General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat costs $1.5 trillion, doesn't work, and comes out of your paycheck?
If you guessed the F-35, you're right.
The F-35 is the most expensive weapon ever built. But according to a damning new article in Vanity Fair Magazine: It can't fly at night, can't fly in bad weather, and definitely cannot fight.1
http://act.truemajority.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=XC6XfXzoKLaISeqCKeXsXJ9dtfEMBs8Z
Mainstream media coverage of contractor abuse like the F-35 is rare. But it can be absolutely essential in our campaign to end these wasteful programs for good. When we were fighting to shut down the F-22 (another useless warplane that didn't work) a major news story about how the plane didn't work on CBS nightly news helped convinced President Obama to veto any spending bill that wasted more money on that needless warplane -- despite the lobbying of big weapons contractors.
Now its the F-35's turn, and this news story is already making big waves. None other than Sen. John McCain (who's usually only too happy to back bloated Pentagon spending) called out the F-35 program as "worse than a disgrace" and "still one of the great, national scandals that we have ever had, as far as the expenditure of taxpayers' dollars are concerned."
But not a lot of people read Vanity Fair every month for news about national security or the federal budget. So if we want to make sure Washington hears from people that the F-35 is as big a waste like this article shows that it is, we need to spread the word. Just click here to share the news on Facebook, Twitter or email.
Sincerely,
Ross Wallen
sakabatou
(42,170 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)sakabatou
(42,170 posts)MattSh
(3,714 posts)And that's to suck money out of the US Treasury and the US taxpayer.
By that standard, the F-35 is a rousing success!
steve2470
(37,457 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)I was thinking Congress.
Flying Squirrel
(3,041 posts)Alkene
(752 posts)on weapons that don't work, perhaps the world will be just a little bit safer.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Fumesucker's reply better.
Guess both are worthy of consideration.
Festivito
(13,452 posts)A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon it adds up to real money!
xchrom
(108,903 posts)Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
unhappycamper
(60,364 posts)This POS costs around $243 million a pop.
Guess what the single most expensive piece of military hardware is. (Hint - The Navy is building it.)
madokie
(51,076 posts)U.S. Navys Brand New Aluminum Ship: Foiled by Seawater
unhappycamper
(60,364 posts)What pieces of military hardware currently being produced cost more than five billion dollars a pop?
madokie
(51,076 posts)unhappycamper
(60,364 posts)Steath destroyers
Virginia-class submarines
Ford-class aircraft carrier
NutmegYankee
(16,201 posts)unhappycamper
(60,364 posts)According to wikipedia. how much does
* an F-22 cost? Time magazine reported $418 million a pop.
* a C-17 cost? Time magazine reported $320 million a pop.
* a B-2 cost? Numerous articles in military rags say $2.1 or $2.2 billion a pop.
Read thru the comments on http://www.dodbuzz.com/ .
NutmegYankee
(16,201 posts)I think you have Virginia Class mistaken with the Ohio Replacement Class, still in design, that is estimated at 5 billion.
unhappycamper
(60,364 posts)I'll find them and post later.
unhappycamper
(60,364 posts)Here's a TIME Magazine article on the cost of military jets. When I had originally posted the article Time said the F-22 cost $418 million a pop; now it's only $350 million.
http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1912203_1913321,00.html
Trying to find previously posted threads is more difficult than it should be. I need to rethink how to preserve the $$$ numbers in an easily accessible manner.
Mopar151
(9,992 posts)in salt spray? if the brass who approved that wer'nt high then, they need to start NOW.
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)What it says is, if you build a warship out of aluminum and moor it in a harbor next to a warship made out of steel, the steel warship will soon have a nice coating of aluminum below the waterline and what's left of the aluminum one will be lying on the bottom of the harbor.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)You know, in case the terrorists build a fleet of titanium-plated Death Stars.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Oh, sorry, that's more to the tune of 60 Billion.
But it would appear the JSF is a boondoggle as well.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)Last edited Sat Sep 28, 2013, 02:44 PM - Edit history (1)
7962
(11,841 posts)Only in close-in dogfights does it become equal with other jets, but its very hard to GET close to an F22
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)The so-called best fighter jet ever has never actually been tested in live combat, despite the US being in a near-constant state of war since it invaded Afghanistan in 2001. Most of the F-22 Raptors supposed combat advantages are, at this moment, entirely theoretical. http://rt.com/usa/f-22-problems-decade-112/
The Airframes http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/482198_.html
dairydog91
(951 posts)If the U.S. is ever in a situation where it needs to send the F-22 against a comparable fifth-generation fighter, it will by definition be fighting a country capable of deploying that level of technology. All of those countries (Russia and China) have ICBMs, which means no head to head wars. Considering that the U.S. normally amuses itself by picking fights with third world countries with third-rate equipment, the F-22 is grossly overbuilt, as is the F-35.
7962
(11,841 posts)And usually against the F-whatever counterpart. Russia just released their next generation fighter. Dont think it wont end up in the middle east somewhere. China does the same thing. We just need to do a MUCH better job of making sure shit works before we spend a trillion bucks on it. Either that or continue to upgrade the F-15s and hope our better pilots continue to have the advantage.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)We are our own worst enemies we sell our technology$$ The f-15 for example.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)I don't think that even a *working* fighter aircraft is a good use of $5000 per capita.
But the claims that it won't work appear to be ... probably exaggerated, to put it mildly...
hughee99
(16,113 posts)Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)350 million = 3.5 x 10^8 people in the USA.
1.5 trillion = 1.5 * 10^12 dollars spent.
1.5 is about 3.5/2.
So about 10^4/2 = $5,000 per person.
Is there a mistake in there? I'm a mathematician, I don't use actual... you know, numbers and counting and vulgar stuff like that.... all that often.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)I should learn to double-check before assuming I'm right.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)undeterred
(34,658 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)The Shiites, The Taliban, The Syrian Rebels ? Seems we'd have to pick a fight with someone closer to our own size who can afford fighter planes, and that's not likely to happen anytime soon.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)Don't kid yourself. It's coming.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)earthside
(6,960 posts)Working and middle class wealth is transferred to the corporate 'defense' elite and the retired officers cadre (i.e., 'retired' military officers now working for the 'defense' and 'national security' industries).
Whether or not the F-35 actually works is almost beside the point, what matters is funneling money to the military welfare class.
And ... the sad thing is that the MIC is so powerful and pervasive that Democratic and Repuglican national legislators hardly ever say no to this kind of wealth transfer.
dairydog91
(951 posts)Lots of that money went to paying the engineers, manufacturing workers, accountants, secretaries, so on and so forth. Doesn't make the spending "good", but it makes it damn difficult to shut down and incentivizes wild overspending.
Incitatus
(5,317 posts)And working on things like green energy and medical technology. $1.5 trillion would go a long way there. You do make a good point. It could be a tough transition, but keeping engineers and the rest working on machines of death and in this case a machine that could be useless for the sake of their jobs isn't the best idea.
SleeplessinSoCal
(9,135 posts)lastlib
(23,266 posts)Arthur C. Clarke's short story, "Superiority", in which one planet is defeated in a war by its enemy's inferior technology.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Meanwhile, you'll get your Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid slashed to the bone.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)With an extra engine for each? (Imagine warehouses full of extra engines)
Didn't I read this somewhere?
BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)I rather could have used the money...rats.
King_Klonopin
(1,306 posts)What percentage of food stamp dollars turns out to be
"wasted money", do you suppose?
Now, what percentage of the $650 billion defense budget
turns out to be "wasted money"?
Answer: It depends ...
If you're a Republican, then 100% of the food stamp program
(and "welfare" is considered to be a HUGE waste of money,
while $1.5 trillion flushed down the MIC toilet is considered to be
no more than patriotic chump change.
Other folks may hold the opinion that we could cut the defense
budget by $200 billion, re-allocate the money to places where it
could be put to a better use, and never feel a pinch. But, in reality,
the MIC is just a government-protected racket for industries which
rake in trillions of dollars from the taxpayers.
F-35's, B-2 Bombers, F-22's, Patriot Missiles ...
it's all the same con game.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)In March 2013 USAF test pilots noted a lack of visibility from the F-35 cockpit during evaluation flights and said that this will get them consistently shot down in combat. Defense spending analyst Winslow Wheeler concluded from the flight evaluation reports that the F-35A "is flawed beyond redemption";[185] in response, program manager Bogdan suggested that pilots worried about being shot down should fly cargo aircraft instead.[186]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II#Concerns_over_performance_and_safety
Interesting response by Bogdan, to say the least.
bighart
(1,565 posts)after 25 years in the service. The pay was really good but he ended up quitting because he couldn't stand being told to pass parts on to the military he knew were defective. He told me he had been on the other end receiving crap parts that they had to figure out how to make work and could not in good conscience be responsible for sending to the field.