As you know, the F-35 does not yet have its full combat
capabilities. Those were part of the
incremental Block software upgrades and should have happened years ago. Now, the Block 4 upgrade effort has been
delayed yet again.
Note the phrases,
“at the earliest”
“include fewer
capabilities than originally envisioned”
You know, beyond the slightest shadow of a doubt, that the
even the much delayed 2031 date will slip further still and the already
downgraded capabilities of the Block 4 will be further downgraded. Honestly, at the rate we’re going, Block 4
isn’t going to deliver much in the way of new capabilities, at all. Many features have already been deferred to a
nebulous, non-existent. Unfunded, future upgrade instead of the Block 4.
In addition, the Block 4 program is being reorganized, yet
again. GAO reports,
The cost for this pile of digital crap is stunning, even by Department of Defense standards.
Well over $16B and counting (with at least five more years of costs still to come!) and with next to nothing to show for it. I really don’t know how to apply any value-added analysis to that. People should be rotting in jail for this. Okay, I guess that was my value-added analysis.
On the off chance that you aren’t angry about this, yet, the
following should correct that.
So, we set up a contract with incentives and then paid the manufacturer incentives even after they failed to deliver aircraft on time. People should be rotting in jail for this. See? More value-added analysis.
This is exactly the kind of thing I had hoped that SecDef
Hegseth would address but he is disappointing me. Heads should be littering the halls of the
F-35 program. What is Hegseth doing with
his time?
_____________________________________
The Pentagon now anticipates the F-35’s Block 4 modernization won’t be complete until 2031 at the earliest, a five-year delay from its original timeline, even as the department rescopes the effort to include fewer capabilities than originally envisioned … [1]
Note the phrases,
According to program officials, the new Block 4 major subprogram will have fewer capabilities, will experience schedule delays, and will have unknown costs until the program office finishes developing its cost estimate.[1]
The cost for this pile of digital crap is stunning, even by Department of Defense standards.
An updated cost estimate for the Block 4 effort, which was $16.5 billion as of 2021, is expected “later in 2025,” according to the GAO.[1]
Well over $16B and counting (with at least five more years of costs still to come!) and with next to nothing to show for it. I really don’t know how to apply any value-added analysis to that. People should be rotting in jail for this. Okay, I guess that was my value-added analysis.
The F-35 program’s use of incentive fees has largely been ineffective at holding the contractors accountable to delivering engines and aircraft on time,” the GAO stated. “For lot 15 aircraft, where the program originally tied incentives to on-time delivery, the program gave the contractor a second chance to earn fees by redirecting those incentives to other aspects of the program when it was clear that Lockheed Martin would not deliver any aircraft on time.[1]
So, we set up a contract with incentives and then paid the manufacturer incentives even after they failed to deliver aircraft on time. People should be rotting in jail for this. See? More value-added analysis.
https://breakingdefense.com/2025/09/f-35-block-4-upgrade-delayed-until-at-least-2031-gao/
"What is Hegseth doing with his time?"
ReplyDeleteI think that Hegseth is a good choice for reinvigorating a war fighting mentality.
But I think a better person to straighten out these types of messes would be DeSantis with his experience with larger scale administration.
Maybe after his governor term is completed.
Lutefisk
"I think that Hegseth is a good choice for reinvigorating a war fighting mentality."
DeleteOne of the best ways to reinvigorate the warfighting mentality is to ruthlessly fire the people responsible for disastrous acquisition programs, terminate failed acquisition programs, and refocus our acquisition on worthwhile equipment. This, as much as anything will send the message to the rank and file that we are serious about warfighting. So far, Hegseth has left 99% of the previous known bad actors in place. What message is that sending? He should have fired 80% of the generals and admirals, terminated dozens of major acquisition programs, fired almost every program manager, fired half the colonels for being political animals, set new high standards for physical performance (he's offered lip service but no actual change that I'm aware of), enforced corrosion control on the Navy, etc. He's done almost none of those. Again, what message is he really sending? He spouts sound bites but he's not really doing much of anything as far as I can tell.
This post, alone, should be sufficient to terminate the F-35 program. We could have an entirely new, state of the art aircraft by 2031, following the methods I've described. We produced an operation F-14 in just a few years, as you'll recall !
DeleteCNO, reading your post there....I can't disagree with a single thing you just said.
DeleteLutefisk
"He should have fired 80% of the generals and admirals, terminated dozens of major acquisition programs, fired almost every program manager, fired half the colonels for being political animals [...]"
DeleteCan he actually do that without being blocked by courts immediately, hit with lawsuit for terminating contracts, etc.?
Genuine question here.
"Can he actually do that"
DeleteI'll preface my answer by stating that I am not a lawyer.
Yes, he can fire generals and admirals (for example, MacArthur was fired by Truman). Appointing replacements requires Congressional approval. Program managers are merely assignmentes and every program manager can be instantly removed from that assignment. Terminating programs can be done but does require lawyers to work out the contract termination terms. Lower ranks (colonels, for example) can be fired for no reason. Standards can be changed with the stroke of a pen.
So, as a general (pardon the pun) answer, yes, he can do those things with varying degrees on "instantaneousness".
I have no confidence in SecDef Hegseth, given that contrary to the tenets of this blog, he is REDUCING firepower. He's outlined plans to cut current numbers of Abrams tanks and Apache gunships and instead increase the procurement of ISVs. The ISV is a windowless roofless dune buggy! It has NO firepower and NO protection!
Delete"China's J-35"
ReplyDeleteThis is not a Chinese propaganda site. I encourage factual discussion of Chinese weapon systems but not blatant propaganda efforts that have no basis in fact. Stop trying to get these kinds of comments posted.
When the roots of a system are rotten, dismissing many people is useless—the new replacements will be no different.
ReplyDeleteThere is NO alternate! F-35s are only stealth fighters which Pentagon can buy. Even for non-stealthy, F-15EX and F/A-18E/F have their own problems and they cannot counter China's stealthy fighters.
DeleteF-47? We haven't seen any prototype assembled. It is many years away (based on F-22 and F-35 experiences). We can only hope that Pentagon does right things - carefully design and reviews - neglect whatever Trump's request to make first flight on his watch.
"When the roots of a system are rotten, dismissing many people is useless"
DeleteThis is patently foolish. Not everyone in the military is "rotten". The vast majority of people sign up for virtuous reasons to greater or lesser extents. Over time, the system selects for the worthless political animals but the good people are still there - those who don't simply leave the service. Dismissing high ranking officers alters the selection process, hopefully in a better direction, clears the way for the remaining good people, and sends the emphatic message that a new way of thinking (the old way, actually) is back. And if, perchance, some of the replacements are bad then you simply get rid of them, too. Sooner or later you'll find good people.
"There is NO alternate!"
DeleteOf course there is. There are always options. The preferred option is to terminate the F-35 and build a new aircraft. We can put a state of the art (but not beyond) aircraft into squadron service within five years and I've described exactly how to do it.
They just placed a retired F-35 as a static display at MCAS Beaufort SC.
ReplyDeleteThat aircraft was the first F-35B (BF-1) ever built and was used for testing.
DeleteThere is an F-22 displayed in the Hill AFB museum, Utah. It was previously assigned to the 325th Fighter Wing from Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida.
DeleteGoogle the web yourself on bazar story why this F-22 ended up in museum.
How many decades again did this "project" start again?
ReplyDeleteDepending on when you consider the start of the program, the F-35 has been in development for 20+ years, heading towards 30! For comparison, Grumman was awared a development contract for the F-14 in 1969 and the first F-14 squadrons deployed in 1974. That's five years from initial development to squadron service. We've forgotten what we were once capable of.
DeleteIt's also partly a political decision. The F-14, F-15 and F-16 initial adoption variants were markedly different from the final forms deployed, because we accepted that there would be periodic blocks and tranches of aircraft at revised specifications. The original F-16A was a daytime light fighter, but each progressive Block upgrade and variant added new features and capabilities, with the end result F-16 Block 60 being an all weather strike fighter. IT seems with the F-35 that we want to make it perfect first.
DeleteThe whole F-35 project was based on wrong strategic thinking. During Bush Jr. time, SOD Rumsfeld pushed for stopping F-22 and insisted on common platform of F-35. National leaders believed that US military would no longer fight another superpower but focus on fight regional powers, terrorists, and insurgents.
ReplyDeleteF-22 was an air superiority fighter. It cannot fly slow and low well thus not suitable for close-in air supports. F-35 was designed with emphasizes in ground attacks thus sacrificed some air-to-air combat capabilities. Rumsfeld, etc. believed that was not important since there would no opponents in future.
After 911, within hours, then Chinese leader called president Bush Jr. to support US' antiterrorism activities. This made the Bush Administration dismissed any possible future threats from China. China did so to purchase a very precious thing - peaceful time. They need a relative peaceful environment to do R&D than rush out weapons to counter threats.
Today, thanks to politicians from both parties, the nation fights in many fronts thus no time to develop weapons need long time to mature but rush to get something to counter this and that. Each dismissed the other side's wars as stupid yet their wars are vital for the nation. What can I say?
It is too late. For many years, there haven't any meaningful upgrade on F-22 for obvious reasons. Its avionics (sensors, etc,) are outdated today. It still has no EOTS and EODAS as F-35 and China's J-20 and J-35. All F-22 remains are old thus it is questionable on worthiness to upgrade them. It is a catch 22.
Delete"All F-22 remains are old thus it is questionable on worthiness to upgrade them."
DeleteThis is somewhere between factually false and highly debatable. The F-22 remains the consensus most lethal fighter in the world. Beyond that, the F-22 is scheduled for significant upgrades. See, F-22 Upgrades
What is Hegseth doing with his time?
ReplyDeleteHegseth just like any other person operates within the frame work provided to them
if you want change, you need strong doner class to patron that cause
Hegseth has the maximum backing possible. The President tasked him with revamping the military. There is no stronger "patron" than that. Hegseth is failing to take advantage of his advantage.
Deleteis US President stronger than Deep state ?
DeleteThat's a political discussion we'll leave for other blogs.
DeleteThe second new B-21 has been delivered. It seems to be moving along nicely leading me to suspect it's just an upgraded B-2. I checked and its much smaller and..
ReplyDelete"Unlike B-21 Raider, which can only carry less than 30,000 lbs, the B-2 Spirit has a payload of 60,000 lbs."
https://www.techtimes.com/articles/284386/20221207/b-21-raider-vs-2-spirit-heres-comparison-between-two.htm
Progress? I suspect with rapid tech progress, these bombers will soon become easily detectable. There are some techniques, like using a cell phone network to see a pattern of signal disruption. Or like the Serbs did, spotlights on fighters.
They can also be seen by radar when they open bomb bay doors, and bombs aren't stealthy, and since B-21s are subsonic and an enemy will usually know where they are going home, they might be chased down.
You never know until years later. In early days of F-35's fly tests, we rarely heard any bad news about it despite Pentagon already knew problems existed. However, they were confident that these problems would be solved quickly. So, let's wait if this time is truly different or another lemon.
DeleteThe availabilty of the F35 has been reported here .
ReplyDelete"Key Factors Contributing to Poor Availability
Reliability & Maintainability Issues:
The F-35 fleet has struggled with overall reliability and maintainability, failing to meet availability goals across all variants (F-35A, F-35B, F-35C).
Lack of Spare Parts & Equipment:
Reports from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) have highlighted issues with the availability of spare parts and maintenance equipment.
Maintenance Crew Issues:
Maintenance crews have sometimes lacked sufficient technical data, impacting their ability to effectively service the aircraft.
False Fault Reports:
The F-35's self-monitoring system triggers a high rate of false fault reports, leading to excessive and unnecessary maintenance requirements.
Stealth Material Damage:
Damage to the aircraft's stealth material can render it non-mission-capable, with issues affecting all U.S. Air Force and Navy F-35s at one point.
Upgrade Delays:
Delays in the crucial Technology Refresh 3 (TR3) upgrade have caused Air Force to temporarily halt new jet acceptances due to unresolved sensor and avionics issues.
Network System Transition:
The transition to the new ODIN network (replacing the older ALIS system) has faced significant delays, with necessary hardware not fully in place until at least 2025.
Impact and Goals
Reduced Mission Readiness:
The poor availability means fewer F-35s are ready to fly actual missions compared to older aircraft like the F-22 and F-15.
Increased Costs:
Sustainment costs for the F-35 have risen significantly, with estimates increasing from $1.1 trillion to $1.58 trillion.
Lowered Flight Hours:
The decreasing availability and increasing costs have led the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps to reduce their projected annual flight hours for the F-35 fleet. Key Factors Contributing to Poor Availability
Reliability & Maintainability Issues:
The F-35 fleet has struggled with overall reliability and maintainability, failing to meet availability goals across all variants (F-35A, F-35B, F-35C).
Lack of Spare Parts & Equipment:
Reports from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) have highlighted issues with the availability of spare parts and maintenance equipment.
Maintenance Crew Issues:
Maintenance crews have sometimes lacked sufficient technical data, impacting their ability to effectively service the aircraft.
False Fault Reports:
The F-35's self-monitoring system triggers a high rate of false fault reports, leading to excessive and unnecessary maintenance requirements.
Stealth Material Damage:
Damage to the aircraft's stealth material can render it non-mission-capable, with issues affecting all U.S. Air Force and Navy F-35s at one point.
Upgrade Delays:
Delays in the crucial Technology Refresh 3 (TR3) upgrade have caused Air Force to temporarily halt new jet acceptances due to unresolved sensor and avionics issues.
Network System Transition:
The transition to the new ODIN network (replacing the older ALIS system) has faced significant delays, with necessary hardware not fully in place until at least 2025.
Impact and Goals
Reduced Mission Readiness:
The poor availability means fewer F-35s are ready to fly actual missions compared to older aircraft like the F-22 and F-15.
Increased Costs:
Sustainment costs for the F-35 have risen significantly, with estimates increasing from $1.1 trillion to $1.58 trillion.
Lowered Flight Hours:
The decreasing availability and increasing costs have led the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps to reduce their projected annual flight hours for the F-35 fleet. " PB
When you quote, especially an extensive passage, be sure to supply the credit. Also, please try to include some value-added analysis or commentary. Thank you.
Deletehttps://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2025-06/61347-F-35-Availability.pdf. ( My post above is from a google AI search ) However, after reading this CBO report , I must say that this saga has been going on for some time. Another article I am reading is "F35 the part time fighter jet " My take : maintenance & part supply chains have been problematic ,impacting poor availability also sustainment costs have risen. Then there is the issue of the fighter jet not reaching its full potential for some years in the future. PB
ReplyDeleteYoutuber and former Naval aviator Ward Carrol just posted a vid about the F-35. Not good.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LReZ4ejDjpw
Very well put together, but also deeply terrifying. When you really start to absorb those numbers with a T behind them, coupled with the ongoing delays it makes you think!!
DeleteThen there is the impact on carrier airwings....with the F35 being a part time fighter and aging superhornet air frames.
DeleteWill F-47 repeat F-35's ordeals?
ReplyDelete