It's a Flying (?) Turd

This is today's second post so if you haven't seen the first step back one space and take a look.

The United States military is buying a couple thousand F-35 Joint Strike Fighters. The purchase is for 2,400 planes at an estimated cost of one trillion dollars. The fighter is designed by Lockheed Martin to evade enemy radar, bomb ground targets and shoot down rival fighters. Sounds like a pretty great fighter jet up to this point. The jet is designed in three configurations. The Air Force's F-35A, the Marine's vertical-takeoff F-35B and the Navy's F-35C. The Navy's version needs a larger wing for carrier landings at sea. The problem is that the jet is attempting to be all things to each service and as such manages to be good at none of them. It seems the basic problem has to do with the 50 inch diameter vertical lift fan required for the Marine version. Since all three jets use the same airframe the body of the plane has to be wider. Why is width a problem? It affects speed. The jet is wider so it is slower. The jet is intended to be stealthy so to avoid detection by radar the weapons must be carried internally. The lift fan also reduces fuel efficiency, acceleration, and flying range. The fan also results in the jet having one engine instead of the two carried by most fighters. The placement of the fan behind the cockpit also limits the pilot's ability to see attacks from the rear. The stealth nature of the jet loses its advantage as soon as it begins firing its weapons. Finally the vertical takeoff and landing requirement forced weight reduction which makes the jet more maneuverable but also less durable and less safe to fly. The overall analysis is a jet that has inferior acceleration, inferior climb rate, inferior turning capability, with a lower top speed. A jet that can't turn, can't climb, can't run.

What has our competition been doing? At least twice since 2007 Chinese computer hackers have stolen data on the F-35's from developers' poorly guarded computer servers. This included detailed design specifications. The latest Chinese jet fighter prototype the J-31 strongly resembles the F-35 but lacks the vertical takeoff fan. The Chinese fighter is built for speed, maneuverability, acceleration and flying range. It also has a second engine. If both countries proceed with current designs the Chinese fighter has significant advantages over the F-35.

Let's take a minute to talk money. In June 2012 the cost of the F-35 program for 2,457 F-35 jets was estimated to be 395.7 billion dollars. The 2007 estimate was 233 billion dollars a cost growth of 162.7 billion dollars. The numbers are not quite as accurate as the government would like you to believe. The original cost of 233 billion was for 2,866 jets. When you crunch the numbers the cost of the program has almost doubled. If you go back to 2001 when the program actually began the estimated cost was 117.2 billion dollars. Those are procurement costs. The estimate for operating the jets over their 30 year expected lifespan is 1.1 trillion dollars.

What could we have done with that money? If you look at the F-35 as a 400 billion dollar program that is at least 7 years behind schedule and plagued with cost overruns we could have provided every homeless person in the United States with a $600,000 home. The program could fund the National School Lunch Program which feeds 31 million students annually for the next 24 years. We spent 19 times more money on defense and international security assistance in 2013 than we did on education. We spend more on defense than China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, France, United Kingdom, Germany, Japan and India combined.

What we get for that money is a flying turd that will get its ass kicked in a fight with countries who are spending much less money on defense. Is it time to rethink our national priorities?