Military Review

Concern Lockheed Martin is in no hurry to fix the detected defects of the F-35 fighter

122
Concern Lockheed Martin is in no hurry to fix the detected defects of the F-35 fighter

The Lockheed Martin concern is in no hurry to fix the detected defects in the F-35 fighter. As reported by Bloomberg, citing a report from the Pentagon's test department, 871 defects have not yet been fixed in the plane.


According to the publication, the report prepared for publication indicates that uncorrected defects can adversely affect the combat readiness of the fighter, its use and maintenance. It is emphasized that in 2020 the developers have eliminated only two defects, which are not indicated.

Note that in August 2018, during the audit and general inspection of the F-35 fighter and its modifications, 966 design defects were found, which can become an official reason for refusing to operate aircraft of this type.

All defects of the aircraft were divided into two categories: the first - deficiencies that can jeopardize safety, protection or other critical requirement, the second includes deficiencies that can impede the successful performance of a combat mission. The report pointed out 111 shortcomings of category 1 and 855 shortcomings of category 2. Later, some of the shortcomings from the first "critical" category were transferred to the second with a stroke of the pen, i.e. without any work. According to experts, in this way the military "solved the problem" so as not to delay the start of serial production of the aircraft.

Despite the identified defects and problems with their elimination, the F-35 program will not stop, since it has tremendous support in the American Congress and the new US President Joe Biden.

The Pentagon itself has not yet commented on the new report, citing the fact that the document has not yet been officially published.
122 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. zwlad
    zwlad 12 January 2021 13: 47
    +10
    Just think 871 defects. This is, on average, even less than 2 pieces per aircraft manufactured. wassat
    1. military_cat
      military_cat 12 January 2021 14: 06
      -5
      Turkey, meanwhile, is negotiating with the United States to create a "working group" to resume supplies of the F-35. Some strange, do not understand their happiness.
    2. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 12 January 2021 14: 56
      0
      Quote: zwlad
      Just think 871 defects. This is, on average, even less than 2 pieces per aircraft manufactured.

      Read it carefully. We are talking about the number of defects in ONE aircraft. That is, in EVERYONE.
      1. zwlad
        zwlad 12 January 2021 15: 38
        +6
        Didn't you notice the smiley? I understood everything perfectly that we are talking about 871 defects on each aircraft.
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 13 January 2021 00: 51
          0
          Trump Lockheed Martin strongly crushed the F-35 price cut.
          There is no simultaneous price reduction and quality improvement. hi
      2. Avior
        Avior 12 January 2021 20: 29
        -1
        About the fact that in everyone there is no talk
        Perhaps different copies show different defects
        Choral would look at this very list of 1000 defects, about which everyone writes, what kind of defects are there
    3. pytar
      pytar 12 January 2021 16: 51
      0
      Just think 871 defects. This is, on average, even less than 2 pieces per aircraft manufactured.

      Just kidding, the F-35 is actually a very complicated machine! She has over 300 parts! Of the defects, 000 belong to the first category of complexity (they can lead to death, serious injury, etc.). Including include, for example, such as "the handle in the cockpit, which the pilot can touch during the ejection." It must be said here that the most difficult thing about this plane is the integrated computer system of artificial intelligence. It works in an almost complete sphere (111D) around the aircraft. The software contains over 3 million lines of code! Flying supercomputer!
      1. zwlad
        zwlad 12 January 2021 17: 02
        +6
        I doubt that mechanically it is much more complicated than our SU-34, 35.
        Business the American way is important here. With the support upstairs, Lockheed sniffed the raw product and boiled it off, naturally sharing it with the support group. And if it worked like that, then why rush to fix defects all over the world.
        1. pytar
          pytar 12 January 2021 17: 41
          -2
          I doubt that mechanically it is much more complicated than our SU-34, 35.

          Mechanics are not the most expensive part of the design. With all that, probably the material / composites / the Americans have better.
          Business the American way is important here.

          Business verses are the same in essence. "Russian" is no better than "American" or others.
          With support from upstairs, Lockheed sniffed the raw product and boiled it off ...

          Such super-expensive projects are impossible without support from above. There is a hard lobbying, it is the same in the Russian Federation. An example with Su and MiG, and others are not an exception.
          Every new product has "childhood diseases". The more high-tech, the more diseases initially.
          ... naturally sharing with the support group.

          Cooperation is also a method for increasing the efficiency of production and for expanding the circle of potential customers.
          ... why rush to fix defects all over the world.

          With such a complex product, it is probably not so easy to fix defects. Even in the production of cars, it often happens that the manufacturer fixes defects in tens of thousands of already sold cars. hi
          1. Sanichsan
            Sanichsan 13 January 2021 01: 21
            -1
            Quote: pytar
            With all that, probably the material / composites / the Americans have better.

            definitely not. even a zamvolt with Chinese composites, but for the second and third, even the Chinese one turned out to be too expensive and the composite was replaced with ordinary steel, most likely also Chinese wink
            Quote: pytar
            With such a complex product, it is probably not so easy to fix defects. Even in the production of cars, it often happens that the manufacturer fixes defects in tens of thousands of already sold cars.

            it seems so far the only defect that this software fixes. a little strange fix. for example, the logistics module was simply turned off. did not let fly. request
            1. pytar
              pytar 13 January 2021 10: 52
              -2
              definitely not. even a zamvolt with Chinese composites

              "Chinese composite" - factories for production are located in China, where they make it cheaper. And the technology and equipment itself is American. By the way, remember how the project Russia sank. trunk lines, due to the refusal of the Japanese, to supply composites for the wing. And the Russian composite turned out to be more difficult.
              it seems so far the only defect that this software fixes. a little strange fix. for example, the logistics module was simply turned off. did not let fly.

              We can only know from open sources. Fortunately, the F-35 program is very public! With all that, as in fact, it is difficult for us, as non-specialists, to judge. I repeat again - the F-35 is an extremely complex product! This is a transitional model to fully robotic systems with artificial intelligence!
              1. Sanichsan
                Sanichsan 13 January 2021 20: 43
                0
                Quote: pytar
                By the way, remember how the project Russia sank. trunk lines, due to the refusal of the Japanese, to supply composites for the wing. And the Russian composite turned out to be more difficult.

                Well, if your contractor suddenly disrupts supplies, of course there will be problems, and yes, for a year we have set up production of our own. and where did you get the idea that the Russian was heavier? claim that it fully complies with the terms of reference, that is, the same, but much cheaper than the Japanese one.
                As for materials, neither the United States nor the Japs have maneuvering hypersonic units, which means they seriously lagged behind Russia in the materials for their manufacture request
                Quote: pytar
                This is a transitional model to fully robotic systems with artificial intelligence!

                "the hopes of young men nourish" (c) bully
                and the bottom line is the advertised F-35 which is not produced in the USA and the F-15 and F-18 decommissioning request
                someday they may do it, but now it is at the level of pictures and fantasies, and everyone saw how large-scale projects end with the example of a railgun wink
                1. pytar
                  pytar 14 January 2021 00: 45
                  -1
                  and where did you get the idea that the Russian was heavier?

                  If memory does not fail, even here on VO there were articles on this occasion. In any case, I read in several Ross. from sources.
                  As for materials, neither the United States nor the Japs have maneuvering hypersonic units, which means they seriously lagged behind Russia in the materials for their manufacture

                  Alexander, if we start comparing who doesn't have what, it turns out that Russia doesn't have a lot ... I say without joy, by the way.
                  I don't know why you invested in Japan here, they are not developing strategic weapons in principle. As for the USA, they / officially / until recently did not create hypersonic units, because there was no need! Russia has begun to create, so that somehow / theoretically / could break through the American missile defense! The United States creates in response, and will, do not hesitate.
                  A few more words! In Russia. The media praise the Hypersonic Blocks as something invincible, "unbeatable in the world" like ... In fact, the situation is somewhat different. Shooting down such an apparatus is not as difficult as you think! Even on the final leg of her flight! It is enough for the missile to spray a cloud of dust of a certain density on the way of the block! And the block will crash into it like into concrete because of its tremendous speed! It cannot maneuver sharply, because of overload it will self-destruct! In addition, its trajectory, "due to the noise" of the hypersound / radiation, heating, etc. /, is easily tracked by missile defense systems! Impossible to hide! Modern comp. surveillance / identification systems, transmit all the necessary characteristics to air defense in seconds!
                  and the bottom line is the advertised F-35 which is not produced in the USA and the F-15 and F-18 decommissioning

                  Where do you think the F-35 is made? Yes, many parts are produced by international cooperation, but the aircraft are for export! So its cost decreases and the circle of buyers expands! It is a very reasonable decision, nowadays there are infinitely many products produced in the world! As for the F-15 and F-18, they have their own goals along the line of division of tasks. The F-35 must penetrate covertly, eliminate the air defense, and then complete the "old" Efs. In the Russian Federation, after all, the production of all sorts of derivatives of the Su-27 and MiG-29 is also continuing! And they are still in service, the same age as Epham.
                  someday they may do it, but now it is at the level of pictures and fantasies, and everyone saw how large-scale projects end with the example of a railgun

                  Underestimation is 100 times more dangerous than overestimation. The first leads to death and tragedy, and the second only to fright ... hi
                  1. Sanichsan
                    Sanichsan 14 January 2021 01: 24
                    0
                    Quote: pytar
                    I don't know why you invested in Japan here, they are not developing strategic weapons in principle. As for the USA, they / officially / until recently did not create hypersonic units, because there was no need! Russia has begun to create, so that somehow / theoretically / could break through the American missile defense! The United States creates in response, and will, do not hesitate.

                    how cute laughing I will disappoint you in all this wink
                    hypersonic is not only a strategic weapon, and to create it, unique materials are needed that can only be created by the most developed powers, such as Russia, for example. Japan has not so far. The United States is in the role of catch-up and they themselves admit it.
                    The American missile defense system poses a threat to Russia not because it can stop a nuclear strike, even with old Soviet missiles, but because this system is not defensive and can secretly be turned into a shock one. Russia has repeatedly pointed to this and the United States, immediately after the break of the treaty, demonstrated that Russia was right. they fired a cruise missile from a launcher they called missile defense.
                    there is no doubt that they will create something, but when and what remains a question request if the next "railgun" or CLS, then God help them bully
                    Quote: pytar
                    Where do you think the F-35 is made? Yes, many parts are produced by international cooperation, but the aircraft are for export! So its cost decreases and the circle of buyers expands! It is a very reasonable decision, nowadays there are infinitely many products produced in the world!

                    but as a result, the United States is not able to build the F-35 itself request no matter how you justify it, it's a fact. is it good that the components are produced by all project participants? considering the history of Turkey, that's great! good especially for Russia bully
                    Quote: pytar
                    As for the F-15 and F-18, they have their own goals along the line of division of tasks. The F-35 must penetrate covertly, eliminate the air defense, and then complete the "old" Efs.
                    strange. for all known teachings, the situation is exactly the opposite. old F-s are thrown forward, throwing air defense with meat, and F-35s have to do something from behind their backs. this doctrine was also voiced in the Pentagon. F-35 is too expensive for the front line.
                    Quote: pytar
                    In the Russian Federation, after all, the production of all sorts of derivatives of the Su-27 and MiG-29 is also continuing! And they are still in service, the same age as Epham.
                    no. here is an article about orders from the Ministry of Defense. build Su-30 and Su-35.
                    Quote: pytar
                    Underestimation is 100 times more dangerous than overestimation. The first leads to death and tragedy, and the second only to fright ...

                    I agree with you here hi
                    but overestimation also leads to a waste of valuable resources request
                    1. pytar
                      pytar 14 January 2021 10: 22
                      0
                      ... and to create it, you need unique materials that can only be created by the most developed powers, such as Russia, for example. Japan has not yet very much. The United States is in the role of catch-up, and they admit it themselves.

                      Japan is a highly developed country, with this even the most ugly can not argue. And creates unique materials that she needs. The United States in the given case is catching up not because it is technologically backward, but because it started doing it late. And they have materials and everything. And in what you said about missile defense there is some truth. Here I agree. yes
                      there is no doubt that they will create something, but when and what, it remains a question if the next "railgun" or CLS, then God will help them

                      In general, it seems to me that all wunderwafe children are "created" for "internal consumption". Raise patriotism as if. lol USA is happy too! A good reason for the military lobby to demand more money from Congress! winked
                      On the "railguns" from time to time come across everyone who creates something. This is a normal situation when looking for new solutions!
                      but as a result, the United States is not able to build the F-35 itself, no matter how you justify it, this is a fact. is it good that the components are produced by all project participants?

                      Even Lada is produced in cooperation! The Superjet has more than half of its foreign counterparts. And in China everything is stamped, only the labels of the companies are different. The F-35 may well become one of the most massive modern aircraft, precisely because of the concept of cooperation.
                      considering the history of Turkey, this is great! especially for Russia

                      The story from Turkey, oddly enough, is liked by everyone. The sultans have historically earned themselves a very bad "glory" ...
                      build Su-30 and Su-35.

                      They are the development of the same Su-27. Advanced, updated, but still conceptually the same buzz.
                      but overestimation also leads to a waste of valuable resources

                      Every year, hundreds of billions of forever green capital flows from Russia. And everything else is propaganda hype. hi
                      1. Sanichsan
                        Sanichsan 16 January 2021 17: 57
                        -1
                        Quote: pytar
                        Japan is a highly developed country, with this even the most ugly can not argue. And creates unique materials that she needs.

                        if you don’t understand, let me clarify. hi I do not argue with this thesis. Indeed, Japan creates to the best of its strength and needs, but such large-scale projects as hypersound, this is not their level, this is not the level of a colonial country whose external debt has long exceeded 200% of GDP request
                        Quote: pytar
                        In general, it seems to me that all wunderwafe children are "created" for "internal consumption". Raise patriotism as if. USA is happy too! A good reason for the military lobby to demand more money from Congress!
                        true! good but understanding this, you have missed one important fact. now generals work in the military-industrial complex lobby, and not vice versa. what is the result? the US army does not get the weapons they need, but the ones that the military concerns want to sell to the army. the only useful technique they received in recent years is the F-15X request
                        Quote: pytar
                        The F-35 may well become one of the most massive modern aircraft, precisely because of the concept of cooperation.
                        not true. can no longer. This is a commercial project and it could become widespread while the United States was the only pole of power in the world and could dictate who buys what and in what quantity. not anymore. the US military themselves are reducing the volume of purchases of the F-35 (does not resemble the story with the zamvalts? wink ), Germany refused altogether. a large batch for Turkey was also disrupted. maybe the Poles compensate for this? funny wassat
                        Quote: pytar
                        The story from Turkey, oddly enough, is liked by everyone. The sultans have historically earned themselves a very bad "glory" ...

                        that's for sure good but I'm a little sorry .. after all, this was the only real chance that the F-35 and S400 would be in the same army, and therefore the opportunity to find out what this "stealth" is really worth wink
                        Quote: pytar
                        They are the development of the same Su-27. Advanced, updated, but still conceptually the same buzz.
                        you know .. so now we will roll to Lenorado Davinci with his wings ...
                        Quote: pytar
                        Every year, hundreds of billions of forever green capital flows from Russia. And everything else is propaganda hype.

                        have already taken up this, if you do not know wink since the end of 2019, they have come together. about the revision of contracts with all sorts of Cyprus and Luxembourg have not heard?
                        in this light, "propaganda hype" is just your statement wink
  2. nPuBaTuP
    nPuBaTuP 12 January 2021 13: 47
    +4
    Sick penguin ... Oh, what sick ...
    1. antivirus
      antivirus 12 January 2021 14: 19
      +1
      will quickly switch to f-45. working out ideas on a penguin. the new design will give more profit than the modernization of the old one.
      1. Sanichsan
        Sanichsan 13 January 2021 01: 23
        -1
        Quote: antivirus
        will quickly switch to f-45.

        while they are switching to the F-15 and F-18 taken from storage request
        if you are not aware then the USA does not produce the F-35 on its own wink
  3. Flashpoint
    Flashpoint 12 January 2021 13: 52
    +5
    Standard theme. We got into the project, did something by doing business. But now they will sit for a long time on "project support", modernization and so on.
    The good news is that they classify all problems from small to large.
    But the administrative resource is harnessed there and works off the money from the trough.
    1. bad
      bad 12 January 2021 13: 59
      +18
      Quote: Flashpoint
      now they will sit for a long time on "project support", modernization and other

      If they take it anyway, then why eliminate ...
  4. credo
    credo 12 January 2021 13: 54
    +9
    As reported by Bloomberg, citing a report from the Pentagon's test department, 871 defects have not yet been fixed in the plane.
    [i] [/ i]
    It sometimes seems that this topic sometimes simply turns into a conversation between a deaf and a dumb - there seem to be a lot of defects, but the plane does not stop flying because of this. Fantasy.
    Either the defects are minor, or these conversations are just to lull the vigilance of the opponents of the United States and personally Lockheed Martin.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 12 January 2021 14: 10
      +2
      In any project, a huge number of defects is the norm. And their number will grow. It's just that the F35 is an open project, everything is known about it. On F16, these defects will be several thousand, taking into account all the blocks.
    2. Sanichsan
      Sanichsan 13 January 2021 01: 27
      -1
      Quote: credo
      it seems like there are many defects, but the plane does not stop flying from this.

      how it stops flying! last year two in a row stopped flying wink but then yes, there is not President Lockheed Martin at the helm or some congressman, so "it will do just fine" good
  5. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 12 January 2021 13: 55
    +11
    I fucking know what they mean. recourse Our pilots absolutely love the F-35.
    1. bad
      bad 12 January 2021 13: 58
      +12
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      Our pilots are delighted with the F-35

      hi Is the service very different compared to others?
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 12 January 2021 14: 14
        +7
        Quote: malo
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        Our pilots are delighted with the F-35

        hi Is the service very different compared to others?

        Well, they write about this very sparingly. As well as in general about the work of aerodrome services.
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 13 January 2021 00: 56
          +2
          Do you write that the software on your F-35s has been completely rewritten, so much so that the States are jealous? wink
          The Israeli version of the F-35 is the most efficient. hi
    2. askort154
      askort154 12 January 2021 14: 39
      +3
      Aaron Zaavi ....I know the hell about what they are. Our pilots absolutely love the F-35.

      In my aviation life, I have never met a pilot who would not like the plane on which he flies. The pilot's motto is "even on a broom, if only to fly." And the ultimate dream is to master a new type. And so, all flight life.yes hi
      1. Kart
        Kart 12 January 2021 14: 48
        -3
        Sofa pilots usually hate airplanes, though only Russian ones.
    3. avg
      avg 12 January 2021 15: 30
      -5
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      Our pilots absolutely love the F-35.

      And what is the delight? The flight characteristics are frankly weak, the pilots lose consciousness from hypoxia, the coating will cover, no one knows about invisibility (they are not allowed to remove the lenses), the software will not be finished. But complete delight ... request
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 12 January 2021 15: 46
        +3
        Quote: avg

        And what is the delight? The flight characteristics are frankly weak, the pilots lose consciousness from hypoxia, the coating will cover, no one knows about invisibility (they are not allowed to remove the lenses), the software will not be finished. But complete delight ... request

        Ours have never lost. In terms of performance characteristics, they are not inferior to the F-16. In combat operations, it provides the highest possible stealth for technical equipment in Syria and Iraq.
        1. Alex777
          Alex777 13 January 2021 00: 58
          +2
          One drawback - they will not reach Iran. Therefore, the F-15EX. hi
      2. Filxnumx
        Filxnumx 14 January 2021 22: 12
        -1
        And what is the delight?

        So, judging by the number of shortcomings, they are happy that they fly at all good
  6. Wedmak
    Wedmak 12 January 2021 13: 56
    0
    Despite the identified defects and problems with their elimination, the F-35 program will not stop, since it has tremendous support in the American Congress and the new US President Joe Biden.

    This, in general, very colorfully characterizes the cutting of money and the US technologies themselves. Technologies are being developed to hide defects ... I wonder if the F-35 would have passed our military acceptance. And what would the non-living media write, there are so many defects on the Su-57 ...
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 12 January 2021 14: 06
      0
      Quote: Wedmak
      And what would the non-living media write, there are so many defects on the Su-57

      How many defects are there? one? did it crash upon acceptance?
      1. El Chuvachino
        El Chuvachino 12 January 2021 19: 42
        +3
        It crashed during factory tests and it's better than falling into the sea or burning while being put into service.
  7. Magic archer
    Magic archer 12 January 2021 13: 57
    -1
    The Americans will finish it off. They will pour in a lot of money but finish it, a fact. Yes, a penguin, but not very flying But due to a good brao, it is still a strong aircraft. Each generation levels flight performance. And the Americans realized that there is no need to get involved in a dog dump, if there is an opportunity to shoot with impunity from afar. What I wish for ours
    1. bar
      bar 12 January 2021 14: 10
      +10
      Quote: Magic Archer
      Each generation levels flight performance.

      In the end, you won't need to take off. They will fight straight from the runway. It is both safer and the stealth coating is better preserved laughing
      1. antivirus
        antivirus 12 January 2021 14: 29
        0
        so they prophesy about our nuclear submarines - work from the pier ........................................ .................................................. .................
        1. bar
          bar 12 January 2021 14: 34
          0
          Quote: antivirus
          so they predict our nuclear submarines - work from the pier

          Well, okay. They will shoot from the F-15 with the runway, and we will from the nuclear submarine from the pier. And who will win who laughing
    2. 3danimal
      3danimal 12 January 2021 18: 17
      0
      Yes, the penguin, yes, it does not fly very much

      Not very much - only in comparison with airplanes with OVT engines.
      We have a misunderstanding (what is being compared with what) many have raised the flag "F-35 will lose the close battle of An-2." Su-27 in "dogfight" will be very bad against the background of the Su-35 or F-22. OVT rules the BVB ..
  8. Prisoner
    Prisoner 12 January 2021 13: 59
    +4
    laughing Those who understand the service are in no hurry. (army wisdom)
  9. Lord of the Sith
    Lord of the Sith 12 January 2021 14: 02
    0
    Well, let them rivet their imperfections, and while our engineers lick the Su-57 to shine))
    1. 3danimal
      3danimal 12 January 2021 18: 18
      -1
      And riveted a dozen 2, if you're lucky sad
      1. Lord of the Sith
        Lord of the Sith 12 January 2021 19: 37
        +2
        Our military-industrial complex is not guided by such words as "lucky or unlucky".
        They will say - they will. But not earlier, when the plane will be relieved of childhood ailments that always arise when designing such complex equipment.

        And yes, the Su-57 is a purely Russian plane, while the penguin molds almost everything NATO, but they still can't copelaughing
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 13 January 2021 09: 01
          +2
          They will say - they will

          The history of the last 15 years shows that there is no large-scale replenishment of completely new equipment (not modernized old ones), that's what I mean.
          They will "say" based on production capacity (including avionics and engines) and available funds.
          And yes, the Su-57 is a purely Russian plane

          Correct nationality in passport smile
          penguin sculpts almost everything NATO, but they still can't cope

          Localization of a part of production in a number of countries, mainly to increase the flow.
          There will be about 3000 of them around the world, 600 have already been built.
          Childhood diseases are present on all new aircraft (especially as complex as the F-35). Our Su-57 is no exception.
      2. El Chuvachino
        El Chuvachino 12 January 2021 19: 46
        +1
        76 + 2 have been ordered and these contracts will be fully implemented.
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 13 January 2021 09: 13
          +1
          Let's look at the situation with order fulfillment in 2030 request
          By 2020, they promised 1000+ T-14 tanks, and then revised plans ..
          1. El Chuvachino
            El Chuvachino 14 January 2021 14: 16
            0
            Quote: 3danimal
            By 2020, they promised 1000+ T-14 tanks, and then revised plans ..

            Who promised? There were no contracts.
            Quote: 3danimal
            The history of the last 15 years shows that there is no large-scale replenishment of completely new equipment (not modernized old ones), that's what I mean.

            New aviation units like the Su-35, Mi-28 and others are entering service in the hundreds.
            Quote: 3danimal
            Let's look at the situation with order fulfillment in 2030

            In recent history, KnAAZ did not disrupt delivery times.
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 14 January 2021 17: 12
              +1
              Who promised? There were no contracts.

              A representative of UVZ, for example.
              https://rg.ru/amp/2016/09/27/rossijskaia-armiia-poluchit-2000-tankov-armata.html
              Well, how such promises were picked up here is a separate topic.
              1. El Chuvachino
                El Chuvachino 14 January 2021 23: 41
                0
                The representative of UVZ expressed his opinion without submitting documents, terms, details and other things like that. He cannot be responsible for MO and promises.
  10. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 January 2021 14: 16
    +1
    It is emphasized that in 2020 the developers have eliminated only two defects, which are not indicated.

    At this rate, they will eliminate 871 defects for 436 years. No, after all, our "sawflies" still grow and grow before the Americans ...
    1. bar
      bar 12 January 2021 14: 35
      0
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      our "sawflies" have yet to grow and grow before the Americans ...

      American sawflies have their own printing industry, it is easier for them than for ours.
    2. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 12 January 2021 14: 43
      0
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      our "sawflies" have yet to grow and grow before the Americans ...


      For such a statement, you need to know the number of developers for, for example, the Su-35 laughing You know?
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 January 2021 14: 58
        +2
        Quote: Eye of the Crying
        For such a statement, you need to know the number of developers on, for example, the Su-35. Do you know?

        Read the article
        Note that in August 2018, during the audit and general inspection of the F-35 fighter and its modifications, the presence of 966 design defects that can be an official reason for refusing to operate aircraft of this type.

        Su-35, passed state tests in full. Accordingly, there are no defects on it that could become a reason for refusing to use it.
        Can you prove the opposite?
        1. The eye of the crying
          The eye of the crying 12 January 2021 15: 02
          -2
          I thought that the number of defects on the Su-35 is not known to you.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 January 2021 15: 20
            +2
            Quote: Eye of the Crying
            I thought that the number of defects on the Su-35 is not known to you.

            I thought that if only you could turn the conversation to something else. The F-35 is being discussed, if anything, not the Su-35
            1. The eye of the crying
              The eye of the crying 12 January 2021 15: 35
              +1
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              The F-35 is being discussed, if anything, not the Su-35


              No. Now these words of yours are being discussed:

              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              nevertheless, our "sawflies" still grow and grow before the Americans ...
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 January 2021 16: 41
                0
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                No. Now these words of yours are being discussed:

                Sumptuously. And what is the relation to
                Quote: Eye of the Crying
                to our "sawflies"

                has a Su-35?
                1. The eye of the crying
                  The eye of the crying 12 January 2021 17: 57
                  0
                  You judge how good "their sawflies" are by the number of defects in the F-35. And how do you assess the quality of "our sawflies"? An estimate has been proposed for the number of defects in the Su-35, but you do not know the number of defects. So how do you rate "our sawflies"?
                  1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 13 January 2021 07: 30
                    +2
                    Quote: Eye of the Crying
                    You judge how good "their sawflies" are by the number of defects in the F-35. How do you assess the quality of "our sawflies"?

                    I do not judge by defects, but by the cost of developing the F-35, which seems to have become the most expensive military program in the history of mankind, which has been going on for a quarter of a century, since 1995 - it was then that the decision was made to combine the JAST programs with ASTOVL and the abbreviation appeared JSF.
                    That is, to devour more than $ 55 billion in 25 years to produce a bunch of serial aircraft (it is clear that the cost of aircraft production was paid additionally), which did not pass the analogue of our state tests completely, and to eliminate the existing hundreds of comments on 2 defects per year for taxpayers' money - what could be more "wonderful"? We simply do not have any analogues. Our scale is much more modest.
                    1. The eye of the crying
                      The eye of the crying 13 January 2021 15: 39
                      -1
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

                      I'm not judging by defects


                      And the number of defects was just mentioned, of course.

                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      F-35, which seems to have become the most expensive military program in the history of mankind, which has been dragging on for a quarter of a century, since 1995


                      So what? The program was planned from the very beginning.

                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      never passed the analogue of our state tests completely


                      Then a simple question - what is the name of the American "analogue" of your state tests? smile

                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      eliminate hundreds of comments on 2 defects per year for taxpayers' money - what could be more "wonderful"? We simply do not have any analogues.


                      And on what grounds do you judge that "we simply do not have it"? To do this, you need at least to know the number of defects in some large project. We have already established that you do not know the number of defects in the Su-35 - this already means that you do not know that "we simply have no analogues."
                      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 13 January 2021 16: 16
                        +1
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        And the number of defects was just mentioned, of course.

                        I explained why I did it. And, in my opinion, the explanation would be understandable even for children of primary school.
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        So what? The program was planned from the very beginning.

                        But lying is not good. The program has failed miserably in terms of time and cost.
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        Then a simple question - what is the name of the American "analogue" of your state tests?

                        Achieving full operational readiness
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        And on what grounds do you judge that "we simply do not have it"?

                        Name the program of the Russian Federation, stretching for 25 years, on which 55 billion was spent on R&D
                      2. The eye of the crying
                        The eye of the crying 13 January 2021 19: 17
                        -1
                        You quickly began to juggle.

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

                        Then a simple question - what is the name of the American "analogue" of your state tests?

                        Achieving full operational readiness


                        An English-language term was needed, of course. If we mean "full operational capability", then these are not state tests. These are "certification event marking completion of training, providing maintenance facilities, and end of planned production of the item". Those. it is the readiness of the units to use technology, and not "state testing" of the technology itself. And the closest American bureaucratic concept to "state testing" is "Initial Operational Test & Evaluation". Until the completion of which, the F-35 program (the program, not the F-35A and F35B aircraft) lacks a flight simulator, as it was reported to VO.

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        And on what grounds do you judge that "we simply do not have it"?

                        Name the program of the Russian Federation, stretching for 25 years, on which 55 billion was spent on R&D


                        Have you lost the thread of the conversation? Let me remind you - you said "nevertheless, our" sawflies "have yet to grow and grow before the Americans, and now the arrows were turned that their weapons programs are more expensive. More expensive, of course. Their budgets are many times larger.
                      3. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 14 January 2021 07: 51
                        0
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        You quickly began to juggle.

                        Remind the proverb about a speck and a log?
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        An English-language term was needed, of course. If we mean "full operational capability", then this is not a state test

                        This is a close analogue.
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        These are "certification event marking completion of training, providing maintenance facilities, and end of planned production of the item". Those. it is the readiness of the units to use technology, and not "state testing" of the technology itself.

                        To put it simply, in order to consider the Su-35 to be in the analogue of "full operational readiness" it should have:
                        1) Complete state tests
                        2) Pass the "run-in" of the pilots in a specialized center, on whose recommendations documents were drawn up, including manuals on the use of this aircraft
                        3) Put the Su-35 in combat units
                        4) Train combat pilots to fight on it, taking into account clause 2
                        5) Conduct military tests and trial operation
                        So, serial production began in 2009 (a contract was signed) EMNIP in 2012, the first aircraft went to GLITs, the aircraft passed military tests, and only EMNIP in 2019 passed state tests. That is, we can say that the states have become a kind of final chord, and we can even say that the Su-35 reached full operational readiness before the completion of the state
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        Have you lost the thread of the conversation? Let me remind you - you said "nevertheless, our" sawflies "have yet to grow and grow before the Americans, and now the arrows were turned that their weapons programs are more expensive.

                        That is, you cannot bring a Russian analogue to the mass of disruptions and abuses called F-35.
                      4. The eye of the crying
                        The eye of the crying 14 January 2021 09: 21
                        0
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        To put it simply, in order to consider the Su-35 to be in the analogue of "full operational readiness" it should have:
                        1) Complete state tests
                        2) Pass the "run-in" of the pilots in a specialized center, according to whose recommendations the documents were drawn up

                        .


                        At the very least, you understand that "full operational readiness" is a much broader concept than "state testing".

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

                        That is, you cannot bring a Russian analogue to the mass of disruptions and abuses called F-35.


                        I can’t (although I can’t give examples of "abuse called the F-35"). But I cannot cite them because almost nothing is known about the development and operation of the Su-35. Therefore, it is impossible to compare them with the development and operation of the F-35, about which quite a lot is known. Although, of course, this does not stop "patriotic" authors - they consider (sincerely or out of stupidity) lack of knowledge to be knowledge of absence.
                      5. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 14 January 2021 10: 05
                        0
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        At the very least, you understand that "full operational readiness" is a much broader concept than "state testing".

                        Yes, this is a broader concept. However, in our aviation today, it is developing so that state tests can be passed when this very full operational capability is achieved (by the way, this was not always the case), which is why I am talking about some kind of equivalence.
                        That is, the state is never complete operational readiness, but if we talk about the point after which the US Air Force and the Russian Federation can fully use the new aircraft in battle, then for us it is the surrender of the state, for the USA it is full operational readiness.
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        I can’t (although I can’t give examples of "abuse called the F-35").

                        Well, I just would like to remind you that initially JSF assumed the creation of a cheap aircraft, and the output of production to the standard capacity (194 aircraft per year) was planned to be achieved in 2010.
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        Although, of course, this does not stop "patriotic" authors - they consider (sincerely or out of stupidity) lack of knowledge to be knowledge of absence.

                        I can tell you about similar projects in my homeland. This is "Polyment-Redoubt", which was mutilated for a very long time, although it was dumbfounded to a positive result, this is the development of VNEU by Rubin, this is Poseidon, and, it seems, is Husky. Klimov and Timokhin perfectly described the scam on the corvette 20386, I did not know much. This is so, offhand, and more. But the bottom line is that none of our projects has such a scope in terms of time and state funding as the F-35 has.
                      6. The eye of the crying
                        The eye of the crying 14 January 2021 12: 11
                        0
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        At the very least, you understand that "full operational readiness" is a much broader concept than "state testing".

                        Yes, this is a broader concept.


                        And you didn't write it in the first paragraph for nothing. Because the states are held before how the product is transferred to the military for operation. So state testing is not an analogue of IOT & E.

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        that JSF was originally supposed to create a cheap plane


                        No. The project assumed that significant savings could be achieved by developing a nearly single aircraft for the three services. And this is where they may have been wrong. But this is not a breakdown or abuse - just a mistake. And the planes themselves, due to mass production, will not be so expensive (although not cheap).

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        But the bottom line is that none of our projects has such a scope in terms of time and state funding as the F-35 has.


                        Of course. But you were not talking about the scope of the project, but about 1) the scope of cuts 2) the quality (expressed by the length of the list of defects) of the resulting product.
                      7. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 14 January 2021 12: 41
                        0
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        And you didn't write it in the first paragraph for nothing. Because the state is carried out before the product is transferred to the military for operation

                        The fact of the matter is that no. The state starts before being commissioned, yes, but they go in several stages, and now it turns out that the state finally surrenders after experimental operation and military tests.
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        No. The project assumed that significant savings could be achieved by developing a nearly single aircraft for the three services. And this is where they may have been wrong. But this is not a breakdown or abuse - just a mistake.

                        To be honest, I cannot imagine a specialist in the field of aviation development who could decide that as a result of the development of a single model, including VTOL aircraft, savings can be made. Even for a person far from the drawing board, it is obvious that this is nonsense.
                        And this is not the only time that American corporations have triumphed over common sense to profit from it. I can recall the story of the Space Shuttle - there the congressmen were persuaded on the basis of the initially "fooled" business plan of the project.
                        Quote: Eye of the Crying
                        Of course. But you were not talking about the scope of the project, but about 1) the scope of cuts 2) the quality (expressed by the length of the list of defects) of the resulting product.

                        Perhaps I expressed myself incorrectly, and you, accordingly, misunderstood me. The bottom line is that in a number of cases the military-industrial complex or other corporations or other structures, pursuing the goal of making a profit or at the expense of their departmental interests, knock out a state order for themselves, which, of course, makes a certain sense, but at the same time it is deliberately inappropriate, since there is much more simple ways to achieve the desired result. An example is our Poseidon. It is simply not needed, since the tasks it solves is quite capable of solving an ordinary SSBN. But a lot of money has been allocated for it, and although the project itself is hardly so drinkable in terms of yachts and dachas in the Canary Islands for the people who created Poseidon, this project itself is an inappropriate use of budget funds.
                        By "sawflies" in this case, I meant not people who stole $ 100500 million on government contracts, but people who, out of personal interest, pushed through the deliberately inappropriate spending of public funds.
                        If American manufacturers would immediately explain to their higher-ranking comrades that the idea of ​​unification "three in one" is wrong, then the US Air Force and Navy would have been flying with might and main on excellent light (well, medium ...) 5th generation multifunctional fighters, yes, I think that a separate VTOL aircraft project would have already flown. And all this would have cost them much cheaper
                      8. OgnennyiKotik
                        OgnennyiKotik 14 January 2021 13: 24
                        -1
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        I can’t imagine a specialist in the field of aviation development who could decide that as a result of the development of a single model, including VTOL aircraft, savings can be made.

                        So look around at cars, laptops, phones. Platforms everywhere.
                        Yes, the creation of the platform itself is expensive, but not more expensive than designing each type separately. In production, modernization and operation, it is much cheaper.
                        And the market has already divided into 2 parts who understand this and bankrupts.
                      9. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 14 January 2021 13: 55
                        0
                        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                        So look around at cars, laptops, phones. Platforms everywhere.

                        No :))))) For example, we have phones, tablets, laptops, "reading rooms", etc. At the same time, even within the framework of one type of goods - for example, laptops - there is no single platform, motherboards are completely different, for different tasks. The architecture of the gaming laptop will be fundamentally different from the office one.
                        To build a horizontal takeoff and landing aircraft and VTOL aircraft in one bottle is to combine incongruous. They have completely different tasks, although in many respects these aircraft could be unified.
                        The same engine - different versions of the same could be used. Radar station - single, etc. But the platforms had to be different - it would be much cheaper and more efficient than trying to make a gaming laptop and a phone on the same platform.
                      10. OgnennyiKotik
                        OgnennyiKotik 14 January 2021 14: 29
                        -1
                        Naturally, each manufacturer has several platforms for different classes. If you look closely at laptops and smartphones, then nothing depends on the label. Each class has 2-3 component manufacturers and that's it. In general, there is no difference what to buy, only the question of how much money is there and what is in priority. An example of platforms from Volkswagen, where 4 supposedly manufacturers are the same car, are purely marketing differences.

                        In the case of the F35, the class is one, the goals and objectives are the same. Accordingly, one platform is needed. The golden age of the Cold War ended long ago. When it was possible for each type of troops to cut their planes. F14 / 15, F16 / 18 (Hornet). Yes, separate projects for the Air Force, ILC and Navy will be cheaper than the JSF program, but in total they will surpass it.
                      11. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 15 January 2021 07: 47
                        0
                        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                        In the case of the F35, the class is one, the goals and objectives are the same.

                        No. VTOL aircraft have a very special task that is not faced by conventional aircraft - this is vertical (short) takeoff and vertical landing, which obviously degrades the rest of the aircraft's performance characteristics relative to conventional ones.
                        This is roughly the same as trying to pair a gaming laptop with a smartphone. The result will be neither one nor the other, and the tasks of both will be solved worse than specialized development
                    2. The eye of the crying
                      The eye of the crying 15 January 2021 00: 02
                      0
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      At the same time, even within the framework of one type of goods - for example, laptops - there is no single platform, motherboards are completely different, for different tasks.


                      There is. You may have heard the word "chipset".

                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      To build a horizontal takeoff and landing aircraft and VTOL aircraft in one bottle is to combine the incompatible. They have completely different tasks, although in many respects these aircraft could be unified


                      So they were unified.
                    3. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 15 January 2021 07: 44
                      0
                      Quote: Eye of the Crying
                      There is. You may have heard the word "chipset".

                      Maybe. This is not a platform, for one processor their number may be ... different. Two three. So - by
                    4. The eye of the crying
                      The eye of the crying 15 January 2021 13: 36
                      0
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      This is not a platform, for one processor their number may be ... different. Two three. So - by


                      The fact that you no longer insist that motherboards are "completely different" is already good. And the fact that one and the same processor can be part of several platforms is a fact of life. I would tell you about Sun3 on M68020, but this is too special a topic smile On the other hand, if you think the processor is a platform - okay, then all laptops are made on 2-3 platforms fellow
                    5. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 15 January 2021 14: 47
                      0
                      Quote: Eye of the Crying
                      The fact that you no longer insist that motherboards are "completely different" is already good

                      I insist. Your link to the chipsets does not refute me, since they are also not a single platform :)
                    6. The eye of the crying
                      The eye of the crying 15 January 2021 17: 43
                      0
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      The fact that you no longer insist that motherboards are "completely different" is already good

                      I insist.


                      It means that you study worse than it seemed to me.

                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      the link to the chipsets does not refute me, since they are also not a single platform :)


                      A chipset is a platform for motherboards. It doesn't have to be one. In case you haven't noticed, VW has multiple platforms too. And besides VW, there are other manufacturers - they also have their own platforms.
                    7. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 15 January 2021 20: 42
                      0
                      Quote: Eye of the Crying
                      A chipset is a platform for motherboards. It doesn't have to be one. In case you haven't noticed, VW has multiple platforms too. And besides VW, there are other manufacturers - they also have their own platforms.

                      It is very good that you finally understood this. Accordingly, you should have understood that your analogy with a "single motherboard" or "single chipset" is also wrong.
                    8. The eye of the crying
                      The eye of the crying 15 January 2021 20: 45
                      0
                      The one platform claim was yours, and I explained to you that it was wrong.
    3. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 15 January 2021 00: 01
      0
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      Perhaps I expressed myself incorrectly, and you, accordingly, misunderstood me


      Right or wrong, but absolutely unambiguous:


      our "sawflies" have yet to grow and grow before the Americans ...
    4. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 15 January 2021 07: 45
      0
      Quote: Eye of the Crying
      Right or wrong, but absolutely unambiguous:

      And I confirm that this is exactly the case. Explanations given above
    5. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 15 January 2021 12: 20
      0
      You can give explanations, this is a simple matter. And you have no data.
    6. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 15 January 2021 14: 48
      0
      Quote: Eye of the Crying
      And you have no data.

      What data do you lack? :)))
    7. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 15 January 2021 17: 40
      0
      I wrote above.
    8. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 15 January 2021 20: 41
      0
      Quote: Eye of the Crying
      I wrote above.

      And I answered you above
  • 3danimal
    3danimal 12 January 2021 18: 21
    -1
    Here at VO there are articles by M. Klimov, which describe interesting aspects of a number of our acceptance (in the fleet and submarine). What if offshore is no exception?
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 12 January 2021 15: 05
    +3
    For the F-35 fight and with 871 defects laughing
    With us, when they are sent to bomb somewhere in eastern Syria / Iraq,
    the pilot is warned: "fly carefully, otherwise you have as many as 871 defects on the plane
    don't shake them up. "
    And he replies: "Yes, what are you, I don't touch anything, maybe, pah-pah, you will be lucky" smile
    And so every time ...

    Vaughn: Typhoon - a list of zero defects. But nobody needs it.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 January 2021 15: 20
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      For the F-35 fight and with 871 defects

      And who is fighting? :)))))
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 12 January 2021 15: 23
        +3
        Queue 6 years ahead. With the release of 12-14 aircraft per month.
        And Rafali, Typhoons, Gripenes hardly push through tenders
        in small batches. With a single assembly.
        ---
        Even more than 6 years old. Singapore orders 12 F-35Bs.
        The squadron will only be formed in 2029.
        Previously no place in line.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 12 January 2021 16: 48
          -1
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Queue 6 years ahead.

          "Sister name, name!" (from). But for now, you know, such news comes across
          "After the British military tested American fifth-generation F-35 fighters, official London canceled the contract with Washington to supply the Royal Air Force with a batch of 68 F-35 fighters - the amount of the deal thwarted for the United States is about 15-18 billion dollars.
          “Plans for 138 planes were canceled, but the UK agreed to buy 48 by the end of 2025 as part of a £ 9,1 billion deal. The short takeoff and vertical landing aircraft will be deployed on the Royal Navy's Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers, The Times reported. Instead, military funding will go to the UK-developed Tempest jet, which is expected to be produced by 2035, "according to the British Daily Mail.
          More details at: https://avia.pro/news/velikobritaniya-razorvala-kontrakt-na-postavku-iz-ssha-68-istrebiteley-f-35
          1. A. Privalov
            A. Privalov 12 January 2021 17: 31
            +1
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            But for now, you know, such news comes across

            As it turned out, avia.pro only knows about this "news" and has reprinted them.
            Do not read this disgrace and you will be happy.lol
            Go to https://www.defensenews.com/
            For example: https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nato-air-power/2020/08/06/uk-facilities-for-american-f-35-jets-are-delayed-and-over-budget /
            hi
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 13 January 2021 07: 20
              0
              Convinced, I admit I'm wrong
          2. The eye of the crying
            The eye of the crying 12 January 2021 18: 07
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Plans for 138 aircraft were canceled


            And here is what the Daily Mail actually wrote, to which the resource you specified refers:


            Plans for 138 jets could be scrapped but the UK has agreed to buy 48 by the end of 2025 as part of a £ 9.1billion deal


            That is, plans may or may not be canceled.


            Britain is not contractually obliged to buy any more than 48.


            And Britain will buy 48 aircraft for 9 billion in any case.
          3. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 12 January 2021 18: 29
            +5
            avia.pro? belay
            Not impressive ... This is the main fake-news-maker in Russian

            You are an economist, if I'm not mistaken?
            If some factory running 24X7X365 is provided
            orders from 10-12 wealthy international clients for 6-8 years in advance,
            then we can assume that he produces a good product. smile
          4. Vitaly gusin
            Vitaly gusin 12 January 2021 19: 06
            +2
            Avia.pro, this is the yellow press, I wrote about this several times and gave examples of fakes.
            And this is no exception
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Instead, military funding will go to the UK-developed jet plane Tempest, production of which is expected by 2035 ", - reports the British newspaper" Daily Mail ".

            But she also says much more ..
            The next generation fighters will be "optionally staffed," which means they can operate without human pilots. And these planes are tuned in to control a swarm of unmanned drones called "loyal wingmen."
            IN GENERAL, YOU SHOULD READ THE ORIGINAL.
            https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8664283/Britain-buy-HALF-targets-F35B-Lighting-2-fighter-jets.html
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 13 January 2021 07: 20
              0
              Persuaded, was wrong.
    2. 3danimal
      3danimal 12 January 2021 18: 24
      -1
      But do you have to sanctify them before every flight? How else to explain successful flights under the yoke of hundreds of defects? wink
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 12 January 2021 18: 36
        +7
        We have the "Holy Land". Holy air enters the air intakes laughing
        This alone saves you from a thousand defects.
        1. Sanichsan
          Sanichsan 13 January 2021 01: 40
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh
          This alone saves you from a thousand defects.

          or the fact that they are delivered to you with an open architecture and there will soon be more of yours than American wink
          the rest are less fortunate bully
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 13 January 2021 01: 54
            +5
            In Israel, they add avionics to the plane, add
            operational capabilities,
            They do not eliminate defects according to the list. And if you have eliminated some
            then they report this to the Lockheed engineers. And it goes for everyone.
        2. Filxnumx
          Filxnumx 14 January 2021 22: 51
          0
          We have the "Holy Land".

          do you mean the whole Earth or only the territory of the State of Israel (within the boundaries recognized by the international community)?
  • Vitaly gusin
    Vitaly gusin 12 January 2021 14: 40
    +3
    This is from the author
    Note that in August 2018, during the audit and general inspection of the F-35 fighter and its modifications, it was found 966 design defects,
    And this is in the article
    The Defense Department's most expensive weapon system "continues to suffer from a large number of deficiencies, many of which were identified prior to" the development and demonstration phase, which ended in April 2018 with 941 flaws, said Robert Behler, director of operational testing. new estimate received by Bloomberg News prior to publication.
    This is from the author
    The report pointed out 111 shortcomings of category 1 and 855 shortcomings of category 2. Later, some of the shortcomings from the first "critical" category were transferred to the second with a stroke of the pen, i.e. without any work
    And this is in the article
    Only 10 of the 871 unresolved flaws cited by Boehler relate to potentially serious Category 1 issues, defined as critical flaws that could jeopardize the safety of a pilot or aircraft or reduce mission effectiveness. This is compared to 102 such problems out of 941 cases reported in 2018.
    Lockheed said in a statement, that none of the 10 current deficiencies are categorized as "1A"that may affect the safety of the pilot or aircraft, but refers to “Category 1B”, which the program office defines as “critical impact on mission readiness,” training, or maintenance.
    WISHING TO SEE THE ARTICLE
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-12/f-35-flies-with-871-flaws-only-two-fewer-than-a-year-earlier
    1. Avior
      Avior 12 January 2021 20: 45
      +3
      Is the list itself publicly available? I would like to see what the disadvantages are listed in such quantity.
      1. Vitaly gusin
        Vitaly gusin 12 January 2021 22: 39
        +1
        Quote: Avior
        Is the list itself publicly available?

        You can hardly find a complete list in the public domain.
        There are different publications
        https://www.defensenews.com/smr/hidden-troubles-f35/2020/04/24/the-pentagon-has-cut-the-number-of-serious-f-35-technical-flaws-in-half/
        The main problems with the F-35B / C, as well as with the ALIS program, which is being replaced by ODIN.
        In the Israeli Air Force F-35ADIR, there are no these problems.
        1. Avior
          Avior 13 January 2021 00: 03
          +2
          thanks, I'll take a look
  • 7,62x54
    7,62x54 12 January 2021 14: 41
    +1
    When all defects appear, then they will be eliminated.
  • Aleks2000
    Aleks2000 12 January 2021 14: 43
    +7
    ABOUT! a quarterly article about defects in F35 arrived in time.
    Defects, however, our media are in no hurry to describe. They were very funny when they listed them last time. Like, the tire can withstand 10 extreme landings, we want 25 etc.
  • APASUS
    APASUS 12 January 2021 15: 58
    +1
    This report will die under the rug; who wants to admit that the Americans made it up?
  • Misha_an26
    Misha_an26 12 January 2021 18: 10
    0
    How can you fix it, if these aerodynamic uё ... n 500 pieces were cut.
  • Voltsky
    Voltsky 12 January 2021 19: 52
    +2
    I don’t understand where shit ?! Where is the good old our one drying with the engines of the first stage one will tear like a tuzik a heating pad the entire floor of the F-35 mower
    1. Filxnumx
      Filxnumx 14 January 2021 23: 00
      0
      You are addressing the wrong address. If you want a srach, then wash down the pickles with milk. Only I beg you: not here and not now.
  • AML
    AML 12 January 2021 20: 06
    0
    Quote: pytar
    The software contains over 20 million lines of code! Flying supercomputer!


    At the current level of development of 20 million, this is absolutely nothing. I personally saw the project, where 10 thousand lines of self-written code accounted for 1 million lines of body kit. And all because the level of programmers is such, it is easier for them to pull the entire 10000-line framework than to scratch their 100 lines of code.
    1. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 13 January 2021 15: 56
      0
      Quote: AML
      I personally saw a project where 10 thousand lines of self-written code accounted for 1 million lines of body kit.


      Have you seen a project that is 20 (or maybe 200) times smaller than the software for the F-35? COOL!!!
  • AML
    AML 12 January 2021 20: 13
    0
    Quote: voyaka uh
    We have the "Holy Land". Holy air enters the air intakes laughing
    This alone saves you from a thousand defects.


    Like in a joke.

    - Well, maybe you won't drown all the passengers because of my sins?
    - Yes, schaz, I've been collecting you 'women of easy virtue' for this cruise for 10 years.
  • Dimon-SPG
    Dimon-SPG 13 January 2021 15: 25
    0
    This is not a combat aircraft, it is a pump for withdrawing money from those unfortunate ones who are "lucky" to have it.
  • AML
    AML 13 January 2021 16: 42
    0
    Quote: Eye of the Crying
    Quote: AML
    I personally saw a project where 10 thousand lines of self-written code accounted for 1 million lines of body kit.


    Have you seen a project that is 20 (or maybe 200) times smaller than the software for the F-35? COOL!!!


    If my memory serves me, then the Linux kernel is about 25 million lines.

    If you want impressions then google about the game .kkrieger. A full-fledged 3D shooter, 1 executable file 96kb of live weight.
    1. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 13 January 2021 19: 30
      0
      Quote: AML
      If my memory serves me, then the Linux kernel is about 25 million lines.


      Perhaps (although the main volume there is drivers). And the generalized Linux distribution is billions of lines. Which demonstrates the zero cost of "I saw the project" statements.

      Quote: AML
      .kkrieger. A full-fledged 3D shooter, 1 executable file 96kb of live weight.


      Cool, of course, but I remember DOOM (the first one) - an executable file of several hundred KB and a wad file of 15M, so the size of the binar means quite a bit.
  • AML
    AML 13 January 2021 20: 52
    0
    Quote: Eye of the Crying

    Quote: AML
    If my memory serves me, then the Linux kernel is about 25 million lines.


    Perhaps (although the main volume there is drivers). And the generalized Linux distribution is billions of lines. Which demonstrates the zero cost of "I saw the project" statements.


    Of course, I led to the fact that 20 million lines of F-35 software only looks scary, but in practice nothing outstanding.

    Quote: Eye of the Crying

    Quote: AML
    .kkrieger. A full-fledged 3D shooter, 1 executable file 96kb of live weight.


    Cool, of course, but I remember DOOM (the first one) - an executable file of several hundred KB and a wad file of 15M, so the size of the binar means quite a bit.



    You are not imbued with the figure, 96 kilobytes the whole game with all resources. Textures are rendered on the fly. :) Doom with 15 M smokes nervously.
    1. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 14 January 2021 09: 38
      +1
      Quote: AML
      I led to the fact that 20 million lines of F-35 software only looks scary, but in practice, nothing outstanding.


      And this is not true. Firstly, (using your example) it is almost the Linux kernel, which, I recall, has been written for 30 years, thousands of people and dozens of commercial firms participate in its writing; secondly, the code for the F-35 is written according to completely different standards and in completely different conditions than, for example, the .kkrieger code; and thirdly, it is necessary to compare not with abstract "projects", but with the "projects" of the onboard software of other fighters. For example, the volume of the F-22 onboard software is 2 million lines.

      However, you yourself should know all this. Rather, I write for the curious.

      Quote: AML
      96kilobyte whole game


      Well, actually, this game runs on Windows, so it actually has a lot more code because it has all the Windows code at its disposal. Unlike DOOM, which ran almost on bare metal (DOS / 4GW is a rather primitive thing).

      Quote: AML
      with all the resources. Textures are rendered on the fly. :)


      Wiki slanders that the resources there are already one level (rather monotonous), so miracles do not happen. And textures are always rendered on the fly - you probably wanted to say that in .kkrieger, textures are generated on the fly. But generating data at runtime is common. And the results of procedural generation are usually pretty uniform.
      1. pytar
        pytar 14 January 2021 10: 32
        0
        Quote: Eye of the Crying
        Rather, I write for the curious.

        I'm one of those. Thanks for the interesting information! hi Plus canceling! good