Some 500 F-35 jets have been built since the first model of the fighter was introduced back in 2015, with each unit costing around $80 million dollars at least. However, despite the jet being the top of its class in the US and arguably in the West in general, whether or not the F-35 is worth its cost remains an open question, The National Interest magazine suggested.

The outlet stressed that the introduction of the F-35 in the US military did have indisputable pros. Namely, due to the F-35 being, arguably, one of the most versatile fighters in the world, it could replace a whole array of other jets, such as the A-10 Thunderbolt II, F-16 Fighting Falcon, F/A-18 Super Hornet, and the AV-8B Harrier.

Maintaining so many different machines has been a costly matter, according to the media outlet, not to mention the need to develop different pilot training programmes for each aircraft. In addition, maintenance of the ageing jets usually costs more than for the newer ones.

On the other hand, each plane still costs between $80 and $115 million, even after Lockheed Martin’s major reductions in the production cost, not to mention the hundreds of billions spent on the aircraft’s development and the total of $1.1 trillion planned to be spent over the lifetime of the programme. Even experts in the defence industry are not sure the jet was worth the costs and risks of developing it.

“No other aircraft has that level of technological advancement inserted collectively onto a single platform. Is it worth the money – well, it is worth the gamble that was originally put out there if you like, and it has paid off with a large home grown market”, John Sneller, head of aviation at Jane’s Information Group which focuses on defence-related analysis, said in an interview with The National Interest.

ALSO READ  Russia's new S-350 missile system to boost military's capabilities: report

At the same time, the magazine noted that despite the fact that the F-35 is a technologically advanced jet capable of fulfilling the roles of several aircraft, even after its release it continues to be plagued by technical flaws and deficiencies, according to numerous reports from other media outlets – not something one would expect from an $80 million warplane.

Among the reported issues are software glitches, problems with the jet’s weight, fuel capacity (and as a result with its operational flight distance) and gun malfunctions.

The National Interest admits that many of these problems have reportedly been resolved, but summed up that the question still remains whether the F-35 is “truly the best of the best, or just an expensive flying lemon”.

 

Source: Sputnik

Advertisements
Share this article:
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
The International News Desk reports on issues and events world wide.

Notice: All comments represent the view of the commenter and not necessarily the views of AMN.

All comments that are not spam or wholly inappropriate are approved, we do not sort out opinions or points of view that are different from ours.

This is a Civilized Place for Public Discussion

Please treat this discussion with the same respect you would a public park. We, too, are a shared community resource — a place to share skills, knowledge and interests through ongoing conversation.

These are not hard and fast rules, merely guidelines to aid the human judgment of our community and keep this a clean and well-lighted place for civilized public discourse.

Improve the Discussion

Help us make this a great place for discussion by always working to improve the discussion in some way, however small. If you are not sure your post adds to the conversation, think over what you want to say and try again later.

The topics discussed here matter to us, and we want you to act as if they matter to you, too. Be respectful of the topics and the people discussing them, even if you disagree with some of what is being said.

Be Agreeable, Even When You Disagree

You may wish to respond to something by disagreeing with it. That’s fine. But remember to criticize ideas, not people. Please avoid:

  • Name-calling
  • Ad hominem attacks
  • Responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content
  • Knee-jerk contradiction

Instead, provide reasoned counter-arguments that improve the conversation.

5
Discuss

avatar
3 Comment threads
2 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
3 Comment authors
Daeshbags-SuxItchTartus 69 Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Tartus 69
Guest
Tartus 69

A big fat lemon that only flies intermittently its operational usefulness is a 3/10. Its advantages over non NATO superpowers 1/10 its cost twice the price of a Su-57 and simply not a competitor. Its stealth laughable. The only upside is 330 now exist with a operational status of 36%.

Itch
Guest
Itch

Su-57??? you really think other nations are taking the Su-57 seriously?

Daeshbags-Sux
Guest
Daeshbags-Sux

India used to pay half of Su-57 R&D and pulled out due to the fact Su-57 didn’t reached at all what Sukhoi was promising, especially in terms of stealth, engines and combat system… In other terms, Su-57 is as troublesome as F-35! BTW, comparing them is like comparing apples and oranges : Su-57 is into F-22 size and class of weight… F-35 goal is (was) to complete F-22 in the strike role since due to costs, the F/A-22 direction was not pursued… Well, in the end, US would better had mass produced a F/A-22 and even done a naval version… Read more »

Daeshbags-Sux
Guest
Daeshbags-Sux

Daeshbags-Sux
Guest
Daeshbags-Sux

The aircraft doesn’t costs $80M. $80M is what you pay for the airframe and the engine.
Everything else has to be directly paid to hundreds subcontractors.
Therefore, the real flyaway cost is around $135 millions, not speaking about everything else needed to sustain operations.