- Nov 30, 2012
- 22,757
- 619
- 121
Pretty sure the plane cost more than its weight in hundred dollar bills.
Why am I thinking that the back-hinged "hood" over that front thruster seems like a bad idea.
The front hood closure fails or is damaged in a dog fight, aerodynamics and stealth is ruined so the pilot is now a sitting duck because his hood flew open.
I agree that we're unlikely to see the traditional dogfight return again given capabilities of fire control systems and antiair ordanance. Doesn't mean these craft are good enough to effectively replace some airframes such as the A10.
No big deal. I've been pulling off much more impressive landings since BF2.
Why am I thinking that the back-hinged "hood" over that front thruster seems like a bad idea.
The front hood closure fails or is damaged in a dog fight, aerodynamics and stealth is ruined so the pilot is now a sitting duck because his hood flew open.
I'm a little surprised the C is costing more than the B. Maybe it would change if you assigned the R&D costs of STOVL only to the B?
Engineers, absolutely yesim pretty sure the aeronautical engineers at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics are way smarter than you at building advanced fighter aircraft.
I agree that we're unlikely to see the traditional dogfight return again given capabilities of fire control systems and antiair ordanance. Doesn't mean these craft are good enough to effectively replace some airframes such as the A10.
Engineers, absolutely yes
Project managers....I really wonder.
Project managers are brilliant imo. They pushed all the cost of their screw ups onto the taxpayer for a decade. What better way to prolong a gravy train than screw it up and get paid?
With all this talk about salvaging the A10 - what about the advances in portable MANPAD systems that the A10 would be highly vulnerable to these days compared with planes that do high-altitude precision bombing?
Maybe a STOVL F35 overall is a waste of money (it was also for replacing the Harrier, not the A10). Perhaps helicopters and relying on full carrier based or land-based jets would have been a better value for the Marines.
Lets see, a 100 dollar bill weighs 1g.
Unloaded weight is 13,199 kg, so approximately 13,199,000 bills are required at a cost of 1,319,900,000 dollars.
Wiki says
F-35A: US$98M (low rate initial production, full production in 2018 to be $85M)[9][10]
F-35B: US$104M (low rate initial production)[9][10]
F-35C: US$116M (low rate initial production)[9][10]
$59.2B for development, $261B for procurement, $590B for operations & sustainment in 2012[8]Not bad.
I'm a little surprised the C is costing more than the B. Maybe it would change if you assigned the R&D costs of STOVL only to the B?
More planes, lower $$$.
"Not bad", are you F-ing joking dude?, it's the equivalent of a flying "black-hole" money pit and it can't even come close to the performance of the F-22.