• SSTF@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I suppose the question is really if the dollars are being spent in the most efficient way to get the result. I don’t know, because that’s complicated and probably needs more digging than I can do for an NCD comment. I do know that much of the discussion is muddled by the three models of F35 all essentially being their own subprograms. Which makes it hard to follow certain news articles or critiques when they jump from model to model to make their points.

    • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      4 months ago

      If it makes you feel better, the package to modernize A-10’s costs more per plane than a brand-new F-35. The F-35 has also become fairly cheap to maintain per flight hour over the past couple of years due to economies of scale. It’s now comparable to the F-16 in that regard.

      Also, the controls and avionics are being adopted in the upgraded F-15s that will be produced soon

      • SSTF@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I’m team anti-A-10 for sure. The only reason that thing is still around is because the big gun is so thought terminatingly cool that it short circuits peoples’ ability to be rational. There’s an embarrassing Congressional hearing about retiring A-10s and a Senator (McCain I think) was arguing against the data with “But if big gun plane go away, where will big gun be?”

        I suspected, vaguely, that a lot of F35 costs would trend down now that the R&D was done, and there is production ramping up.

    • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      The f-35 project is over budget and chock full of stupid expenses.

      It still remains worth every penny for the US given it is a beyond peer platform, so is the f-22.

      At the end of the day being able to win without question will almost always be worth the cost even if it was more than necessary.

        • Estiar@sh.itjust.worksM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          F-22 isn’t in production anymore and it would be very expensive to start up production again. Much of the capacity to produce F-22 has been taken up by other programs such as F-35 meaning that they would need new capacity.

          They actually had the opportunity to produce more F-22s with the Japanese government offering to buy and put forward a lot of money to produce more, but the US didn’t see the need for more of an air superiority platform

          F-22 specializes in Air Superiority or clearing the skies. It wasn’t made for air to ground (even though it can do it today) In Afghanistan, there wasn’t a need for more air superiority

        • Zink@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          The US keeps the F-22 to itself already, but the F-35 is basically the NATO multirole fighter jet so the US has plenty of those too.