F-35 Declared Operational

[TheGrey]

Capable of what, militarily speaking? Not a good fighter, not a good ground attack aircraft, not a good close air support aircraft...but it's stealthy!

Way too expensive. I'd rather see more aircraft with more capability for that money.

Well, it sounds incredibly capable of being a money pit...

[Gman]

I'm sure a ton of that money will find its way right back to the politicians that supported it.

[TFOGGER]

Did they get it to stop poisoning the pilots with the emergency O2 supply yet?

[HoneyBadger]

Capable of what, militarily speaking? Not a good fighter, not a good ground attack aircraft, not a good close air support aircraft...but it's stealthy!

Way too expensive. I'd rather see more aircraft with more capability for that money.

I'm not arguing that it isn't a bloated program that costs far too much for each aircraft. I'm a taxpayer too.

As far as capability, it's hard to quantify because it doesn't have an operational record yet. From what I saw, it is extremely effective at air-to-air and air-to-ground engagements. I don't understand how you can say that it's not a good fighter or ground attack aircraft - What are your qualifications? What is your experience with it? Not a personal attack by any means - I'm just wondering how you've formulated your opinion.

Anyone who knows anything about modern CAS knows that it is dependent on the munitions available and the F-35 can deliver the same guided munitions as an MQ-1/MQ-9, F-16, F-22, F-18, F-15, or A-10. It can deliver those munitions more effectively than an A-10 due to the both onboard tech and the stealth tech. The A-10 is so effective in CENTCOM right now because it has a VERY limited number of threats. Very rarely are A-10s being shot at by SAMs. In a contested theater with a real enemy, SAMs are a huge threat and the F-35 is several orders of magnitude harder to target than the A-10.

Speaking of those munitions, the F-35 can carry more than 18,000lbs of them in it's air-to-ground attack role. The A-10 can only carry 16,000lbs. In an air engagement, the A-10 is extremely vulnerable.

Is the A-10 really badass? Yep. Did I initially join the Air Force to fly the A-10? Yep. Is it easier and cheaper to maintain? Yep. Is it doing the job we need it to do in the theater its in right now? Yep. Do I pee a little bit every time I hear that gun? Maybe...

Is the A-10 the right airframe to fight our future wars? I don't think so. It's served us well, but not every engagement is going to be against an insurgent group in a wasteland. Should we retire the A-10 tomorrow? Definitely not.

[HoneyBadger]

I'm sure a ton of that money will find its way right back to the politicians that supported it.

This is the same with any program nowadays. It's basically legalized bribery, and it happens every day in the American political system. We can start a whole new thread about that if you want..

[SuperiorDG]

Did they get it to stop poisoning the pilots with the emergency O2 supply yet?

That was the F22

[Gman]

As far as capability, it's hard to quantify because it doesn't have an operational record yet.

Let's try this response for a 3rd time...damn you Edge browser!

We'll likely find the answer to this if the Israelis start using F-35s. I doubt this country has the intestinal fortitude to use them against an adversary capable of taking out our previous generation fighter aircraft.

Everything else is theoretical.

Anything built to be all things to everyone usually excels in nothing. Please prove me wrong. Exceptionalism in one aspect is sacrificed for other requirements.

The fact that stealth and electronic warfare capabilities are marketed so heavily concerns me that it's air to ground and air to air capabilities aren't where they should be. I'm sure it's pretty good when it's a point-click-and ship engagement beyond visual distance. When you hang a bunch of crap on the wings there goes the stealth and VTOL of the C variant. I'm willing to bet that history shows the F-35 is used primarily in the same role that the F-117 was.

The future of warfare is electronic. If someone were to shutdown the US communications, this society would not be resilient.

The future of air warfare is probably UAVs. In the meantime, a few really expensive aircraft and limited number of pilots can be defeated by sheer numbers and resolve.

[TFOGGER]

That was the F22

There were rumblings about the F35 as well. Lockheed Martin claims that it's a different system NOW, but they had issues in the initial high altitude tests.

[Hoser]

I have spent a little time directly involved in Military Aviation.

The F-35 is not a F-15, nor is it an A-10.

This is the first time in a long time Uncle Sam has stopped building planes and training for the last war.

Everyone hated the C-17 when it first came out. And it was a total piece of shit for the first couple years. Now it is one very capable airplane.

The KC-10 was a pain in the ass when Uncle Sam decided to modify a DC-10 to haul trash and gas. Now it is one very capable airplane.

The C-17 also suffered from the new way of building planes. R&D while pumping out planes. It is slow, more expensive and a pain for the guys flying and maintaining the A and B models.

I am looking forward to it. Should be a cool plane to cover our six while we work.

[asmo]

This is what a Bajillion dollars looks like: