XPost: alt.comedy.air-farce, alt.politics.republicans, rec.aviation.military   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: davek@xxxmail.com   
      
   The United States Air Force announced the need for a new multi-use fighter   
   jet to replace its aging F-16 fleet, while stressing that it would not   
   feature the same high-price tag and technological prowess of the F-35.   
      
   The announcement, made by Air Force Chief of Staff General Charles Brown   
   came as a surprise to defence analysts, given that the F-35 was pegged as   
   the modern fifth generation aircraft that would replace the F-16.   
      
   Instead, Air Force Chief Brown suggested they would develop a “fifth-   
   generation-minus” fighter jet.   
      
   Nearly twenty years ago, the USAF set out to develop a replacement to the   
   F-16’s successor, but the program only continued to grow prohibitively   
   expensive as more cutting edge technology was poured into it. When it grew   
   too expensive, other nations were brought in as partners to offset the   
   runaway costs.   
      
   In an ironic twist, the F-35 has become the kind of dilemma it was   
   initially supposed to resolve. Now, a new fighter jet is needed to meet   
   the needs of the US Air Force.   
      
   Running the F-35 for 66 years is expected to cost $1.182 trillion, on top   
   of its already hefty development cost of $397.8 billion. The F-35 costs   
   slightly less than $100 million per plane. But cost is the least of its   
   concerns.   
      
   Bugs and flaws   
      
   In spite of its advanced technology and cutting-edge capabilities, the   
   latest stealth fighter suffers from structural flaws and slew of   
   challenges.   
      
   Most recent among them is a structural engine flaw and shortage in its   
   production.   
      
   The F-35’s engine problem is partly based in not being able to deliver   
   them for maintenance as fast as needed, in addition to a problem with the   
   heat coating on its rotor blades which shortens engine lifespan   
   considerably.   
      
   Defense News described it as a “serious readiness problem”, suggesting   
   that as soon as 2022, nearly 5 to 6 per ent of the F-35 fleet could be   
   effectively grounded as it waits for engine replacements.   
      
   Another challenge is the plane’s software. Most modern fighter jets have   
   between 1 to 2 million lines of code in their software. The F-35 averages   
   8 million lines of code in its software, and it’s suffering from a bug   
   problem.   
      
   To fix this, the US Department of Defense is asking three American   
   universities to help figure it out.   
      
   The fighter jet also suffers from a slightly embarrassing touchscreen   
   problem. After making the switch from hard flipped switches to touch   
   screens, pilots report that unlike a physical switch that you’re confident   
   has been activated, touch screens in the plane don’t work 20 percent of   
   the time says one F-35 pilot.   
      
   Aging fleet, modern enemies   
      
   Amid all these challenges, To justify his decision, Air Force Chief Brown   
   compared the F-35 to a Ferrari.   
      
   “You don’t drive your Ferrari to work every day, you only drive it on   
   Sundays. This is our ‘high end’ fighter, we want to make sure we don’t use   
   it all for the low-end fight,” he said in a press conference on February   
   17.   
      
   In a nutshell, Brown wants to limit how often the F-35 is being used, as   
   then develop a less advanced replacement.   
      
   The current fleet of F-16’s are old. Even the newest variants among them   
   were bought in 2001. To replace the thousand F-16’s the USAF uses as a   
   workhorse fighter jet will be a tall order. Ordering more F-16’s isn’t an   
   option either, if only because they’re falling behind the technological   
   curve.   
      
   Russia is already fielding its considerably cheaper Sukhoi-57 5th   
   generation fighter jet. While it does not boast the technological prowess   
   of the F-35, there’s considerable doubt that the F-35 could stand up to   
   the Su-57 in a one-on-one dogfight.   
      
   This is mainly given the F-35 excels in fighting from a distance. China is   
   also fielding it’s twin-seater J-20 fighter jet, which promises   
   considerable offensive capabilities.   
      
   In essence, the F-35 was designed to have ultimate technological   
   superiority. But doing too much means compromises in design.   
      
   To adapt to different demands, the F-35 has multiple, costly versions.   
   Lockheed Martin provides a regular version suited to land operations, one   
   specifically designed for aircraft carrier take-off, a smaller naval   
   variant, not to mention a vertical take-off variant.   
      
   But having so many versions of the F-35 leads to a much more complex   
   design. Resolving issues in one variant, doesn’t mean they’re resolved in   
   the rest.   
      
   Unfortunately, there’s nothing to prevent the next fifth generation   
   ‘minus’ plane from encountering the same challenges that brought the F-35   
   to its current predicament.   
      
   More dangerously, developing a new jet could take decades. Two decades by   
   the F-35’s benchmark. By then, the F-16’s will be nearly 60 years old.   
      
   https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/us-admits-f-35-failed-to-replace-f-16-   
   as-planned-needs-new-fighter-jet-44483   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)