![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/02\/f-35-pacific_24107_c32-0-3000-1731_s885x516-500x292.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The long-in-development, expensive, flashy, packed with technology (some of which doesn’t even get used by the pilots – looking at you voice command system) F-35 has “failed” according to Forbes. In the now textbook example of feature creep on big ticket defense projects, the F-35, once supposed to be\u00a0<\/em>the low-cost fighter of the future, is too costly to replace the roughly 1,000 F-16s in use by the USAF. The Chief of Staff of the Air Force General Charles Brown Jr. wants to invest in yet another new, as-yet-unnamed or planned truly<\/em> low-cost fighter to supplement the over-priced stealth F-35 and F-22 (ironically considered so costly they cancelled the production run early and destroyed all the dies in favor of the F-35).<\/p>\n The last block of F-16s was purchased by the USAF in 2001. After two decades of war they are old. Gen Brown prefers not to invest in old technology by purchasing the latest F-16 models. It should be noted, the development of the F-16 has continued the last twenty years and our allies are buying the latest, upgraded versions for their own air defenses.<\/p>\n This is all going on at the same time that the F-35 has been found to be deficient in filling the roles of other aging fighters. The F-15, a design dating back to the Vietnam-era, is currently undergoing flight testing of a new iteration of the venerable fighter (an Israeli one landed with only one wing once, and no F-15 has ever been lost in air-to-air combat). The F-15EX is planned to replace 1980s and 90s vintage F-15s because it’s cheaper to develop and buy the EX than it would be to get the F-35 to fill the same role.<\/p>\n The F-35 was conceived with the best of intentions. A single airframe for all three branches (Air Force, Navy, and Marines), as well as numerous allied nations. It would replace at least a half dozen aircraft in service (including the F-16, A-10, AV-8B, A-6, and F-14). The problem is that the three versions are, despite outward appearances, completely different aircraft. The supposed cost saving of shared parts is nearly non-existent. With all the roles it’s supposed to fill, the F-35 is becoming a classic case of jack of all trades, master of none.<\/p>\n Read Forbes’ take on it here<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"