03 Aug 23
Lockheed Martin’s $1.7 trillion F-35 fighter jet is 10 years late and 80% over budget
—and it could be one of the Pentagon’s biggest success stories
Last fall, comedian Bill Maher captured the conventional thinking about the fighter during a monologue on his HBO show. “We spent $1.5 trillion on the F-35, which has never worked, and never will, and yet we still buy it,” Maher declared, concluding, to peals of laughter,
-----------------------------
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/lockheed-martin-1-7-trillion-100000423.html
-----------------------------
But somehow, this F-35 project went from boondoggle to the most coveted jet fighter.
Come on in, Wildgrass 🙂
03 Aug 23
@vivify
Lockheed Marten and Boing have the people to make things happen.
What would happen if say General Milley decided to be the head of development? The expertise is just not there for the advancements inherent in F35 technology, WAY more advanced than say the F16's which has 1970's technology where the pilot has to monitor all the instruments and such AND look out the window at the same time for some military engagement. The F35 is an information gathering station of it's own and gives the pilot and the generals instant information as to what and where things are happening in real time.
It was so far behind because new technologies had to be invented at great cost, lots of failures on the way to getting to where we are no with that fighter jet.
And our allies know just how advanced that plane is, the radar target of a grapefruit and computing power unheard of in earlier planes. I know from where I speak, having spent four years in the US air force on now ancient planes like the B47. I had my nose rubbed in THAT plane, like without rocket assist on a hot day it would never have gotten off the ground and the targeting was done with a mechanical analog computer which I spent a year in tech school learning. It is VASTLY different now that the F35 is out in the world.
@earl-of-trumps saidJust to recap the prior thread:
Lockheed Martin’s $1.7 trillion F-35 fighter jet is 10 years late and 80% over budget
—and it could be one of the Pentagon’s biggest success stories
Last fall, comedian Bill Maher captured the conventional thinking about the fighter during a monologue on his HBO show. “We spent $1.5 trillion on the F-35, which has never worked, and never will, and yet we st ...[text shortened]... this F-35 project went from boondoggle to the most coveted jet fighter.
Come on in, Wildgrass 🙂
The F35 is an awe-inspiring Ferrari-of-the-sky with a huge range of capabilities.
The F35 is also a huge scam on the American taxpayer. Lockheed strategically built facilities all over the country in congressional districts where congressmen who make decisions were elected. This business strategy was less efficient, but allowed them unchecked contract renewals for decades. They go over budget almost every single year and they have underperformed on expectations nearly every single year. There are zero checks and balances to make sure they provide planes on time, meet performance predictions, or really anything. If we are using "safety of the American people" as an important metric for distributing trillions of tax dollars earmarked for defense, there is no rationale that makes sense as to why the USA needed to spend this much money on R&D for this. Lockheed's net earnings of $1.9 BILLION per year are coming directly from taxpayers and being distributed to shareholders.
As proof that this is a huge scam, the Russians built a comparable plane on a much smaller budget
03 Aug 23
@vivify saidYeah it's a bastardization of capitalism. The idea is to encourage competition and keep prices down, something that intramural government programs are notoriously bad at doing.
I don't understand why the government uses a third party rather than develop it's own facility to make weapons. It can't possibly cost more to have a government-run version of Lockheed than it does to contract them.
But Lockheed has a monopoly on these jets. A real capitalist society would have them developing the jet tech with venture capital and then selling them to the US government. Instead, government just asks Lockheed how much and then they reply with "how much you got?"
The NIH has a better extramural system than DoD. Both agencies support research but NIH hands out grant money for limited 5 year periods based on competitive project proposals (how will you advance our understanding of human health?), and successful recipients essentially start their own scientific R&D companies in which the products are patents, new technologies and scientific resources.
Unfortunately we now have a budget that is proposing cuts to NIH and increases to DoD, moving us further and further into crony capitalist territory.
03 Aug 23
@vivify saidBecause we're a capitalist society and that's how we do things. It works to keep the USA on top of the pecking order. It's not unusual; Japan, France and Germany are among the nations which use private industry to buy weapons.
I don't understand why the government uses a third party rather than develop it's own facility to make weapons. It can't possibly cost more to have a government-run version of Lockheed than it does to contract them.
Armalite made the m16 rifles, Jeep made the Jeeps of WW2, Porsche made tanks for Germany in WW2, Mitsubishi made fighter planes for Japan in WW2, Dassault makes the Rafale fighter plane for France, etc
03 Aug 23
@wildgrass saidI will admit, wildgrass, I am a bit mystified over this.
Just to recap the prior thread:
The F35 is an awe-inspiring Ferrari-of-the-sky with a huge range of capabilities.
The F35 is also a huge scam on the American taxpayer. Lockheed strategically built facilities all over the country in congressional districts where congressmen who make decisions were elected. This business strategy was less efficient, but allowed them unc ...[text shortened]...
As proof that this is a huge scam, the Russians built a comparable plane on a much smaller budget
It may be way overpriced *but* why are so many countries standing in line to get them??
Surely not all those countries are run by crazymen. I would think, anyway.
@earl-of-trumps saidIt's the profits, earl. Tax dollars paid for it, but only the shareholders of a private company will benefit.
I will admit, wildgrass, I am a bit mystified over this.
It may be way overpriced *but* why are so many countries standing in line to get them??
Surely not all those countries are run by crazymen. I would think, anyway.
Of course it's great. They had an unlimited budget to build a spectacular killing machine. They could have built a 1000 mile high roller coaster for the same budget and people would wait in line for weeks,.
If they built a roller coaster instead of the f35 this would have had no impact on US security.
03 Aug 23
@athousandyoung saidYes, of course. It isn't like the governments can get experts with the know-how and experience of what is in private industry.
Because we're a capitalist society and that's how we do things. It works to keep the USA on top of the pecking order. It's not unusual; Japan, France and Germany are among the nations which use private industry to buy weapons.
Armalite made the m16 rifles, Jeep made the Jeeps of WW2, Porsche made tanks for Germany in WW2, Mitsubishi made fighter planes for Japan in WW2, Dassault makes the Rafale fighter plane for France, etc
And look at NASA.
My cousin worked for Sperry-Rand and he was doing a lot of work for NASA at the time (1970's) and he told me,
most of what NASA does or has is farmed out to private industry. All NASA does is figure out what they want,
and go get the companies that can accomplish it.
Also, there is this: If the government was in charge of beer manufacturing, a sixpack would cost $20.
Keep government OUT of business.
03 Aug 23
@earl-of-trumps saidDo you think the f35 is not government?
Yes, of course. It isn't like the governments can get experts with the know-how and experience of what is in private industry.
And look at NASA.
My cousin worked for Sperry-Rand and he was doing a lot of work for NASA at the time (1970's) and he told me,
most of what NASA does or has is farmed out to private industry. All NASA does is figure out what they want,
a ...[text shortened]... nt was in charge of beer manufacturing, a sixpack would cost $20.
Keep government OUT of business.
04 Aug 23
@sonhouse saidYou don't have problem with how much fossil fuel it burns? It is a CO2 emitting machine that is grossly over priced.
@vivify
Lockheed Marten and Boing have the people to make things happen.
What would happen if say General Milley decided to be the head of development? The expertise is just not there for the advancements inherent in F35 technology, WAY more advanced than say the F16's which has 1970's technology where the pilot has to monitor all the instruments and such AND look out the ...[text shortened]... I spent a year in tech school learning. It is VASTLY different now that the F35 is out in the world.
@earl-of-trumps saidCompletely pointless waste of resources.
Lockheed Martin’s $1.7 trillion F-35 fighter jet is 10 years late and 80% over budget
—and it could be one of the Pentagon’s biggest success stories
Last fall, comedian Bill Maher captured the conventional thinking about the fighter during a monologue on his HBO show. “We spent $1.5 trillion on the F-35, which has never worked, and never will, and yet we st ...[text shortened]... this F-35 project went from boondoggle to the most coveted jet fighter.
Come on in, Wildgrass 🙂
The Eurofighter is the better craft, and that’s not even considered 5th generation.
04 Aug 23
@metal-brain saidRumble fail. Yet again.
@sonhouse
https://rumble.com/v34b5ji-proof-democrats-are-horrible-for-the-climate.html