| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| Most Expensive Weapon Ever Built Limps Toward Finish Line |
| 2016-04-26 |
| Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC |
| #10 Marines have long experience getting superannuated, cast-off or otherwise inoperable equipment, and making it into something you can win battles with. I still think the Marines would love to fly the A-10s with their Osprey squadrons. |
| Posted by: Otto Sinatra3589 2016-04-26 23:27 |
| #9 Difference between the Misguided Children and the Zoomies is that the former wants their weapons to work. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2016-04-26 20:47 |
| #8 There is a "work around" according to Marines Not Affected By F-35 Radar Reset Software Glitch; Fielding Still On Track: The Marines are flying both an older 2B software version and the new 3I software, but the software problem resides in a 3I software update that the Marines never loaded, Deputy Commandant of the Marine Corps for Aviation Lt. Gen. Jon Davis told the Senate Armed Services seapower committee on April 20. |
| Posted by: magpie 2016-04-26 18:28 |
| #7 Gorb: the airframe's fine, they're just using the software problems as a way of keeping it in LRIP forever, so it'll stay expensive and they don't have to worry about the US having an air force newer than the Mac SE/30. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2016-04-26 18:14 |
| #6 Let's reopen the SkyRaider line and launch them from the Wyoming Class Hybrid Battle Carriers. Or just do without. No shame in that. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2016-04-26 17:23 |
| #5 I've been reading stories like this my entire life. Every new weapons system. Every single one. What I especially don't like about this plane is that it is taking forever. By the time we get the dam*ed thing to work better than a Sopwith Camel, it will be obsolete. In fact, maybe we should make it so the canopy slides back so they can shoot a pistol at opposing planes and throw bombs out of the cockpit. |
| Posted by: gorb 2016-04-26 17:15 |
| #4 I was watching Live Free or Die Hard (2007) and laughed out loud when the F-35 showed up. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2016-04-26 17:02 |
| #3 Helmuth, to quote the BlogFather....Where's the graft in that? |
| Posted by: AlanC 2016-04-26 15:57 |
| #2 Why dont they continuously run R&D, and take the finished products to create an aircraft they know will work from the beginning? Do that every 5 years or so. Integration becomes much simpler, and the research cost of the aircraft is separated from the actual cost of the airframe and equipment. Its somewhat dishonest to sink the cost of R&D that will be ongoing anyway against the cost of additional aircraft. The difference now between buying X amount of F-22 and X+20 does not require any R&D, just production. So why not account for them that way? For instance, the B-2 is not a billion dollar aircraft. Its a couple hundred million in equipment and the rest in research and development that can be applied to other systems, and also used as a basis for further R&D. |
| Posted by: Helmuth, Speaking for White5269 2016-04-26 15:43 |
| #1 I've been reading stories like this my entire life. Every new weapons system. Every single one. |
| Posted by: Iblis 2016-04-26 15:36 |