FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Inside the Pentagon’s Trillion Dollar F-35 Embarrassment
Inside the Pentagon’s Trillion Dollar F-35 Embarrassment
Jump to: Newest in thread
There is an in-depth article on Vanity Fair magazine's website about the US aircraft that is years overdue and hundreds of billions of dollars over budget.
This is the aircraft we are supposed to be ordering for our aircraft carriers so it affects the UK as well.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *inaTitzTV/TS
over a year ago
Titz Towers, North Notts |
Defence procurement has been a scandal for years. There was a huge article in Private Eye about it a bit ago. Projects running for years when they should have been completed within 18 months, cost overruns that would have paid the national debt of someplace tropical and daft things like the army ordering an helicopter or something and the navy or the boyscouts already having one that they could use.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The coalition changing their minds about the planes for the new aircraft carriers being nailed together at Rosyth or built in Govan is the main reason for the delay and price hike."
With the greatest of respect that statement is utter bollocks.
The f35 problems have nothing to do with the uk carriers.
They do have a lot to do with some very advanced engineering, complex manufacturing and new technologies. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"The coalition changing their minds about the planes for the new aircraft carriers being nailed together at Rosyth or built in Govan is the main reason for the delay and price hike.
With the greatest of respect that statement is utter bollocks.
The f35 problems have nothing to do with the uk carriers.
They do have a lot to do with some very advanced engineering, complex manufacturing and new technologies. "
That's not what I said. The problem isn't with the planes, it's with the coalition's inability to decide on which planes/ which arrest system/ VTOL to plump for.
Why we, the UK, couldn't have agreed on an advanced Sea Harrier is another matter. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The coalition changing their minds about the planes for the new aircraft carriers being nailed together at Rosyth or built in Govan is the main reason for the delay and price hike.
With the greatest of respect that statement is utter bollocks.
The f35 problems have nothing to do with the uk carriers.
They do have a lot to do with some very advanced engineering, complex manufacturing and new technologies.
That's not what I said. The problem isn't with the planes, it's with the coalition's inability to decide on which planes/ which arrest system/ VTOL to plump for.
Why we, the UK, couldn't have agreed on an advanced Sea Harrier is another matter."
Because we a) don't have the time ( circa 15 years) to develop it b) the money to develop itor c) the sskills to develop it.
Other than that it's a great idea. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"
Why we, the UK, couldn't have agreed on an advanced Sea Harrier is another matter.
Because we a) don't have the time ( circa 15 years) to develop it b) the money to develop itor c) the sskills to develop it.
Other than that it's a great idea."
If we'd started when we should have started ie when we decided to build the aircraft carriers, we could have replaced the lost skills and put the money into the Defence Budget.
Sitting about doing easy stuff doesn't advance the nation at all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The coalition changing their minds about the planes for the new aircraft carriers being nailed together at Rosyth or built in Govan is the main reason for the delay and price hike.
With the greatest of respect that statement is utter bollocks.
The f35 problems have nothing to do with the uk carriers.
They do have a lot to do with some very advanced engineering, complex manufacturing and new technologies.
That's not what I said. The problem isn't with the planes, it's with the coalition's inability to decide on which planes/ which arrest system/ VTOL to plump for.
Why we, the UK, couldn't have agreed on an advanced Sea Harrier is another matter.
Because we a) don't have the time ( circa 15 years) to develop it b) the money to develop itor c) the sskills to develop it.
Other than that it's a great idea."
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
They do have a lot to do with some very advanced engineering, complex manufacturing and new technologies. "
They have taken a massive leap in technology with the latest generation of designs. Same with civil aircraft. Take a look at the latest Boeing. Clever? Yes. Would I fly on one yet? Hmmmm  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Why we, the UK, couldn't have agreed on an advanced Sea Harrier is another matter.
Because we a) don't have the time ( circa 15 years) to develop it b) the money to develop itor c) the sskills to develop it.
Other than that it's a great idea."
Not knowing a lot about aircraft design but we designed and built the Harrier so surely if we had carried on developing it we would have a suitable aircraft that we could have sold round the world.
As for the skills I am sure that is something we still have. The UK is world leading when it comes to design and development and have the skilled people to do it. We have a big problem when it comes to investment and costs compared to other countries though... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Why we, the UK, couldn't have agreed on an advanced Sea Harrier is another matter.
Because we a) don't have the time ( circa 15 years) to develop it b) the money to develop itor c) the sskills to develop it.
Other than that it's a great idea.
Not knowing a lot about aircraft design but we designed and built the Harrier so surely if we had carried on developing it we would have a suitable aircraft that we could have sold round the world.
As for the skills I am sure that is something we still have. The UK is world leading when it comes to design and development and have the skilled people to do it. We have a big problem when it comes to investment and costs compared to other countries though..."
We have very little experience of stealth technology and our record of system integration for aircraft is crap. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *nnyMan
over a year ago
Glasgow |
"
Why we, the UK, couldn't have agreed on an advanced Sea Harrier is another matter.
Because we a) don't have the time ( circa 15 years) to develop it b) the money to develop itor c) the sskills to develop it.
Other than that it's a great idea.
Not knowing a lot about aircraft design but we designed and built the Harrier so surely if we had carried on developing it we would have a suitable aircraft that we could have sold round the world.
As for the skills I am sure that is something we still have. The UK is world leading when it comes to design and development and have the skilled people to do it. We have a big problem when it comes to investment and costs compared to other countries though...
We have very little experience of stealth technology and our record of system integration for aircraft is crap."
Which is why we tend to look towards joint ventures with our allies who have different skill sets.
The Harrier was a world beater on her day and the fact some Yanks still use it suggests retirement was premature. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
