# F-35: Death spiral is closing in **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 21, 2016, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493 "2016-09-21T11:23:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/141 "2016-12-23T07:18:18Z")
BUMP Looks like Trump is inclined to [cancel the whole thin](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/23/lockheed-f-35-fighter-project-in-doubt-after-trump-tweet-encourages-rival-boeing)g. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 11:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/142 "2016-12-23T11:01:10Z")
It’s obviously outside the conventions what Trump is doing by seemingly meddling so intimately in the economy, but I think this is one area in which I probably don’t mind. Contractors have been fleecing this country for years – it’s about time someone hold them accountable. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/143 "2016-12-23T14:51:15Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Do you have a cite that either the F-15 or F-22 have hooks? I’ve read a lot about both over the years, seems tons of pictures and videos, and have never heard anyone say this, certainly never saw one deployed. I asked the same question when I viewed a YouTube video of a plane (F4 Phantom in this case) claimed to be an Air Force Phantom flying by with it’s tail hook down. I was ready to claim that it must have been a Navy or USMC plane. I received comments from 2 different people, both Air Force mechanics, describing how Air Force planes really did have tail hooks. Seems there are times they use them to arrest landing distances other than on a ship. One even described the noise made when a hook was dropped while a plane was in a maintenance hangar. So strange as it seems, many AF planes have tail hooks. ETA I see LSGuy already hit this… ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/144 "2016-12-23T14:52:30Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > BUMP > Looks like Trump is inclined to [cancel the whole thin](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/23/lockheed-f-35-fighter-project-in-doubt-after-trump-tweet-encourages-rival-boeing)g. Putin wins again! ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/145 "2016-12-23T14:57:08Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > BUMP > Looks like Trump is inclined to [cancel the whole thin](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/23/lockheed-f-35-fighter-project-in-doubt-after-trump-tweet-encourages-rival-boeing)g. Trump probably knows that Congress will keep the F-35 program alive. He gets to sound brash and strong, and gets to blame Congress for the spending. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/146 "2016-12-23T15:07:30Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > I asked the same question when I viewed a YouTube video of a plane (F4 Phantom in this case) claimed to be an Air Force Phantom flying by with it’s tail hook down. I was ready to claim that it must have been a Navy or USMC plane. > I received comments from 2 different people, both Air Force mechanics, describing how Air Force planes really did have tail hooks. Seems there are times they use them to arrest landing distances other than on a ship. One even described the noise made when a hook was dropped while a plane was in a maintenance hangar. So strange as it seems, many AF planes have tail hooks. > > ETA > I see LSGuy already hit this… The F-4 was an intermediate case in that it was a 100% Navy design that the Air Force belatedly decided to buy. As such it had many Navy standard design features: nose gear with dual wheels & catapult connector, long travel monster main gear, extra corrosion proofing, etc. And relevant to this hijack, a USN standard heavy-duty hook rather than the USAF standard occasional-use hook. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/147 "2016-12-23T15:11:01Z")
Complete hijack, but I once read that of current airforce planes, the F16 was the only one which could readily be redesigned as a carrier plane. (By which I mean, a carrier version made, not that existing airframes be retrofitted). This is unlike Russian and French practice, where carrier planes are basically models of existing airforce planes. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/148 "2016-12-23T15:15:15Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > Putin wins again! Not to pick on the quoted poster, but it’s amazing to see people who have been calling the F35 a piece of shyt for years suddenly learning to love it when Trump expresses that same opinion. 😛 The Guardian newspaper for one. [QUOTE=scr4] Trump probably knows that Congress will keep the F-35 program alive. He gets to sound brash and strong, and gets to blame Congress for the spending. [/QUOTE] Either way this is the first real political pushback Lockheed has had. Earlier, the criticisms came from middle managers, everyone in power in the US and abroad has been busy fellating them to actually do something. ---
**Author:** ![Morgenstern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Morgenstern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgenstern)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/149 "2016-12-23T15:21:58Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Not to pick on the quoted poster, but it’s amazing to see people who have been calling the F35 a piece of shyt for years suddenly learning to love it when Trump expresses that same opinion. > 😛 > The Guardian newspaper for one. > … Unfortunately, I’ve been a supporter of the aircraft. I’ve accepted the “if we could only tell you all the classified capabilities of this aircraft” as reason enough to give it a chance. I’m not privy to classified information, so I’m stuck listening to the experts/pilots who flew it when they tell me it’s awesome. But again, Putin will love it if Trump cancels a major threat to his potential air-superiority in any conflict. ETA, even the Chinese are copying it, but the Chinese think just looking like it is being it. (China’s J-31) > **[China's Copycat Jet Raises Questions About F-35](https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2015/09/more-questions-f-35-after-new-specs-chinas-copycat/121859/)** > > Did the Chinese theft of data on the US fighter jet and other weapons shrink the Pentagon's technical superiority? ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/150 "2016-12-23T15:47:35Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Complete hijack, but I once read that of current airforce planes, the F16 was the only one which could readily be redesigned as a carrier plane. (By which I mean, a carrier version made, not that existing airframes be retrofitted). This is unlike Russian and French practice, where carrier planes are basically models of existing airforce planes. I’d be curious for a ref to that if you have one. It seems to me … implausible. The airplane was built very lightly wherever it wasn’t needed to carry Gs. That’s part of how it performed so well. The main gear’s gross design was akin to that on the A-7, another joint USAF/USN aircraft. I could imagine some non-expert writer observing that similarity and writing something along the lines of “With its Navy style main gear and its hook it could easily be adapted for carrier use.” Which IMO would be bunk. But externally plausible bunk. OTOH, there’s no guarantee I’ve got it right here either. I just worked there; I sure wasn’t involved in the design stuff. ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/151 "2016-12-23T15:52:41Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Not to pick on the quoted poster, but it’s amazing to see people who have been calling the F35 a piece of shyt for years suddenly learning to love it when Trump expresses that same opinion. > 😛 > The Guardian newspaper for one. I did a quick search of F-35 related articles on the Guardian and didn’t see any old articles that called for it to be canceled, or any new articles saying it should be continued. Got links? ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/152 "2016-12-23T15:53:49Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > I’d be curious for a ref to that if you have one. It seems to me … implausible. > > The airplane was built very lightly wherever it wasn’t needed to carry Gs. That’s part of how it performed so well. > > The main gear’s gross design was akin to that on the A-7, another joint USAF/USN aircraft. I could imagine some non-expert writer observing that similarity and writing something along the lines of “With its Navy style main gear and its hook it could easily be adapted for carrier use.” Which IMO would be bunk. But externally plausible bunk. > > OTOH, there’s no guarantee I’ve got it right here either. I just worked there; I sure wasn’t involved in the design stuff. :smack: I feel like an idiot. I went back and found the article in question…and it turns out the plane [they considered was the F15](http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-sea-eagle-how-americas-f-15-fighter-almost-became-18051). ETA: Although in my search I just discovered that a carrier capable[Viper was planned at one time.](http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/v-1600-the-carrier-capable-f-16-that-wasnt/) ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/153 "2016-12-23T16:00:29Z")
> [@scr4](#): > > I did a quick search of F-35 related articles on the Guardian and didn’t see any old articles that called for it to be canceled, or any new articles saying it should be continued. Got links? I did’n say they called for it to be cancelled, just that it was shyt. But here. [Australia’s F-35 jet acquisition has hallmarks of Ponzi scheme, inquiry told](https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/mar/22/australias-f-35-jet-acquisition-has-hallmarks-of-ponzi-scheme-inquiry-told) [British U-turn on US jets damages credibility of UK defence chiefs](https://www.theguardian.com/news/defence-and-security-blog/2012/may/10/defence-fighter-aircraft) ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/154 "2016-12-23T17:56:06Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > :smack: > I feel like an idiot. I went back and found the article in question…and it turns out the plane [they considered was the F15](http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-sea-eagle-how-americas-f-15-fighter-almost-became-18051). > > ETA: Although in my search I just discovered that a carrier capable[Viper was planned at one time.](http://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/v-1600-the-carrier-capable-f-16-that-wasnt/) Cool. Thanks. The rest of that link is interesting. The carrier F16 would have been 25% heavier at empty weight, need all new landing gear, etc. It might better be described as a whole new aircraft derived from the F-16. No need for a :smack:. The more I learn and the older I get the more I recognize that a huge memory such as yours or mine contains a lot more inadvertent cross-links than I wish it did. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/155 "2016-12-23T18:35:58Z")
Thanks for the kind words. 🙂 Do you think the Navy’s objection re the carrier F16 (as related in the article) were valid or were a case of “will take an Air Force fighter over our dead bodies”. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2016, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/156 "2016-12-23T18:57:57Z")
After the F-111 fiasco which set the Navy’s acquisition for that mission back about 10 years I bet politics had a lot to do with it. But more legitimately … The YF-16 vs. YF-17 fly-off showed two excellent aircraft which nonetheless had significant differences. The Venn diagrams were each large, but so was the area of non-overlap. USN & USAF have different metrics for what they valued. One thing USN particularly valued / values is twin engines. Something that was a non-starter from the git-go for the F-16. USAF found the YF-16 scored best in their metrics. USN found the YF-17 scored best in theirs. Both production -A models were a lot different from their YF- prototypes. Mostly because both YF-s were built unrealistically small to boost maneuvering performance which USAF said would score very highly. Once GD won, the practicalities of getting enough radar, fuel, and ordnance on board led to a 15%-all around stretch from the YF-16 to the F-16. Last of all, there was plenty of politics on the USAF side too. The F-16 had to be mildly crippled to avoid encroaching on the vaunted F-15. Had they not done so, the project would have been killed by the so-called F-15 Mafia as a threat to their numbers. The Navy at that point in history didn’t have that issue; the F-17/18 was to be a replacement for, not a supplement to, their then-current premier F-type, the F-14. So USN didn’t want to buy as their front line F-jet something that had been partly crippled to satisfy USAF internal politics. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2016, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/157 "2016-12-24T10:38:06Z")
Interestingly the blog War is Boring said on the whole [Trump v F35](https://warisboring.com/the-official-f-35-price-tags-are-bogus-99d67799e2ac#.n3w3lcu9c) > [@](#): > > Congressional appropriations showed us that the total costs came down again to $128 million for a generic F-35. That’s $113 million for an F-35A, $142 million for an F-35B and $241 million for a F-35C. > > However, an old Congressional Research Service report on the F-35 tells us that in 1994 the Pentagon was promising F-35As for $31 million, F-35Bs for $31 to $38 million and F-35Cs for between $30 and 35 million. In 2017 dollars, those costs would be $53 million per F-35A, $53 million to $65 million for each F-35B and $51 million to $60 million for a single F-35C. > Put another way, in 2017, a F-35A costs about twice what the Pentagon promised Congress more than two decades earlier. Compared to this initial estimate, the F-35B costs more than twice as much now, while an F-35C is about four times more expensive. > > **I suspect Trump can recognize when he is being scammed.** In this case, the Pentagon is telling him American taxpayers can get F-35s for only two to four times what they originally advertised. Emphasis mine: Takes one to know one I guess. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![UberArchetype](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/2bfe46/32.png) [@UberArchetype](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UberArchetype)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2016, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/158 "2016-12-24T17:40:20Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > But again, Putin will love it if Trump cancels a major threat to his potential air-superiority in any conflict. Trump cannot unilaterally “cancel” the F-35 program, or any major defense program, for that matter. Government and government contracting simply doesn’t work that way. There is a very small chance the new administration could spend political capital stirring up trouble on this front by soliciting contract modifications for things like the Presidential transport and the F-35. But everybody knows those forays into fiscal stupidity always end up costing more and providing less capability. Rampant speculation fomented here and in the media is somewhat amusing, if basically irrelevant. > [@scr4](#): > > Trump probably knows that Congress will keep the F-35 program alive. He gets to sound brash and strong, and gets to blame Congress for the spending. Were you under the impression anyone (any"thing") other than Congress is to blame for Federal spending? And what’s this nonsense comparing 4th generation aircraft? Anyone flying or buying 4th gen fighters today is doing so either because they cannot get F-35s in service quickly enough, or simply cannot or will not buy them for any number of reasons.\* It is not because they don’t desperately “want” or “need” them. It is simply because for whatever\* reason they cannot have them - either now or ever, in some cases. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2016, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/159 "2016-12-24T20:03:32Z")
> [@UberArchetype](#): > > Trump cannot unilaterally “cancel” the F-35 program, or any major defense program, for that matter. Government and government contracting simply doesn’t work that way. What do you mean he can’t cancel the program? There’s always the chance that Congress can step in and reverse the decision - more or less what happened with the V-22 Osprey. But I’m not following how the program can’t be terminated for the convienece of the government. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2016, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493/160 "2016-12-24T20:12:52Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > **What do you mean he can’t cancel the program?** There’s always the chance that Congress can step in and reverse the decision - more or less what happened with the V-22 Osprey. But I’m not following how the program can’t be terminated for the convienece of the government. Contracts. I’m assuming that Trump is well accustomed to breaking contracts whenever he feels like it but I’m assuming the President can’t just order a contract canceled on a whim. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/f-35-death-spiral-is-closing-in/766493.md?page=9)