Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "$1.7T Fighter Jet Only Works HALF The Time | The Kyle Kulinski Show" video.

  1. AEROSPACE ENGINEER HERE: Trying to give some perspective and context. Note: I am highly critical of the F-35 program based on engineering knowledge not emotional claims. FIRST I have gone and read the FT article and its VERY SHORT. Including the title and subtitle its 452 words. I cut and pasted it into word to check that. So that story has almost ZERO DETAIL on anything. There is one very objectional aspect to how this is being presented by BOTH Krystal and Kyle and Saagar and that's the howling and screeching. Is it justified? YES, but it helps NO ONE. I'd highly recommend you all go check out Ward Carroll's take on the F35 crash and the questions he asked from the Base CO. He knows there's no point asking for conclusions when the investigation has only just started. So he asked questions that CAN BE ANSWERED and give context. Krystal, Kyle Saagar and so many others all claim they are NOT like main stream media and then they do this crap. SECOND this is a maintenance issue and maintenance is the one thing that TOO MANY IGNORANT CLOWNS with arts degrees, business degrees and nothing degrees stick their noses into without any understanding of the consequences. Everything we build in engineering requires maintenance because without it everything eventually fails. Breaking down is a hassle for your car, or if you are on a boat or with many other things, BUT WHEN aircraft fail they don't simply stop, THEY FALL OUT OF THE SKY. This is why engineers and technicians get so frustrated at times. We have to deal with people who don't know which end of a screw driver to hold trying explain how our job should be done. THIRD the F35 program was born form the outcomes of the F22 program. Originally the F22 was planned for 750 Aircraft all of those for the USAF. The Navy, Marines and Air National Guard would get something else. Once they started operating it the F22 proved to be brilliant but also incredibly expensive. According to the GAO F22s cost $85,000/hr while an F35 costs $42,000/hr, but then an A10 costs $22,531/hr and an F16 costs $26,000/hr. In comparison a B52 costs $88,000/hr, a B2 Spirit cost $150,000/hr while a B1 Lancer costs $173,000/hr. Over in Helicopter land the CH-47F Chinook costs $4,000/hr while the CH53E Super Stallion costs $45,000/hr. So yes its costs are high but they have to be put into PERSPRECTIVE. This was what killed the F22 program. It wasn't that it didn't do the job. By most reports it was the best fighter plane the USAF has every had, but the maintenance required in raw cost and man hours was horrendous. One of the F35s main design criteria was to get the costs back to something more reasonable, which is why it only has a single engine like the F16. FOURTH and this is where I get start getting critical of the F35 program from its concept. The PR for the F35 was pitched (in concept) to cost 1/2 as much money to buy and 1/2 as much to run as the F22. It certainly hasn't done that on the purchasing and it only looks good against the F22 because its operation costs have almost tripled. BUT YOU HAVE TO SEARCH to find these things out. FIFTH and this is where the F35 went off the rails. One reason WHY the F22 could be cancelled was because it involved only a few factories and because of its small numbers cancelling it did not cost many jobs and only in a few states. Lockheed learnt from this and made sure the F35 had the broadest possible possible supply chain with contractors in as many US States as possible. Its much harder for a US Senator to cancel a program when it costs jobs in their state and if you have parts on a plane that come from over 40 states its NOT getting cancelled. THE SUPPLY CHAIN IS THE PROBLEM and it makes the F35 unsuited for warfare. LET'S BE CRYSTAL CLEAR - I am NOT saying the F35 is NOT capable. By the reports and interviews from pilots who have flown it as well as other fighter aircraft its an amazingly good aircraft. Ward Carroll's buddy Pako ahs explained this as good as anyone. There's also a great debate on the subject between F16 & A10 engineer Pierre Sprey and Lt Col David 'Chip' Berke who flew the F16, F18, F15, F22 and F35. Aaron over on Sub Brief has explained this well. Its not just getting the parts its also getting the specialised tools needed to do the maintenance work. This is a lesson that goes right back to the Battle of Britain. When first introduced the Spitfire was incredibly hard to maintain. The Hawker Hurricane was mostly made of wood covered in fabric. The Spitfire was full metal sheeting over a full metal frame and any repairs required specialist tools. Famously the Polish Squadrons in the Battle of Britain sent their Spitfires back and demanded the return of their Hurricanes because all they needed was the local carpenter to get back flying. YES THE F35 - cost too much to develop but that came from bad decisions from the military trying to have a super complex do-all jet combined with bad project management of the manufacturer. - it cost more to run than it should because that too comes from poor project management of the manufacturer that allowed them to create this ridiculous parts supply chain that can't deliver.
    1