How many of the cheap drones that Iran launched hit their targets?

From the article:
Attached File








It's a WIN-WIN for the enemy

BRO ARE YOU EVEN AWARE
they have proof of Putin urinating on Trump in a NY hotel room. They just won’t admit it because ORANGE MAN BAD RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA.
That Hunter Biden laptop story though? Just right wing disinformation.
#CorrectTheRecord

Planes that can fly would be where I'd start.

Just bring back the F20 ... one minute !

I do not claim to be an expert on this subject and those who are probably don’t say much about it on the internet. But I do not believe the F-35s computers are current vintage. Since it’s a stealth aircraft everything on it has to be integrated to reduce the risk of emissions leaking out and telling everyone where you are.

I’m told that this is a big part of the appeal of the F-15EX. You can bolt a better radar and newer computer systems into it with much less hassle than on a 35. It’s also bigger than the 35, more room to stow stuff.

It's also called "people rising to their level of incompetence", & there's a lot of incompetence in the C suite.

Drones as used offensively in the Ukraine war ARE Artillery.
Russia is outproducing Ukraine on simple weapons like artillery shells, they are NOT outproducing Ukraine on drones. The problem isn't that the Russians are outproducing Ukraine, it's that the Russians and North Koreans are outproducing Ukraine AND NATO when it comes to artillery shells. But Russia is starting to lose the war of attrition, they are running out of artillery tubes to fire those shells, they are running out of all forms of vehicles, tanks, APC's, trucks etc to lead attacks and provide transportation to the battlefield. If Ukraine can survive another year I predict Russia will be done.

The problem in the U.S. with military procurement is a mixture of the defense dept living on the bleeding edge of technology and Congress being involved in decisions they shouldn't be making when writing the checks to pay for it all.
F-35 was sold to Congress on being a more capable, common platform for the air force and navy to save money, when in reality the differences between the three models means that the planes are less capable and more expensive. Congress should never have been involved in the decisions on the capabilities of the planes, they should never be involved on where, how and who manufactures the planes; they should only be involved in the decision of do we pay for this program or not, and once that decision is made they should just write the checks.
It would prevent disasters like the Advanced Gun System and related Long Range Land Attack Projectile where 90% of the money for the program was spent and all development was finished, then Congress decided not to buy the actual shells using a fake cost that included the already spent total development cost not just the cost of the manufacture of the shells, to justify the decision to cancel and making the Zumwalts an orphan program without a purpose. They didn't save 2 billion cancelling the LRLAP shells, they wasted 2.2 billion in development cost of the guns and shells by not spending 200 million manufacturing the shells.
The Ford carrier class problems were all bleeding edge technology problems that could have, and should have, been fixed by building the systems on land and finishing their development and testing before building the carriers. The electromagnet recovery system went pretty well, but the electromagnetic catapult system went poorly and the Ford will always have problems with damage control and repair in battle and the armament transportation system was a disaster and all simply because the very first examples weren't built as individual systems on land in development jigs with easy access and easy component changes and easy design changes but not built and tested until installed in the carrier where it was much more expensive to fix them due to time pressures, component access problems and changes needed to the designs that caused changes to the carriers structure.
Over and over again the defense dept doesn't develop the latest technology in isolation, instead forcing it into the latest weapon programs as a TBD item. Congress insists on this, and insists on making decisions they shouldn't be making. I don't see a way to fix the problems Congress causes, but the defense dept could definitely do a better job of developing the tech separately before putting it into a weapons program. Though I think they don't because of trying to get the money to do so from Congress.

 Lol,  just need artillery with a 2000 miles deployment within 36 hours and a 800 mile range.

Honestly it looks like the Airforce is fucking something up, not the planes.

The Marines are keeping their B models at 50% mission capable, and the Navy's C models are at 60%.  The lack of FMC has more to do with the older blocks those two services have lacking some features.  If the two most complex versions of the aircraft can at least get airborne and do some of their missions why the hell is the airforce having so many problems?

Perhaps you should research the difference between "can fly" and FMC.

FMG

Somebody should have pointed out the C5, C130 and c141 to him. Pretty damn good record of flying.

It's true that artillery does take time to deploy.  

But if we are including drones in the argument... Iranian drones have a lot longer range than 800 miles:


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/02/deadly-cheap-and-widespread-how-iran-supplied-drones-are-changing-the-nature-of-warfare

Why are 30% of them OK? Are we just talking about the STOVL models?

The first operational ones came online what, 10 years ago?

If only the second engine wasnt fucking cancelled

Looks like a problem that needs to be fixed.  You will not fix it by washing hands of it.


Should also note that the GAO is always going to be pessimist no matter what. Its their job.

If they can’t fly, how did Lockheed deliver them to the wing wipers?  

Gaetz is a fucking tool but I’m just a dumb fucking grunt.

Do we have any F35 maintainers on here? I'm curious what kind of pressure they're under (and the Sq CCs) to get better numbers. FMC rate was always a big when I was in and there was hell to pay if we slipped - endless weekend trying to get jets back up. That chart showing the steady decline is like a death march.

Just have SpaceX build a new engine based off the Raptor engines. That fucker will put out enough power.  Meanwhile the F-22 is doing it's thing just fine.

What a novel idea.
The F135 ( F-35 ) is based on F119 ( F-22 ).

I can't believe an American aerospace company can have this many issues with a plane.  They should have had Boing build them.

Ah, a story as old as military aviation itself.

GD F-35 thread.  Almost as good as a California or V.A. medical thread.

Wife was Operational Test on the AF side and I was Developmental Test for LockMart. F22 program.

What you pointed out is the huge problem on the AF side.

The biggest problem with LockMart and such is saying it won’t be a problem that a certain amount of money can’t fix. Then they say they need triple after starting.

I'm hoping this is a joke. Rocket engines and jet engines are not the same thing.

"Sir, we successfully integrated the Raptor-3 in the airframe.

Good news is, we now have 500,000 pounds of thrust.

Bad news is, we'll need to increase the size of our external tanks. By a factor of 87,000."

Also got to install LOX tanks and reconfigure for methane. Merlin engines might make a little more sense because those run off of Kerosene.

A look back at some of the crashes

They would just die against good fifth gen fighters.

No fighter has ever been ahead of schedule and underweight.

Reminds me of when the B-29 when it came out and all the engine problems it had, eventually the engines were improved but there was growing pains.

Didn’t that clown rear end a state trooper recently?

Lol, that’s exactly what they did.  

The F22 engine puts out 26k pounds of thrust, 35k with afterburner (x2).  

The F35 engine puts out 28k pounds of thrust, 43k with afterburner.  For comparison, the F18 super hornet puts out 13k and 22k with afterburner, 26k and 44k with two engines; the F15 puts out  14.5k and 23.7k.  The F35 will get an engine upgrade in 2030.  

SpaceX knows fuck all about fighter jet engines. Pratt and Whitney have been making them for decades and are the best in the business. They make engines for the F16, F15, F22 and F35.  The F35 F135 engine is the most powerful fighter jet engine built.  

It’s actually an amazing and bad ass engine.  It just has to move a very heavy plane.  Think of the F35 as a bumblebee.  It not supposed to be able to fly, but it still does because it can produce a lot of power with its wings.  The F35 is proof that you can make anything fly if you put a powerful enough engine on it.

All of our fighter jets have crash histories.  The F35 actually has one of the lowest incidents of crashes.  It has a very good safety record as far as fighter jets go.

The combat readiness isn’t a function of the plane and its design.  Israel has proven this for us.  It’s a function of poor logistics and program implementation by the contractor which is the fault of the USAF for lack of proper oversight and management.

what kills me is the airforce mission capable numbers collapsing to 0% while the Navy's F-35C mission capable numbers are at least trending the right way, so they are at least getting birds into the air. What the hell is the airforce doing?

Totally acceptable.
More corruption

This.

Summary: the F-35 is the modern F-4.

They should have called it The Flying Brick II.

Just realized I went full GD and decided that reading comprehension is for wimps. The whole fucking chart is the kind of gotcha bullshit the left pulls and doesn't actually tell us jack shit about the overall F-35 fleet.

The only aircraft built between 2008 and 2011 were test articles and all of 9 of the first batch of LRIP aircraft. Were talking less then 40 planes.

That was going through my mind as I read that .

My dad worked on the F-23 Black Widow Project.

Sure was a better plane.

$90,000 for this little bag of bushings.

Are we talking early JSF requirements? From what I know the F35 was always single engine.

it's called sourcing from the maximum number of congressional districts in order to maximize political clout.

They mean a second manufacturer of engines.

I realized I needed to reply directly to this so that everybody can see how bullshit this chart is.

The aircraft built between 2008 and 2011 include a dozen test airframes, and less then 40 LRIP airframes.  The first LRIP airframes ordered in 2007 were not delivered until 2011 when they delivered 9 and in 2012 they delivered 29, and we are talking all block 1 aircraft which were never combat capable, that didn't happen till Block 2.

That  was Cawthorn, the young guy in a wheelchair

Gaw dang.





Are you saying the qouted poster is a leftist? How, why, and what is your proof?

It's not exactly uncommon knowledge that Gaetz is a creep.



We shouldn't even have an air force

Cut funding for the MIC



Yes. Is that bad?

Replace them with far better people.



4 crashes. Compare that to the harrier and other similar planes.

The f35 is the fighter of the free world.

No matter what kind of slopply junk they sell, the gov will buy it. They're literally mainlining taxpayer money.