>Trumps finally doing something about the F35 program and

>>32611297
>is there anything else military wise he will/could fix?

Considering he's clueless, probably not.

Cost reduction is a good idea, which is why LM and the DoD is already doing it, they don't need his interference.

>>32611324
"Considering he's clueless, probably not."

Well obviously, thats why presidents have advisers and hire people for positions such as secretary of state or sec of defense.

But he seems to know about the F35, so he or someone working for him likely is telling him about shit like this

>>32611297
he read shitty memes online about how it's bloated or something and now he thinks he's an expert

nothing will happen

>>32611297
he should not interfere with the military, I hope he does the smart thing, which he initially intended and simply acts as a smiling face that doesn't try to shape USA policy.

during his campaign he told kasich flat out that if he was his VP he'd run the show entirely. he gave the same deal to mike pence. so hopefully trump sits back and enjoys the ride while not fucking up anything. his tweets and statements are bad enough already

>>32611341
>But he seems to know about the F35, so he or someone working for him likely is telling him about shit like this

I don't know specifically what you're referring to, but his comments regarding the "F18 replacement" made just about anyone with a cursory knowledge of aviation cringe, hard. It was just uttery wrong.

As for "knowing about the program", sure. Its one of the most publisized military projects in human history, and his opinion was a parrot of what basically every mainstream media outlet has been saying (stupidly or otherwise) for years.

But TL;DR if anything its political point scoring. It doesn't need his intervention, and I don't see how it would benefit from it.

>>32611297
W-what's he going to do anon?

I wasn't aware CTR was still active.

>>32611297
>Taking populist propaganda seriously.

>Taking a slush fund for black projects masquerading as a next gen multirole seriously.

ishygddt

>>32611465
>>>/pol/

>inb4 CTR cuck shill
I voted for him, dumbfuck. "CTR" should be filtered on /k/

>>32611465
What did he mean by this? Whos the shills

The F-18 stuff is just to try and light a fire under LM is all.

>The F-18 stuff is just to try and light a fire under LM is all.

Yes, I'm sure LM is shaking in their boots over the nonexistant aircraft that could replace the F-35, causing them to "drop their prices".

Perhaps R&D into producing the X-32 another decade from now!

Oh wait no, thats retarded.

>>32611496
Anybody who disparages Il Duce Trump is automatically CTR to these asshats.

>>32611517
But no one did

>>32611513
are you retarded?

>>32611297
>drumpftards
>using liberal and Clinton campaign adhominems

kill yourself

>>32611540
How fucking new/autistic are you. Its fucking satire you retard I dont give a shit who votes for who and I have about 6 /pol/ tabs open right now. I meant inb4 someone says "hurr go back to pol" because you cant mention politics here without this level of autism despite the fact that it fucking decides what the military and shit use/do

>>32611545
>How fucking new/autistic are you.
>proceeds to go an an autistic rant

anyone who unironically uses the word drumpf is as much as a imbecile as those who call ar-15 assault rifles

File: 1475696083281.jpg (27KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 512x512px

>>32611564
Read my post again you fucking imbecile, specifically the part that says

>Its fucking satire

I support trump you dumb fuck I just dont want politics shitting up a thread about what could change under the trump presidency, not some shitthrowing contest

>>32611496
Pointing out that Trump is an idiot who makes ridiculous comments on things he doesn't understand makes you CTR. This is the level of delusion of an unironic Trump voter on 4chan.

>>32611589
>>32611545
>>32611540
>>32611517
>>32611496
>>32611492


Fucking hell can all of you just fuck off back to /co/ and /pol/ respectively for your party of choice

I go on /pol/ and support trump but I dont want to talk about fucking politics, I want to talk about the f35 program and other failed projects that might get fixed or new things because we now have a new administration

>inb4 hurr go back to /pol/
>inb4 hurr ctr shill from the other side of the coin

>>32611580
>its just a prank

You poisoned your own well when you decided to expel the /pol/tard using john oliver's buzzword

>>32611297
considering mattis is secdef and trump is a financial genius (honestly at this point i believe he got in simply by a weird combination of luck, good timing and the disaster that was the obama administration), you're probably going to see lockheed get locked down, with more contracts given out to Boeing and Grumman, along with other smaller companies.

as for the F-35 itself, i'm not sure. it seems pretty good already. from everything i've read these sorts of projects bumble through R&D, initial production and the first few years of deployment until the military eventually gets a feel for the airframe and what it can do. then you get extensions.

on the military not having a feel for the airframe, i do have an anecdote: when the F-117 was initially deployed, basically nobody knew what it could do and that affected it's operations. even in the gulf war commanders were sketchy about throwing it into AAA fire since basically nobody would give up it's RCS.

the F-35 will probably be a pile of shit until the military gets a handle of how it works, then it'll work just like all of the other planes we've had. it probably won't stay in the role it has now, it'll warp into something else. outside of Trump taking away most of lockheed's funding i don't see how this could change. he might be able to develop it in a specific direction by starting a war, but that'd be about it.

File: giphy.gif (480KB, 493x342px) Image search: [Google]

480KB, 493x342px

>>32611616
>F-35
>Failed project

>>32611664
>the F-35 will probably be a pile of shit until the military gets a handle of how it works, then it'll work just like all of the other planes we've had.
The military has already gotten a handle on it; they've been flying it for 6 or 7 years, run it through exercises, etc, and also had ~20 years of flying / testing the concept in simulators, etc.

The F-117 was a black project that was super top secret, the F-35 is one that has ~10 nations working on it and flying it.

>>32611528
No, are you?

Threatening to go to a competitor only works if that is actually an option.

>>32611717
flying it in testing won't fix the issues that come up in real deployments though. they're going to have to solve those as they go, and the issues that come up heavily depend on the environment in which the F-35 is used.

for example, if we deploy into a very tropical area we may find that small parts of the F-35 are quick to rust, or that the sensor system develops issues, etc. you can't find these in a simulator or in a board room with 20 engineers.

just as if we deploy to a very dry area like the middle east. we may find that sand storms fuck up the RAM like nobody else's business, so we'll have to keep the F-35s under cover all the time or jury rig other solutions.

you can't really say that the F-35 is excluded from the development teething issues that literally every other plane in existence has had m8.

>The F-117 was a black project that was super top secret, the F-35 is one that has ~10 nations working on it and flying it.

i'm not talking about the F-117 directly, i'm giving an anecdote for the type of shit that could come up in conflicts we're unprepared for. in the gulf war commanders didn't want to fly directly into AAA fire unless absolutely necessary, and it later turned out the F-117 could basically run circles around the IADS with no issues. we're going to limit how hard we push the F-35 for years, maybe even a decade or more, until we finally get our hands on it. until this happens people are going to see the plane as inherently faulty.

4d chess xddddd

>>32611616
>failed project
>in service with three nations

>>32611768
>for example, if we deploy into a very tropical area we may find that small parts of the F-35 are quick to rust, or that the sensor system develops issues, etc. you can't find these in a simulator or in a board room with 20 engineers.
Which is why they've been flying them in many different conditions; from the Arctic circle, to dry Arizona, to tropical Florida, etc. They've taken them on naval test deployments six times now, gone to other countries, etc.

They also just throw jets into climatic test facilities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8GqdjOy42E

>you can't really say that the F-35 is excluded from the development teething issues that literally every other plane in existence has had m8
I'm not saying that, I'm saying that the uses and capabilities of the jet are fairly well known now.

>we're going to limit how hard we push the F-35 for years, maybe even a decade or more, until we finally get our hands on it
Who's we? The USMC just deployed a combat F-35B squadron to Japan and are deploying another combat squadron to the Middle East later this year. The USAF are deploying (probably to Europe) later this year as well.

Israel has jets in-country, as do Italy, and at least Israel intends to declare IOC before the end of the year.

I don't see the F-35 being notably limited in its use in any way other than those caused by a lack of threats.

File: catastrophic failure.jpg (77KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 960x960px

>>32611664

>the disaster that was the obama administration

If you were too dumb/uneducated/stubborn to take advantage of the economy the past 4 years, you have only yourself to blame.

>>32611768
>they may rust in tropical environments
U wot. On of the main testing squadrons is stationed at Eglin AFB in fucking Destin and they've already been deployed on ships.

They do test deployments you dipshit. Hell, they have specifically declined climate controlled hangars that they test exactly what you're talking about.

>>32611838

The economy recovered -despite- Obama, not because of.

>>32611545
Get back to your containment board, faggot

>>32611717
With a flying hour higher than F-22 i can say it wont fly too soon.

>>32612068
>With a flying hour higher than F-22 i can say it wont fly too soon.

It's flying right now.

>>32611360
>he should not interfere with the military

Yes, yes. He should just allow them to spend and spend without regard to the taxpayer.

t.defense contractor

>>32612082
Well enjoy while you can, because when Trump get into presidency i think it will be an amazing Hangar Queen.

>>32612068
>with a flying hour higher than F-22
What? Do you mean cost per flight hour? It's cheaper than the F-22 in that regard.

>>32611360
>he should not interfere with the military

Lockheed Martin is not "the military". They are a company who we, the taxpayers, have employed to build us a shiny new plane.

They're overcharging us for this task, and doing a pretty shit job of it in any case. Now we're sending our dude to fix this.

It's really that simple, anon.

>>32612121
No it's not.
http://www.businessinsider.com/air-force-plane-cost-per-flight-hour-chart-2016-3

Source: Airfoce

>>32612117
>have 200 working aircraft
>they perform better than legacy aircraft in 95% of situations
>Trump grounds them after making a bullshit speech on how he's saving pilots from having to fly such a dangerous aircraft
Sounds like something he'd do desu, you're right.

>>32612136
>They're overcharging us for this task, and doing a pretty shit job of it in any case. Now we're sending our dude to fix this.

gb2/pol/

>>32612091
>>32612136
Dont even try to discuss with shills, like a guy said before CTR is full foce on 4chan even in 2017.

>>32611616
>, I want to talk about the f35 program

me too anon, me to-..

> and other failed projects

Hey, do me a favor and kill yourself at once, you ignorant peice of shit.

>>32611664
Mattis already full hardheartedly endorsed the F-35 to applicable party's.

>for your next trick, you will try to discredit mattis.

>>32612142
>business insider
Ah yes, the apex of aviation related reporting. I also don't see any sources

Meanwhile I'm seeing reports that it's between $25k to $31k depending on how long ago the article is written.

>>32611360
samefagging here but this is what they mean by sacred cows.

I talk (which means I get called a racist a lot) politics across the spectrum. Each team has their own sacred cows that you are not allowed to touch. Tea Party types scream about limited government while wanting massive military spending and maximum world-intervention and perpetual war. This shit isn't free, numb nuts. You're raiding my check to fund it, thus the military giving money to contractors is little more than welfare.

Keep war going so they keep getting paid.

>>32612136

There is nothing to "fix".

its already as cheap as other newer 4th gen planes, and its only in LRIP.

F-35's are already deployed, fuccboi. Its ogre.

>>32612183
The source of the article is the Airfoce stop being a dense nigger and read m8.

>>32612194
Stop please.

>>32612200
>Surprisingly, the much maligned F-35 is only the seventh most expensive plane per hour that the Air Force flies. Its costs are partially due to the lack of an efficient supply chain for the aircraft, something that should be sorted out over the coming years.

Ah yes, so its the per hour flight cost of an aircraft in LRIP, rather than a projection of cost after FOC. i.e totally meaningless.

>>32612210
Kill yourself

>>32612210
Nope.

Not only that, the F-35 is a far superior to any other 4th gen.

i just wanted to talk about f35s...

>>32612231
I know he's superior to any other fighter in the world, but the price of the project is the problem not plane itself.

There's no logical pay 1,5 Trillion Dollar in RD Program.

>>32611324
>Cost reduction is a good idea

It's always a good idea, especially when gov. contracts are involved.

Even if Trump was a complete fucking idiot he could never be wrong about controlling the insane costs of the project.

>>32612200
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/f-35a-cost-and-readiness-data-improves-in-2015-as-fl-421499/

Why do people always lie on the Internet?

>source is AF read da graph!!!
Doesn't say when it's from or give any details.

>>32612249
The 1.5 trillion is total lifetime costs, and judging by your comma your not american so why the fuck do you care?

File: image.jpg (58KB, 1000x542px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 1000x542px

>>32612249
>1.5 trillion in R&D
>HURRR DURRR IM RETARDED EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME IM A FUCKING IDIOT

>>32612233

There's another thread fella, just look for it in the catalog.

>>32612260
>Even if Trump was a complete fucking idiot he could never be wrong about controlling the insane costs of the project.

No, he was just wrong about the method he chose to do it, the timing, and his idea that he was somehow required or useful in the process, along with the rest of his comments on the matter which were just ridiculous.

>>32612305

I'll wait for you to post the credentials that make you qualified to make that judgement.

>>32612315
I graduated from elementary school

>>32612333
lel, the bantz

>>32612260
Let me explain what happened.

>Trump tweets LM saying he's "totally going to cancel the F-35 for reelz guys I'm not joking."
>LM winks and says "don't worry big boy we'll bring the price down just for (you)"
>costs drop at the pre-established rate just as they would have if Trump hadn't said anything

Now retards like you are saying he was just playing a game of 6th dimensional Goh and that he's just trying to appeal to the public. Even if that was true, it's still retarded.

>>32612260

>Even if Trump was a complete fucking idiot he could never be wrong about controlling the insane costs of the project.

Believe or not, throwing childish tantrum's on Twitter doesn't actually reduce the costs of government projects.

>>32611297
>is there anything else military wise he will/could fix?
The f-22 was designed in the fucking 90s, the f35; considering it's 00's technology is already going to be outdated by the time it sees use in 2030 or whenever. That is how long these fucking programs take to produce a functioning aircraft. Honestly the AF, Navy and ARMY, (yes let the ARMY have input) should just have a new plane made in batches of 200-300 every 5-8 years since the technology and experience building previous generations is too powerful to sit on. That way when a great design comes by w/o the billion layers of compromise it's gets fucking built and used.

>>32611297
Drumpf is not doing anything but selling out America to Moscow.

>>32612333

So you're about as smart as anyone else that has a problem with it.

It's not like he's going to personally change how the program continues. I'm just glad he can see it from a cost/benefit perspective and not a narrow 'HURR KEEP GOING WE CAN'T STOP NOW' viewpoint.

The prices of military aircraft are outrageous. A $25 million F-16 did not jump to $100 due to 40% inflation and avionics upgrades (https://mobile.nytimes.com/1999/07/19/world/israel-will-buy-50-f-16-s-in-its-biggest-arms-deal-ever.html). Op should have known that when mentioning Trump he would derail the threa. But let's not fool ourselves for a minute that defense contractors are 'trying to keep costs down' or, even worse, are justified in what they charge.

>>32612404
At least we can trust putin to not stick our big american dicks in the wasps nest of the middle east for the sake of calming israel's paranoia.

>>32612416
>I'm just glad he can see it from a cost/benefit perspective

Yes, anon

A man that suggested we price up and develop an F-18 derivative to (somehow) fill the F-35's role despite already developing the F-35 and currently fielding it is respecting cost/benefit ratios.

You.

Fucktard.

>>32612397
>step one: stop posting
>step two: go into bathtub
>step three: blow your brains out.

A three step guide to help you improve the average IQ of /k/

>>32612416

>I'm just glad he can see it from a cost/benefit perspective

His own comments have shown that he is incapable of doing that. He's fucking delusional. I pray to god that his cabinet is able to keep him under control, but so far that doesn't seem to be the case.

>>32612434
>implying we will ever make the money back either way

The question is which path would burn more.

We already tack new shit on ancient technology to keep it going. Not saying I like that "idea" either though.

>>32612466
>The question is which path would burn more.

The F-18 path.

>>32612418
>I don't understand economics of scale.

Wow, mentioning the F-2's cost per unit would probably make your fucking had explode.

Your link also doesn't work for me, but a lot of the time total cost of procurement includes more than just the aircraft which makes it seem like the price per unit has increased more than it really has.

>>32612466
I agree. We shouldn't have procures F-16s and F-15s in the first place anyway, far to expensive.

Military industrial complex is just craving money when we should still be zooming around in upgraded Phantoms and Thuds.

>>32612466

The F-35 has already entered service. It is operational. It can be deployed and it will be deployed to Japan very soon.

WE ARE NOT GOING TO STOP F-35 PRODUCTION TO TRY AND DEVELOP A COMPLETELY NEW AIRCRAFT.

And yes, a stealth F-18 would basically have to be a completely new aircraft. It would not just tacking on some shit to an F-18.

>>32612491

This. Not the Lighting II, we should be using the Curtiss Model D, a TRUE fighter.

Fucking MIC.

>>32612503

Actually, its already deployed to japan. 10 left early today.

Its ogre. Anti F-35 fags have lost.

>>32612514

Huh, didn't know that.

>>32612508

>Using planes
>Not settling your arguments with you fists like a man

File: DM33572_klein.jpg (865KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

865KB, 1500x1000px

>>32612482
>Wow, mentioning the F-2's
You meant F-22, but you're still correct about the F-2.

>>32612521
F-2 is pretty funny.

>take blueprints of F-16
>click bottom corner, to stretch the blueprints
>expand about 25%
>done

>>32612503
>WE ARE NOT GOING TO STOP F-35 PRODUCTION

Who the fuck said anything about stopping it?

Do something about costs, sure. When is that ever not important?

>>32612508
>not flying around in VLO Sopwith Camels WiB AN/APG-81s duct taped to the landing gear

Wow the LM shills are out in force

>>32611616
You guaranteed this would be a shitpost thread the moment you called the F35 a failed project. You brought this on yourself.

>>32612521
>2500L of jetfuel just a mere 8" from the tarmac
That pilot must got some balls of brass....

>>32612537
its current costs are on par with current 4th gens.

Kill yourself.

>>32612537
Trump, for one.
>F-18 derivative instead

>Do something about costs, sure. When is that ever not important?
When its already happening and has been for YEARS.

>>32612521
No, I meant the F-2. Shit was crazy expensive.

>>32612555
Its most likely empty.

>>32612537

>Do something about costs, sure. When is that ever not important?

It is very important anon.

And that's why the Air Force has had a very successful cost-reduction plan running for around 5 years now.

>>32612564
>When its already happening and has been for YEARS.
>>32612581
>And that's why the Air Force has had a very successful cost-reduction plan running for around 5 years now.

They'll need it if they want to maintain this >>32612556 for the next few decades.

>>32612593
???

>>32612593
no anon, they wont.

The F-35 is in LRIP, and costs are already competitive.

What happens when it gets into full production?

>>32612603

It's not going to get any cheaper as it gets older.

>>32611977
This is what aggressive stupidity looks like.

>>32612606
Congratulations on that headscratcher, anon

Not sure what point you think you're making but you sure did make it

>>32612530
thats basically the transition between Hornet and SuperHornet too

>>32612482
What exactly were we doing militarily in 1999 that allowed for an overwhelming cheaper aircraft as result of an "economy of scale"? It was a low point of defense spending.

>>32612635

We didn't have a fucking retard like Trump in charge of our military, for one thing.

>>32612397
>the f35; considering it's 00's technology is already going to be outdated by the time it sees use in 2030 or whenever.
Except one of the core elements in the F-35's design was modularity and easy upgrades.

What's the point in a """"stealth"""" multi-role fighter that's shit at air-to-air combat? That's literally the only thing they has over a UAV and the F-35 is garbage at it. The F-22 is a better air superiority fighter, and the F-16 is a better multi-role fighter that
>can beat a bloody F-35 in air-to-air combat
>allows for more experimental systems
>isn't bogged down with fuck-huge operating and maintenance costs
The American Government fell for the stealth meme and the tax payers have had to pay for it.

>>32613222

Putting stealth in quotation marks as if it weren't a real thing immediately invalidates whatever other point you were trying to make.

>>32613222
>shit at air to air combat
>0-11 against F-15E's in exercises
>shit

>Carries more than an F-16 externally and the same amount as an F-16 internally (will be upgraded to carry more than an F16 internally in AtA load out.)
>amazing sensors
>allegedly smaller RCS than F-22 from certain aspects.

>your opinions
>>>/trash/

>>32613222
How exactly is the F-35 shit at air-to-air combat? How exactly is the F-16 better at multi-role?

The F-35 has the ability to locate an enemy aircraft at long range, and to launch/guide a missile to it before the F-35 can be targeted, while also able to use HOBS all-aspect missiles to destroy an opponent in WVR combat. It can attack ground targets with precision munitions in an environment with hostile air defenses without depending on a separate SEAD mission or a discrete targeting pod.

>>32611341
He doesn't attend briefings so I doubt it