The counter-shilling begins.

>>33026225
Well, maybe Lockheed shouldn't have wasted government funds on a jet that has so many off-the-line issues. The F-35 is a wonderful design, but it just wasn't ready for the big time.

>>33026225
DRUMPF IS DESTROYING THE TOOL THAT AMERICA NEEDS

WE NEED THE F-35

File: eee.jpg (37KB, 957x172px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 957x172px

More.

File: image (1).jpg (155KB, 1440x1440px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1440x1440px

>>33026225
Trump is just playing his game to get leftists to defend and beg in favor of the F-35 program.

>>33026441
The F-35 already has bipartisan support.

File: 1486812335581.gif (2MB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x500px

>>33026385

So a theoretical super hornet variant that will never be able to do what the F-35C can do is the answer?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2615170/
>"We are looking seriously at a big order," Trump said. "Dennis is a tough negotiator, but we'll get there."

I thought he was done shitting on the F-35.

>>33026601

The President isn't.

File: 1486953386701.gif (3MB, 219x238px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 219x238px

>>33026555

The president literally doesn't control procurement at all. He can't force the Navy to accept additional Hornets if it doesn't want them. Unless Trump plans on buying the Hornets with his own money.

>>33026659

Hypothetically, he could pressure Congress to write legislation forcing the Navy to buy them.

File: 1474649845273.jpg (125KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1024x682px

>>33026225
F35 welder here
They aren't ordering f18s
Because they just upped the total F35 orders to 2,600.
Lookheed and Pratt are both in panic mode because they were told to produce 1 F35 a day in 2018.

I don't know what Trump's master plan here, but it isn't ordering f18s costing 80million with 1/2 the capability.

Also, he doesn't decide what the Navy wants or buys.

>>33026771
What the fuck is he doing then?

>>33026225
he is drumming up interest for foreign nations to buy more F-18s who wouldn't or cant buy the F-35

>>33026659
>doubting the art of the deal meme master

>>33026756

>F-35 welder.

How'd you get that job?

>>33026771

>Because they just upped the total F35 orders to 2,600.
Really? That's exciting. I guess that's in preparation for military growth.

>>33026784

Trump just kinda invents his own facts as he goes along to serve the moment at hand. He was in front of a crowd of Boeing employees so he told them something they'd want to hear. Doesn't matter if it is true or not.

>>33026804

The Navy wants to have 12 carriers. An additional carrier requires additional planes.

>>33026821

Yeah I figured part of the new order must be for new carrier air wings. I'm wondering about new As and Bs though.

File: lee.png (97KB, 954x384px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 954x384px

>>33026812

Pretty much this.

>>33026771
>>33026659
While he can't directly I know that congress can most definitely force the military to get things they don't want or think they don't need
http://www.businessinsider.com/congress-forcing-the-army-to-make-tanks-2012-10
If I'm not mistaken the only reason why we even kept battleships for as long as we did and have been keeping them is because of law makers and not the navy. So absolutely they can fuck over the procurement process.

>>33026847
They triggered me alittle bit.

>>33026847
>>33026847

>We're going to order more F-18's "if the price doesn't come down, we would."

That's some clever phrasing there. Cause at this point Trump knows that the price of the F-35 is going down, so he basically promised nothing.

>>33026891

Congress controls the budget and yes they can also dictate how the military is authorized to spend their chunk of the budget. But here is the thing: the F-35 has tons of congressional support. Even liberal senators like Bernie Sanders have voted to protect it from cuts. The only person in congress who really doesn't like the F-35 is John McCain. So if Trump wanted to genuinely make a move against the F-35, he'd have to somehow convince an enormous number of senators and representatives, from both parties, to change their mind and remove it from the budget.

This just isn't going to happen, and I'm not convinced that Trump even really wants it to happen either. I think he just likes telling crowds of people stuff that they want to hear so they'll cheer for him. He was in front of a crowd of Boeing employees so he said things that Boeing employees would cheer for. Simple as that.

>>33026891

Now about those tanks:

The reason why congress forces the military to buy more tanks than it actually needs is because the idea is to keep the manufacturing plants open. Somebody in the government has crunched a lot of numbers and determined the minimum number of tanks that need to be produced per year to keep the manufacturing plants open. Why? Because if the plants close, then ordering any number of tanks suddenly becomes a lot more difficult because the company would have to completely rebuild all the infrastructure required to produce those tanks. It also keeps people employed with is good for votes.

And besides all of that, have a large reserve of tanks isn't a bad thing, because in a war, the army would lose a lot of tanks.

>>33026796
He welds

>>33027123

>/k/ poetry

File: F-22-Alliance-Air-Show-Oct-2011-1.jpg (71KB, 1024x731px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1024x731px

>>33026784
Pressing Lockheed to lower prices?

>>33026796
You don't want my job, it pays like shit.
But any aerospace company is gonna have a weld school ex.

I also make f22 shit as well.

>>33026463
the DC UniParty isnt "Bipartisan"

As much as I'm starting to like the F-35, I love the F/A-18 and would not mind buying more of them.

>>33027504

I very much mind the idea of using tax dollars to buy an aircraft that is no longer needed because a superior one has already been developed.

>>33026784
negotiating

>>33026771
>Lookheed and Pratt are both in panic mode because they were told to produce 1 F35 a day in 2018.

An F35 a day will keep the shitposts at bay.

But, shit. That's pretty fast for a modern fighter in peace time isn't it? Do they intend on ramping that up even further given they need to make a fuck ton of them for other nations as well? Who gets the first orders?

Both Lockheed and Boeing can probably go home happy in the end. The Air Force and Marines love the F-35, but the Navy is lukewarm on it at best. Buying more Super Hornets keeps Boeing's fighter line going, while the F-35 gets plenty of orders from the other services and foreign governments.

>>33027477
It has near universal support in Congress, from both sides.

File: 1473722425585.jpg (90KB, 639x615px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 639x615px

>>33027954
>Do they intend on ramping that up even further given they need to make a fuck ton of them for other nations as well? Who gets the first orders?

I've made builds for the foreign F35s
I can't tell you how many for obvious reasons.

I know 1 a day is the goal, idk if that will ever happen though.
I can support that rate, but there are other more expensive and harder to build parts built by other companies.


The US hasn't made a bulk purchase yet, so we'll see who gets what first.

>>33028426
The Navy didn't want to replace f4s or f15s back in the day.
It's like they hate anything new.

>>33026464
Nah, I wouldn't do that either. I'd just fix what's broken on the F-35 and move on. But everyone's being a retard about it.

Force Lockheed to complete the project with no more cash given.

>>33026225
I think we should order plenty of BOTH the F-35 and F-18XT. If the 35 has teething issues or doesn't perform as advertised, we'll still have a proven design that we know works. If the 18XT's upgrades just aren't enough to compete with the 35, then it's still an upgrade over the older planes in service. No matter which turns out to be more useful as a frontline plane, we'll still have a good second-line plane to back it up.

>>33028586

>Force Lockheed to complete the project with no more cash given.

The "project" will last the next 45 years at least, so that's blatantly absurd.

>>33028595
Another point to bring up is that if we get into a shooty war with China or anyone else who has a functional airforce, we won't be able to produce enough F-35s fast enough to meet demand. The F-18s don't compete for tooling and resources, and given that the platform has been in production for a long time already, it could be more reasonable to churn them out much more quickly in an emergency.

>>33028617
Well that's just god damn sexy. Now I want to work for Lockheeb and reap the benefits of working in Satan's sweatshop

>>33028577
>The Navy didn't want to replace f4s or f15s back in the day.

The Navy does not and has never used F-15s.

On a tangent, the Navy has been trying to max out commonality in the carrier air wings to make the on-ship logistics as simple as possible.

>>33028657
Meant f14s jackass.
Any moron could recognize that mistake.
Blame auto correct

>>33028632
Average wage on the shop floor is $17 at Lockheed.
So on par with other shit aerospace companies.
The level of bullshit doesn't match the pay.

>>33028925
<3

File: 1480698118866.jpg (181KB, 500x382px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 500x382px

All the liberal Hillary supporters at my work are claiming that Trump negotiating the F35 price down is "unethical".

How fucking stupid are these people?
How is lowering the price of a project unethical?

>>33026441
Leftist here in pretty sure the f-16 is the GOAT. It's the Kalashnikov of fighter jets Senpai.

File: 1477275694554.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>33029243
The f16 has served us well.
However, it's vastly Inferior to the f35A.

The f16 is far slower with a combat load
Has Inferior sustained turning abilities when fully loaded
Less range
Less powerful sensors
Absolutely no stealth aspect
Can't match the f35A high angle of attack.

Only benefit of f16s is the cheap mantainence at this point.

>>33029202

It's knee-jerk.

>>33026891
>>33027029
To reflect the fact that these two anons have no idea what they are talking about, consider that there have been no new Abrams built for the US military since the mid 90's and that the tanks going through the Lima plant are old ones being refurbished/modernized.

>>33030042

Although they're sure trying to build new ones.

>>33026441
>muh ninth-dimensional chess
He watched a report on FOX News and took it as gospel. That's fucking all.

>>33032198
No they aren't.

>>33027463
Dear Friend,

Do you want to visit China?