From Aviation Week, via Popular Mechanics:
Aviation Week has published a 48-page report from Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon's Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, which casts serious doubts on whether the Marines' current version of the F-35, the Block 2B, is capable of entering combat on it own.
Writes Gilmore: "If in an opposed combat scenario, the F-35 Block 2B aircraft would need to avoid threat engagement and would require augmentation by other friendly forces."
Apparently our spiffiest new fighter jet will need a body guard in combat.
He lists off some of the problems facing that the current version of the F-35 Block 2B, including the fact that the F-35 is unable to deploy weapons or defensive countermeasures while flying at its maximum speed—pilots will need to slow down from the F-35's max speed of Mach 1.6 to Mach 1.2 or less in order to fire.
Software bugs continue to plague the fighter as well, with 11 out of 12 weapons tested during Block 2B evaluation severely hampered. The software malfunctions, Gilmore writes, "required intervention by the developmental test control team to overcome system deficiencies and ensure a successful event (i.e., acquire and identify the target and engage it with a weapon)."
So, what they are saying is that this $100+ million piece of hardware will be a threat to the enemy only if the pilot can roll down a window and have the co-pilot throw lawn darts at the enemy.
According to Gilmore, the root of many of these problems is that each bit of the F-35 has been built with with an eye towards passing individual tests instead of "combat readiness." Gilmore also writes that the F-35 testing team put its thumb on the scale during tests. According to the Gilmore, testing operators made allowances for faults during some tests. "Obviously," states the report, "none of this test team intervention would be possible in combat."
Make no mistake about this people, we are going to waste every single dollar going into this project, because it is “too big to fail”.
$1.3 trillion is a small price to pay for penury, so I am guessing with cost overruns we will spend twice that much.