"5 of 6 F-35As Fail to Take Off During Mock Deployment " Topic

""The Air Force attempted two alert launch procedures during the Mountain Home deployment, where multiple F-35A aircraft were preflighted and prepared for a rapid launch, but only one of the six aircraft was able to complete the alert launch sequence and successfully takeoff," the Pentagon's top weapons tester disclosed in written testimony to Congress on 26 April. "Problems during startup that required system or aircraft shutdowns and restarts – a symptom of immature systems and software – prevented the other alert launches from being completed."

The deployment took place in February in preparation for the first trial deployment of the 34th Fighter Squadron of Hill AFB, Utah, which is slated to declare initial operational capability (IOC) with Block 3i aircraft sometime between August and December this year.

It is one of many examples of failed launches attributed to "immature software" that has been loaded into the 179 aircraft Lockheed has already delivered to the Pentagon and international customers since concurrent production and development began in 2007 "well before the stability of the design could be confirmed through testing"…"
Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

They really should keep this stuff quiet…….

:(

If we're going to burden my children – and great-grandchildren – with crippling, Third World-level debt, can we at least get stuff that works?

If we're going to burden my children – and great-grandchildren – with crippling, Third World-level debt, can we at least get stuff that works?

But if they sold us stuff that works, they wouldn't make money on the post-sale service & support contracts for decades.

Almost 50 years ago, MAD magazine satirized built-in obsolescence.

Things have only gotten worse since then, and the military is not immune.

It also reflects the overall move in the US from a production economy to a service economy. If we build things to work, and to last, we'll cut into our profits on fixes and "necessary" upgrades.

Building a system of aircraft that cannot fly simply holds down the number of combat losses. They were just planning ahead!

As long as we throw taxpayer money at it, Lockheed Martin investors will be happy

That's what why they paid off your congressman/senator with huge campaign contributions

& spread the production of this gold/titanium plated crap sandwhich over as many congressional districts as possible

& spread the production of this gold/titanium plated crap sandwhich over as many congressional districts as possible

I will say that whatever VP at LockMart had that "Eureka!" moment about the Congress districts making an unkillable project….*THAT* guy earned his bonus and then some.

"If we're going to burden my children – and great-grandchildren – with crippling, Third World-level debt, can we at least get stuff that works?".

Apparently not, and why should they?

I mean, why deliver something that works, when you can get paid for delivering non-working items, and then get paid again to "fix" them?

You do see the dynamic in play here, right?

It's all about maximizing profits…….

Can you say "military-industrial complex"?

Nothing new here. It's been going on for centuries.

Hope Norway didn't sell our F16s. Looks like we are going to still need them while our new F35s rust on the ground.

To bad we didn't buy the Gripen instead. I can see the swedes rolling on the floor laughing at us.

Im sure this will be spun into a complete success.

Yep, proves their "rigorous" rollout and testing plan is working.

"The most lengthy, thorough, modern jet rollout in the history of aviation". [Note – I demand steep royalty payments, if they steal my statement, and actually use it for their own]

Should have listened to this guy:

YouTube link

He was no idiot…

They simply decided not to take off, as any time in the air would reduce their precious service life and they might not be available later when a real crisis occurs. Yes, that's it!