Bloomberg: F-35 faces yet more delays due to software issues


"Persistent software problems" in Lockheed Martin's (LMT) F-35 jet have slowed testing, and could further delay the fighter plane and raise costs, Bloomberg reports, citing a report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

The Marines want the F-35 to be ready for warfare in mid-2015, but some of the testing could be up to 13 months late. "Delays of this magnitude would mean that the Marine Corps will not likely have all of the capabilities it expects in July 2015," the GAO says. That would put "put the timely delivery of Air Force and Navy initial operating capabilities at risk."

From other sites
Comments (33)
  • montrachet
    , contributor
    Comments (1691) | Send Message
     
    An investment over time (50 years) of $1500 B, yep with a B!
    We must be very rich....
    23 Mar 2014, 09:27 AM Reply Like
  • jake319
    , contributor
    Comments (105) | Send Message
     
    software problems stopped production of the F22. The F35 is just a corporate welfare program.
    This vehicle will cost $25,000/ flight hour to operate. US is paying 40% of the cost for foreign countries that buy this lemon. How can this $600 billion development program be sustained? The only thing holding up profits for LMT and all other defense companies is advanced quarterly payments from the pentagon. That was an agreement congress made before the sequester. I don't see LMT sustaining these earning or the for 2nd quarter of 2015. This pork needs to be cut.
    23 Mar 2014, 09:29 AM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4365) | Send Message
     
    Waste of time and money...
    23 Mar 2014, 09:38 AM Reply Like
  • scabalqu
    , contributor
    Comments (264) | Send Message
     
    Yup. Lockheed is building an EDSEL. But the US Taxpayers are paying for.

     

    And for some of you that don't know how EDSEL was an albatross on FORD -- which almost bankrupt FORD, here is some brief info on wiki: http://bit.ly/NjkwH9
    23 Mar 2014, 02:38 PM Reply Like
  • losbronces
    , contributor
    Comments (986) | Send Message
     
    Remote controlled planes are the future anyway. No reason to limit the performance of an aircraft to a pilot's ability to withstand the powerful forces generated during abrupt maneuvers. Also, the additional weight of the pilot, ejector seat, etc.

     

    Agree with wigit, this program is a waste. Its already out-of-date before its even flown one mission.
    23 Mar 2014, 10:41 AM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4365) | Send Message
     
    really great points losbronces, so much waste when you look at it
    23 Mar 2014, 10:58 AM Reply Like
  • Buddy Canuspare
    , contributor
    Comments (406) | Send Message
     
    Are you all telling me spending could be cut from the defense budget?
    23 Mar 2014, 01:23 PM Reply Like
  • King Rat
    , contributor
    Comments (1609) | Send Message
     
    Well stated, losbronces, especially as larger pilots are more affected.
    Also removing fear of personal injury would clarify thinking.

     

    However, one could assume that a drone would be more susceptible to electronic (remote) hijacking.

     

    You have to imagine, though, if instead of this money we had built wells, schools, farms, hospitals, bridges, and the like in Africa or Middle East, the lay people would have less incentive to resort to suicidal terrorism. Especially so when you consider the after effect of air attacks. Children whose fathers will killed by American aircraft will want revenge, naturally.

     

    As a bonus, building, wells, schools, farms, hospitals, bridges, and the like in Africa or Middle East is probably safer and more likely to yield rewards than in Detroit.
    23 Mar 2014, 01:36 PM Reply Like
  • kussey
    , contributor
    Comments (178) | Send Message
     
    Totally agree. The Chinese could easily send up 100 drones per F-35, each armed with a missile or two. I work at a Marine Air Station and you'd be amazed on the maintenance requirements of these planes. This thing will never fly in a combat environment... Looks good for the dog and pony shows, though...
    23 Mar 2014, 02:29 PM Reply Like
  • scabalqu
    , contributor
    Comments (264) | Send Message
     
    F-35 has stealth capability and Mach 1+ speed. I doubt that any Chinese drone can find or catch up to any F-35 jet.
    23 Mar 2014, 02:41 PM Reply Like
  • justaminute
    , contributor
    Comments (1552) | Send Message
     
    Until an EMP goes off and renders all of it useless.
    23 Mar 2014, 09:34 PM Reply Like
  • scabalqu
    , contributor
    Comments (264) | Send Message
     
    EMP? LOL.

     

    For over 20 years, most of our (modern) military electronic equipment in planes, tanks, warships, telecom, computers, etc have already been insulated from EMP wave -- even an EMP from distant Nuclear blast.

     

    That's why most military equipment is twice (or more) as expensive as civilian gear. They have to do a lot of testing/destroying to ensure survival in ANY combat situation. They are all "combat ready."
    23 Mar 2014, 10:04 PM Reply Like
  • Maciej Kedzierski
    , contributor
    Comments (34) | Send Message
     
    The drone doesn't have to catch it... the missle does
    23 Mar 2014, 10:04 PM Reply Like
  • scabalqu
    , contributor
    Comments (264) | Send Message
     
    use electronic counter-measures or decoys to disable the missile.
    23 Mar 2014, 10:08 PM Reply Like
  • justaminute
    , contributor
    Comments (1552) | Send Message
     
    scabalqu - you really believe that the communications equipment, including electrical power to support them, are impervious to an EMP? You really think drones are protected?
    23 Mar 2014, 10:53 PM Reply Like
  • kussey
    , contributor
    Comments (178) | Send Message
     
    LOL! That is not why military gear costs twice as much as civilian equipment. The procurement process in DoD is a joke. You'd be amazed how much money gets flushed down the toilet so that each department can "maintain their budget". For every dollar "saved" is less dollars for your next budget. Another is the ridiculous "milspec" testing. Because you want to make sure that your hammer can withstand 1000 degrees, in case you have a brush with the sun or have to work while undergoing a nuclear attack...
    23 Mar 2014, 11:33 PM Reply Like
  • kussey
    , contributor
    Comments (178) | Send Message
     
    No combat aircraft is completely invisible to radar. Maybe if they make the F-35 out of balsa wood...
    And F-35's are not invisible to the eye.

     

    Missiles en masse - the Chinese way.
    23 Mar 2014, 11:36 PM Reply Like
  • Ray Lopez
    , contributor
    Comments (1818) | Send Message
     
    @kussey--you are right, and that's why in a perverse way the F-35 might be a success...as other nations attempt to show their meddle by buying it, when and if it gets cleared for export sales.
    24 Mar 2014, 01:14 AM Reply Like
  • BISTRO_CFO
    , contributor
    Comments (195) | Send Message
     
    Is that before or after this elephant gets off the ground?
    24 Mar 2014, 01:20 AM Reply Like
  • Ohrama
    , contributor
    Comments (568) | Send Message
     
    Remote controlled planes: The communication delivered for proper operation could be deciphered and used to self destruct or capture as the Russia's capture of our drones demonstrate!
    23 Mar 2014, 12:08 PM Reply Like
  • losbronces
    , contributor
    Comments (986) | Send Message
     
    Right, so lets not solve that problem. Instead lets spend more money on an already out-of date weapons system. Did you not see the operating cost?
    23 Mar 2014, 06:55 PM Reply Like
  • scabalqu
    , contributor
    Comments (264) | Send Message
     
    Some of these F-35 problems are very basic. Fix it on Lockheed's dime, not the US Taxpayers. Enough is enough.

     

    Program and Project Management controls on this project are way out of control. Stop changing the requirements and "scope-creep". The project manager or the PMO office needs to be replaced!

     

    No one seems to be running the show and making Lockheed accountable for all the over-charges and under-performance.

     

    How do you spell "frustration"? L-O-C-K-H-E-E-D
    23 Mar 2014, 01:25 PM Reply Like
  • Rwong8200
    , contributor
    Comments (159) | Send Message
     
    Not sure we should end production of F18, we can't afford the F35 how many planes in the world can out perform a F18?
    23 Mar 2014, 03:35 PM Reply Like
  • scabalqu
    , contributor
    Comments (264) | Send Message
     
    @Wong: F/A-18 is a 35 year-old plane. Most of our allies have F/A-18. Most of our enemies already know the weaknesses of F/A-18.

     

    Unfortunately, Soviet and China have already developed the next generation planes that can out-fly, out-maneuver and out-gun the F/A-18.

     

    F-22 was suppose to replace the F/A-18 but only about 200 was built.

     

    Then, F-22 was cancelled because someone in the DoD (Dept. of Defence) decided to build an all-purpose, all-services (e.g. Marines, Air Force and Navy) jet to replace the "F-22".

     

    F-35 was suppose to save money during maintenance. Why maintain 12 different kinds of planes? Just maintain 1 type of plane -- saves on training, parts, logistics, fuel, oil, etc.

     

    F-35 was suppose to save the US taxpayer money!

     

    So, where did F-35 go wrong? Every service (Navy, Air Force, Marines) had specific Jet Requirement. Landing a Navy F-35 jet on an aircraft carrier requires added structural strength. But the added weight also slowed the jet down -- which was unacceptable to the Air Force.

     

    Bottom line: Additional Technical requirements just kept adding to the incredible engineering challenges, financial costs and timing issues. But the program manager should have known about these risks and restrictions before billions of dollars were spent on manufacturing. They should have worked on designing and getting the approval on the F-35 model.

     

    F-35 is a total clusterf.
    23 Mar 2014, 04:05 PM Reply Like
  • Rwong8200
    , contributor
    Comments (159) | Send Message
     
    I appreciate your response, I would rather have F18's available then F35 that cost $300M that we cannot afford to use or replace. The production line is close to being shuttered. By most accounts the Super Hornet is a high performance aircraft.
    24 Mar 2014, 11:23 AM Reply Like
  • kussey
    , contributor
    Comments (178) | Send Message
     
    It is... It's good enough to play the close air support role with new avionics and can dogfight with all but the very best "enemy" aircraft available in a pinch. The needs of the USMC should not include air superiority. That's the Navy's or the Air Force's job. Just like we don't expect the Army to have F-15 aircraft to control the skies over their own battalions. Why should the USMC? They cannot afford this plane. Didn't they learn anything from the Osprey?
    24 Mar 2014, 08:03 PM Reply Like
  • The Rebel
    , contributor
    Comments (2559) | Send Message
     
    From the sound of these comments, there are a lot of frustrated shorts out there. LOL
    23 Mar 2014, 04:08 PM Reply Like
  • Derek A. Barrett
    , contributor
    Comments (3554) | Send Message
     
    Should have just scrapped the attack version and kept the A-10, keep the F-22 for the air superiority version. There I just saved us 1 Trillion dollars lol.

     

    And beef up the drone program for air superiority capabilities, all kinds of money could be saved be taking the limits off by requiring an actual human in the cockpit.
    23 Mar 2014, 07:11 PM Reply Like
  • mike mohr
    , contributor
    Comments (452) | Send Message
     
    I wonder who is writing the software these days after outsourcing the American jobs to low cost countries?
    Could it be all the H1B visa hoslders?
    23 Mar 2014, 09:53 PM Reply Like
  • kussey
    , contributor
    Comments (178) | Send Message
     
    Who is going to write the software? Well, the unemployed Obamacare website people, of course. Don't you know how the government works?
    23 Mar 2014, 11:28 PM Reply Like
  • cptsintl
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    For those who constantly decry "waste, fraud, and abuse" the F-35 is a perfect example. Ironic, that the ACA was endlessly criticized for the problems with the website, while this 13 month, megabillion delay is actually caused by "Persistent software problems." Considering those who are upset at the US for not getting into a war lately, perhaps they can blame Obama for the delay that means "the Marine Corps will not likely have all of the capabilities it expects in July 2015," the GAO says. That would put "put the timely delivery of Air Force and Navy initial operating capabilities at risk."
    24 Mar 2014, 03:57 AM Reply Like
  • kussey
    , contributor
    Comments (178) | Send Message
     
    The USMC has no business in getting into the aircraft superiority battle with anyone. They need to get back to their mission - closing with and destroying the enemy - on the ground. The problem is that it appears that a few generals do not want to rely on the Navy/Air Force for air superiority in a combat zone. The USMC should worry about building Close Air Support aircraft with LIMITED air superiority ability. Harriers, A-6, Superhornets, Cobras.

     

    The F-35 is sort of like buying a $5000 gaming computer to run Windows XP and do spreadsheets and word processor. Overkill. And the fact that the USMC does not have the budget that other branches have, there is no reason whatsoever that they should be blowing it on this garbage. For every half billion dollar airplane, think of all the tanks, flak jackets, Humvees and barracks that could have been built... What most of you do not know is that the infrastructure to support these albatrosses is practically as expensive as the aircraft. You can't just fly these planes out of any airport, and certainly not out of combat environment and a remote airfield.
    24 Mar 2014, 08:43 AM Reply Like
  • Derek A. Barrett
    , contributor
    Comments (3554) | Send Message
     
    Agree with both comments here, well done
    24 Mar 2014, 12:45 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs