Military Review

The Pentagon is going to deploy two squadrons of F-35 to 2020 in Alaska

53
American editionDefense News»Reports that the plans of the main US military - to place two squadrons of F-2020 aircraft in Alaska by 35 year. Accommodation must occur at the air base Eielson, where the F-16 fighters are currently on combat duty. US Air Force spokeswoman Ms. Stefanek told the media that the Pentagon was considering deploying F-35 squadrons outside the United States, but then it was decided that the aircraft could be deployed in Alaska.




According to Ms. Stefanek, the adoption of such a decision is due to the fact that the air base Eielson located relatively close to the base of the so-called United Pacific complex "Alaska". This, according to the Pentagon, will allow the F-35 to be used more effectively when conducting exercises in a vast subarctic territory.

Against this background, work continues to bring the F-35 "to the mind." The fact is that virtually every new attempt to use the latest American military aircraft leads to the identification of another flaw. The number of just discovered flaws since the United States announced the creation of the F-35 exceeded one hundred. At the same time, a step to eliminate one flaw on this aircraft often leads to the appearance of a flaw in the other and new costs, which have already made the F-35 a costly aviation project for the whole world history.
53 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Bureaucrat
    Bureaucrat April 5 2016 11: 49
    +17
    By 2020, we will send two S-500 divisions to Chukotka and count the quits.
    1. Lord of the Sith
      Lord of the Sith April 5 2016 11: 51
      +24
      I think replacing the F-16 with the F-35 is the right decision, keep up the good work! Given the climatic conditions of Alaska. laughing
      1. Same lech
        Same lech April 5 2016 11: 54
        +6
        At the same time, often the step to eliminate one flaw on this aircraft leads to another flaw and new costs, which have already made the F-35 itself a costly aviation project in world history.


        The golden plane turned out literally ...
        the purchase and operation of it will ruin a small state that risked to go for it.
        1. cniza
          cniza April 5 2016 12: 41
          +5
          Quote: Lord of the Sith
          I think replacing the F-16 with the F-35 is the right decision, keep up the good work! Given the climatic conditions of Alaska. laughing


          And also that the unit is still very raw and requires new and new infusions.
          1. crazyrom
            crazyrom April 6 2016 03: 01
            -1
            The X-NUMX Su-2020 squadron will already live in Alaska.
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. Michael67
        Michael67 April 5 2016 11: 56
        +9
        So let them post. Well they freeze in the cold in flight. And we’ll find them thunderous fronts, darn lightning flashed. Finally how flies get. laughing
        Just kidding of course. The enemy must not be underestimated.
        The bureaucrat correctly says: "... we will send two S-500 battalions to Chukotka ...".
      3. Viktor_24reg
        Viktor_24reg April 5 2016 12: 24
        +3
        What's wrong with the conditions ?! Have all the planes hit Siberia yet? Or do you think they are so stupid that they understand everything worse than the local visitors? Of course, I agree that they sometimes make stupid mistakes, for example, appointing Psaki, but they know how to think ahead. And talk about "cuts" in general is already an eyesore on this site. Or is some country crystal clear and there are no cuts? Or do we not have them? Sometimes it feels like some visitors to this site have been given a stupid urge to patriotism, without the opportunity to think about anything.
        1. Kronos07
          Kronos07 April 5 2016 14: 25
          +1
          people don’t know that companies are hired for this kind of project
          the best people.
      4. Kronos07
        Kronos07 April 5 2016 14: 15
        0
        why not?
      5. hartlend
        hartlend April 5 2016 16: 01
        +1
        I agree. If you believe the article, the F-35 is for training only and is suitable. Let them study in Alaska for such and such money wink .
      6. afrikanez
        afrikanez April 5 2016 19: 06
        0
        Well, if they send F-35 to Alaska, then I think they will still find a bunch of flaws. For example, a sweatshirt will put on an airplane, that would not be cold. laughing
    2. Samen
      Samen April 5 2016 11: 55
      +5
      Woke up! Fearless conquerors of the Arctic ... Nu-nu ...
      We will see.
      1. MIKHAN
        MIKHAN April 5 2016 12: 14
        +4
        Alaska, how this word warms the Russian soul .... (Like Crimea!)))) This is ours, EVERYTHING!
    3. Muvka
      Muvka April 5 2016 12: 40
      +4
      Quote: Bureaucrat
      By 2020, we will send two S-500 divisions to Chukotka and count the quits.

      The S-500 is kind of like a missile defense, and not an air defense. The S-400 is perfect for this and already exists.
      1. Serg 122
        Serg 122 April 5 2016 18: 03
        0
        Quote...
        By 2020, we will send two S-500 divisions to Chukotka and count the quits.
        The S-500 is kind of like a missile defense, and not an air defense. The S-400 is perfect for this and already exists.

        A couple of Su-35S squadrons will also be in the subject ...
  2. EvgNik
    EvgNik April 5 2016 11: 50
    +4
    Against this background, work continues to bring the F-35 "to mind."

    By the 20th year will they bring to mind? Can they immediately do the F-36?
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh April 5 2016 12: 00
      +6
      Now the aircraft of the main version A has 97% combat readiness. In 2018, they plan to bring
      up to 100%. It remains to put into operation one software unit, connect
      to a softgun ... On already 200 flying airplanes this can do
      an engineer with a laptop book in half an hour.
      Version B seems to be in order. Marines swear that inter-flight service
      long. But this is the problem of all stealth. The outer coating must be carefully
      to inspect is no longer riveted aluminum.
      Version C is a little stuck. There you need to change the chassis for better engagement by aerofinisher
      aircraft carriers.
      1. Muvka
        Muvka April 5 2016 12: 43
        +2
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Now the aircraft of the main version A has 97% combat readiness. In 2018, they plan to bring
        up to 100%. It remains to put into operation one software unit, connect
        to a softgun ... On already 200 flying airplanes this can do
        an engineer with a laptop book in half an hour.
        Version B seems to be in order. Marines swear that inter-flight service
        long. But this is the problem of all stealth. The outer coating must be carefully
        to inspect is no longer riveted aluminum.
        Version C is a little stuck. There you need to change the chassis for better engagement by aerofinisher
        aircraft carriers.

        Can be done from a laptop in half an hour ... cool ... but why not ??? And where did you find 200 aircraft in version A, if there are ~ 180 in total, and in version A about 75?
        1. Kronos07
          Kronos07 April 5 2016 14: 53
          0
          171 as of March 2016
          1. Muvka
            Muvka April 5 2016 14: 57
            0
            Quote: Kronos07
            171 as of March 2016

            All versions, not just A.
      2. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm April 5 2016 13: 38
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Now the aircraft of the main version A has 97% combat readiness. In 2018, they plan to bring
        to 100%.

        Did they declare that they would adopt the F-35A in August 2016, that something had not happened? This F-35S should have been taken in 2018.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh April 5 2016 14: 16
          +1
          "They announced that they would adopt the F-35A in August 2016,
          something happened not expected "////

          Many times. Technical specifications were changed, defects and bugs were identified and fixed.
          The usual process of fine-tuning a new aircraft (remember the long journey of the famous Su-27)
          Deviated from the original F-35 schedule by about 2 years.
          What a little, in comparison with the long-term construction of Eurofighter, Rafal and others.
          1. _Vladislav_
            _Vladislav_ April 5 2016 14: 22
            +1
            Quote: saturn.mmm
            Did they declare that they would adopt the F-35A in August 2016, that something had not happened? This F-35S should have been taken in 2018.

            T-50 will be forced to go the same way.
            The formation of a new generation aircraft is a long way. It will be a decade before the T-50 will be delivered to the troops on a par with the Dryers of the previous generation.
            The usual thing.

          2. Foofighter
            Foofighter April 5 2016 22: 04
            0
            The "long journey" was several times shorter, but here the end is still not in sight.
      3. quote
        quote April 5 2016 14: 08
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        It remains to put into operation one software unit, connect
        to software gun ..

        To which "PontOgon" asked for 5 FIVE (clearly visible) YEARS !!!
        In the meantime, they will deliver as is! OPPA!
      4. user1212
        user1212 April 5 2016 14: 10
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        On already 200 flying aircraft, this can be done.
        an engineer with a laptop book in half an hour.

        So announce the reason why the adoption was put off for 19 years.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh April 5 2016 15: 07
          0
          Because the software of the last block is still ready.
          When the software is ready, its installation (on all aircraft) is quick.
          Then it's half an hour. And writing and testing is years.
          1. user1212
            user1212 April 5 2016 17: 12
            -1
            Quote: voyaka uh
            And writing and testing is years.

            4 years on the guns? laughing
            1. Foofighter
              Foofighter April 8 2016 13: 37
              0
              Estooon programmers rule ...
      5. Foofighter
        Foofighter April 6 2016 07: 50
        0
        This is vryatli, the coverage is the same, it affects the inter-flight service in the same way.
        As for the 3rd version, one had to think earlier too laughing
      6. The comment was deleted.
    2. Wolka
      Wolka April 5 2016 12: 15
      0
      I agree, and where they saw the mind in the F-35 project, it never was there, only ambitions, because this child is not viable initially, and Alaska is not a cemetery however ...
  3. Observer2014
    Observer2014 April 5 2016 11: 50
    +4
    "The Pentagon plans to deploy two F-35 squadrons in Alaska by 2020"
    That's all, topics for conversation for another two years at least. For now, this plane will be "finalized" to the north.
    I want to add earlier they needed to butt with our strategists. And now, each missile individually is caught. Since our cruise missiles have a range that is slightly more than very far
  4. spech
    spech April 5 2016 11: 50
    +3
    According to Ms. Stefanek, the adoption of such a decision is due to the fact that the Eielson air base is located relatively close to the base of the so-called United Pacific Complex "Alaska". This, according to the Pentagon, will allow more efficient use of the F-35 when conducting exercises in the vast Arctic region.

    The messenger is not far to run wassat
  5. pavelty
    pavelty April 5 2016 11: 51
    +3
    It’s interesting, but maybe it’s not so bad as we imagine ...
    1. Foofighter
      Foofighter April 8 2016 14: 09
      0
      in fact, everything is much worse, but it's still better than the F-117
  6. Kronos07
    Kronos07 April 5 2016 11: 51
    +1
    F-35 Heritage Flight Team - Modern & Vintage Military Aircraft Flying Side by Side
    1. Foofighter
      Foofighter April 8 2016 14: 21
      0
      and where is the modern-heritage-vintage F-117? oh no ... bully
  7. Bacha
    Bacha April 5 2016 11: 52
    +6
    Not the most expensive project, but the most profitable, how much the military dough had raped from it)))
  8. pts-m
    pts-m April 5 2016 11: 53
    +2
    As people say ... away from the eyes, otherwise the loot is already ending for revision ...
  9. Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov April 5 2016 11: 55
    +1
    Quote: Bureaucrat
    By 2020, we will send two S-500 divisions to Chukotka and count the quits.

    A lot of honor! S-300 I think enough.
    1. bertgolz
      bertgolz April 5 2016 15: 46
      0
      Yes there S-300, let's just from a slingshot!
  10. VP
    VP April 5 2016 11: 56
    +5
    I don’t care. The radius of action is a thousand km, from the base only to its coast reaches the maximum
  11. ydjin
    ydjin April 5 2016 12: 00
    +3
    I wonder what awaits the project F-35? A terrible end or horror without end, from the amount of money spent? The question is rhetorical, just like that, laugh! laughing
  12. Prisoner
    Prisoner April 5 2016 12: 00
    +1
    Do they hope to bring it to mind by 2020?
  13. aszzz888
    aszzz888 April 5 2016 12: 03
    +1
    The number of flaws that have just been discovered since the United States announced the creation of the F-35 exceeded one hundred.

    By the year 20, more than one hundred breakdowns will be found. And there you see, the local Eskimos will harness the deer into the sleigh and will carry the "famous" F-35 on them! laughing
  14. kirieeleyson
    kirieeleyson April 5 2016 12: 03
    +1
    That's right, away from the taxpayers, and our seiners will then rescue their pilots by buoys at sea when the frozen "serial" samples disappear from the radar. We will also be guilty, accused of the fact that the Russians came up with super rays of evil, with which they shoot down the brave invincible flyers on ultra-modern airplanes that stand like a cast-iron bridge.
  15. biserino
    biserino April 5 2016 12: 05
    0
    The price of an F-35 is like an F16 squadron. laughing
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh April 5 2016 12: 34
      +2
      No. The latest modifications to the F-16 Americans sell for 85 million
      apiece (Pakistan plans to buy 6 pieces), and the F-35 is now about
      125 million each. With a subsequent reduction in prices (in large series) to 95 million.

      For comparison, "Silent Eagle" F-15 tried to sell for 105 million
      Rafal - more than 100.
      Hindus complained that even the Su-30 cost them (with all the services)
      under 100 million ...
      1. VP
        VP April 5 2016 13: 36
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        and F-35 is now about
        125 million each. With a subsequent reduction in prices (in large series) to 95 million

        and small print footnote "price excluding engine" laughing
        The service is also separate (not Indians, however)
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh April 5 2016 13: 50
          +2
          125 million is including the engine. The price of the F-35 engine is approximately 20 million.
          1. VP
            VP April 5 2016 14: 20
            0
            Not including yet. And without taking into account the fact that this engine is recognized as problematic (problems with the quality of turbine blades and control electronics), i.e. it will have to be modernized or technology changed (which means production lines)
            And there are extremely strong doubts that it costs 20
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh April 5 2016 15: 01
              0
              Problematic? But not one of the nearly 200 aircraft
              which now pilots of 5 countries are intensively running in did not fall.
              F-16, Su-27 (both common, excellent aircraft)
              fought at this stage (the beginning of operation) all the time.
              F-35 so far gives records of reliability.
              The problems were in the production of blades, the bad ones were rejected by the Quality Control Department.
              As in any engine factory.
              1. Foofighter
                Foofighter April 5 2016 22: 01
                0
                And how often and how do they fly? And why do you think the Pentagon and Lockheed are telling the truth?
  16. Wolka
    Wolka April 5 2016 12: 18
    +1
    doesn’t definitely channel, so that there was something to place, you must first make this air miracle at least flyable
  17. sabakina
    sabakina April 5 2016 12: 21
    +3
    an attempt to use the latest American military aircraft reveals another flaw

    Another shortcoming is the fear of the cold.
    - "The steamer is good, only he is afraid of water." (c) "k / f Volga-Volga"
  18. saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm April 5 2016 12: 56
    0
    Incredible news.
    - "Penguins" in Alaska!
    1. Foofighter
      Foofighter April 6 2016 00: 41
      0
      there is really nothing to catch there because of polar bears
    2. The comment was deleted.
  19. Sergey-72
    Sergey-72 April 5 2016 13: 10
    0
    What is there to be guessed by 2020 ?, maybe Alaska will not be American or will there be no Alaska at all. In general, the enemy should not be underestimated.
  20. Lecha57
    Lecha57 April 5 2016 13: 27
    0
    -They have to react somehow. Of course it will be cold for them, but they will not withstand the Arctic differences. Let them take a look. In general, do not hell to do it there. In any case, they themselves will bend!
  21. sergeyzzz
    sergeyzzz April 5 2016 13: 29
    +1
    Quote: Bureaucrat
    By 2020, we will send two S-500 divisions to Chukotka and count the quits.

    What for? All the same, they won’t reach anywhere, will they be bombing polar bears?
  22. demiurg
    demiurg April 5 2016 15: 06
    0
    Quote: Kronos07
    F-35 Heritage Flight Team - Modern & Vintage Military Aircraft Flying Side by Side

    Saber, Falcon, Raptor are beautiful from any angle. The second lightning is terrible as a mortal sin. 100% will be adopted. After such injections, they cannot but accept it. It may very well be that his software and avionics are revolutionary. But who will explain to me why it will produce a plane for 100+ million greens, if all this equipment could be shoved along the F-15 / F-16 / F-18? Stealth? Recent modifications of the Hornets and others have a fairly small EPR. Why choose revolution instead of evolution?
    Just purely hypothetically, put a helmet in f-15, stuff it with avionics and lightning radar, and weave them.
    Not even that, we will give each team 1 billion for the purchase of aircraft, for this money in one team there will be 7-8 lightnings, in the other 12-14 Needles.
    By the way, this pebble in a kosher garden. No offense :)) Can an ordinary person on the fingers explain why lightning is better than a needle?
    We can’t give examples of the T-50, we need a plane with a small ESR to gain superiority in the air, we need a rival Raptor. We will by no means buy it in thousands. Hundreds at best. And the performance of the T-50 is much higher than that of the Su-35.
    1. Kronos07
      Kronos07 April 5 2016 15: 19
      0
      I like it
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh April 5 2016 15: 42
      0
      Easy: EPR Needle 500 times higher than lightning.
      Israelis, when there was a tender, which plane to choose for the future,
      persuaded to buy "Silent Eagle". They showed him, let him fly.
      But, when the pilots were shown clearly what the F-35 looks like on air defense radars
      and the radars of other aircraft, all doubts have disappeared - Eagle F-15 fell away immediately.
      Eagle is Israel’s favorite airplane. But his time has passed.
      And in comparison with another F-16 favorite, the F-35 has an order of magnitude
      higher opportunities for work on the ground.
    3. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh April 5 2016 15: 49
      0
      Second: the F-35 is the world's first combat aircraft of the so-called "open
      architecture of software and electronics. "Neither Raptor nor anyone else
      there is no way to integrate any weapon and any devices
      in the MSA.
      1. Foofighter
        Foofighter April 6 2016 01: 44
        0
        A little beguiled, this is another penguin:
  23. Kronos07
    Kronos07 April 5 2016 15: 20
    0
    .............
    1. saturn.mmm
      saturn.mmm April 6 2016 10: 01
      0
      Quote: Kronos07
      .............
  24. demiurg
    demiurg April 5 2016 15: 32
    -1
    Quote: Kronos07
    I like it

    You cannot dislike him :)) You live with him until 2070 :)))
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Foofighter
      Foofighter April 8 2016 14: 26
      0
      and there, after this "matuta" a little bit more, "99942 Apophis" will fall to Alaska (with all its two squadrons left after the war with China) ...
  25. Victor1
    Victor1 April 5 2016 15: 39
    +1
    Do not underestimate the enemy, while you spit and gloat here, they already rivet them in dozens, the total number of raw F35 is already under two hundred.
    Yes, it is crude, but it will be completed and modernization of the rest will not take much time.
    For comparison, we have only 48 Su35, by the 20th year there will be another 50,
    and the test batch of T50 in the troops goes in number 12,
    Only the version with the engines of the second stage, which cannot yet be seen on the horizon, will begin to be purchased on a larger scale, at best it will appear in the 18th year.
    When will we manage to make at least 50 T50 of the second stage? If 50 simpler Su35s and already in established production require 5 years.
    We were lucky that they had problems with the aircraft and this slows them down, but we should not relax.
  26. sablezub81
    sablezub81 April 5 2016 19: 08
    +1
    Why are the US going to deploy aircraft on our land ?! The rental is already over, I protest! I am against the deployment of military forces in occupied Alaska!
  27. Olegater
    Olegater April 5 2016 20: 21
    0
    Well now, the intensive exercises in the Far East of our troops are clear. In addition to gaining lice in Korea, they stubbornly surround Russia from all sides and think that they will win - naive !!!!!!!!
  28. demiurg
    demiurg April 5 2016 21: 36
    +1
    Quote: voyaka uh
    Second: the F-35 is the world's first combat aircraft of the so-called "open
    architecture of software and electronics. "Neither Raptor nor anyone else
    there is no way to integrate any weapon and any devices
    in the MSA.

    By the importance of the EPR, you know better. Why is it thought that if I do not see the enemy, you can make sure that the enemy does not see me. As an option, Tesla transformers 20-30 megawatts do you think will clog the radars with interference or not? :)) The gloomy genius from Novosibirsk :)
    But with open architecture, it’s strange. It seems like an increasingly less serious service only by the manufacturer. And there was also a mention of a computer loading maps and a mission to fly through a server in the United States. If this is so, are you not afraid of a sudden change in foreign policy overseas with invisible but non-flying aircraft?
  29. Ros 56
    Ros 56 April 6 2016 11: 57
    0
    Yes, let them stand, they may freeze, it’s still scary to take off, our Chukotka team will put a couple of S-400 divisions. But the Lafa flyers, the increased salary, the northern allowances and other amenities. Or have striped benefits not provided?