For F-35 in Britain will build large-scale hangars

In early April, the British Defense Ministry entered into contracts with Lockheed Martin to build the infrastructure for the base of the F-35B Lightning II fighter jets planned for entry, the blog reports bmpd with reference to the magazine "Jane's Defense Weekly".

Project image of one of the objects for the basing of the F-35B fighter jets to be built at the British Markham airbase

The cost of the agreements amounted to £ 142 million. The aircraft will be located at the Markham air base in Norfolk County.

It is noted that in Markham there should be built from scratch "three large complexes of facilities for the basing and maintenance of F-35B fighter jets and flight and ground training."

"Under the terms of the contract, Lockheed Martin will involve BAE Systems Corporation as the main subcontractor for the design and construction of these facilities, the latter will also manage the activities of the British construction company Balfour Beatty, which is directly involved in construction work," writes the magazine.

Construction of the facilities is planned to be completed in 2018, i. to the arrival of the first squadron F-35B.

Image of the basing and maintenance of F-35B fighter jets in one of the hangars to be built at the British Marham Air Base

Comments

[MOTHER]

They will beautifully explode ....))))

[cniza]

Of course it looks beautiful, but how to fight? there they don’t pay for beauty, they have to plow and not in sterile cleanliness.

[Hon]

that is, following this logic, should planes be kept in a pigsty?

[Observer2014]

Hon (4) RU Today, 11:09 ↑ New
that is, following this logic, should planes be kept in a pigsty?
I think that it’s not in the pigsty for sure. Although it will probably be too much for combat units. Think about it after such a sterile environment and at the alternate airfield! So this f 35 will catch some infection with blunt immunity.
Although if there are only ten of them in the air force at the cost of several lards, then the hangar must be made for their storage accordingly. A fashionable airplane, a fashionable hangar!
Not long ago, their general said that we should surrender at his sight with fright. We need to tell the British, let them arrange a hangar in the form of a horror room. Well there with hooks, chains.

[novobranets]

Quote: Observer2014

It is necessary for the British to prompt, let the hangar in the form of a room of horrors make out.

And to drive frenzied grandmothers of tourists, to show a terrible plane.

[Panikovsky]

Quote: Hon

that is, following this logic, should planes be kept in a pigsty?

no, following this logic, each commando should live in five-star apartments with a staff of footmen, prostitutes and packs of servants until they fulfill their functional duties.

[Foofighter]

following the logic, this is probably some kind of very large plane that for it it is necessary to build special hangars
despite the fact that it is generally intended for basing outside airfields if of course ... maybe

[Leto]

Quote: cniza

Of course it looks beautiful, but how to fight? there they don’t pay for beauty, they have to plow and not in sterile cleanliness.

He will fight as it turns out, and a combat aircraft should only be operated in such a way that the inherent resource is not "killed" in the rain and snow.
I hope that for our T-50 there are funds for normal hangars.

[Thronekeeper]

There the terrorist Dopil Otkatov undermines the economy of the United States and GB. Then this "Cinema" in the modern style, with a swimming pool, blackjack and teasers will be included in the price of the AIRCRAFT according to the class of service and maintenance.
Generally - for "Caliber" with ODBCH, "Onyx", or "Zircon" with a cluster head - yacht-s. Brick walls and a glass roof, so that no one left offended, just a bunch. I hope at least Israel will think of reinforced concrete overlap to do it?

[Hon]

from bombing caps

[Michael67]

Am I correcting the title here?
"Large-scale hangars will be built for the F-35 in Britain" - targets.

[Hon]

it’s so easy to bomb an object on a strange territory, which, as it were, doesn’t have the weakest army, but also has nuclear weapons

[Vadim237]

Targets for whom? - Britain has air defense and nuclear weapons too.

[Gray brother]

Quote: Hon

from bombing caps

They take out Norfolk hats from the Black Sea - the "Caliber" style is called.

[Hon]

Quote: Gray Brother

Quote: Hon

from bombing caps

They take out Norfolk hats from the Black Sea - the "Caliber" style is called.

Air defense overcome?

[Gray brother]

Quote: Hon

Air defense overcome?

With a high probability. The target is small, the flight height above the ground is 50-150 meters, 20 meters above the sea.

[Ramzaj99]

Quote: Hon

Air defense overcome?

But is it there ???

[Hon]

Quote: Ramzaj99

But is it there ???

Indeed, where can a country with the fifth largest military budget in the world (Russia fourth place) come from?

[Ramzaj99]

Quote: Hon

Indeed, where can a country with the fifth largest military budget in the world (Russia fourth place) come from?

Well, if you are so smart, can you list what strategic objects, including civil ones)), besides the border, are air defense covered ??)) And what of this can even shoot down anything other than an airplane ?? As far as I know, the "Patriot" can shoot down the "Caliber" if it flies above 100m and knows in advance from which direction and at what time it will fly, with an ammunition consumption of 2: 1 and then without guarantees ...

[GSH-18]

For F-35 in Britain will build large-scale hangars

Ltd! amerikozy, that did not get off the main drawback of the F-22 ??? (the need to check after each flight the anti-radar coverage, because of which the maximum daily rotation of one F-22 equals TWO flights). For this, F-22 special hangars and equipment are needed, apparently F-35 as well. Indoor American fighter jets, therefore, are intended for one-time intimidation actions against a weak enemy. Americanoses continue in the same vein. It will not bring them to good. But to us it is a mess.

[lelikas]

And what is a civil hangar for a non-combatant aircraft.

[Foofighter]

when they are written off in speed as unjustified hopes, you can play basketball
they are being built for F-35B, it will be impossible to put anything else there - low stretch ceilings

[iliya87]

Any complex technique needs proper care.

[retardu]

For a long time already there is no this problem with f22

[Deniska999]

Who will blow up? Do not make me laugh.

[Foofighter]

yes there’s a head already being cut in the streets on white ...

[Portolan]

Build, Build, otherwise the sugar will melt under the dough.

[Vladimirets]

We would also not be prevented by such structures.

[Vovanfalcon]

If only in the form of ARZ, well, there may be a TEC (in large compounds). In other cases, that is, in the field, the aircraft must be operated and be maintainable.

[Vladimirets]

Quote: VovanFalcon

If only in the form of ARZ, well, there may be a TEC (in large compounds). In other cases, that is, in the field, the aircraft must be operated and be maintainable.

Well, this is understandable, it’s just a pity when expensive equipment is worth it.

[Hon]

on the contrary, it’s good how much savings are on the hangar, and nothing that one plane costs like several hangars, the economy should be economical

[Nitarius]

and you look at WESTERN HANGARS ... WHERE THERE IS ANY element chippers for air nozzles .. this is nonsense and nothing more!
If the equipment is designed for normal storage .. and aggressive air flows ... then nothing will happen to it under normal rainfall!
And believe me .. SHOW AND NO MORE! Repair yes .. But storage clearly!

[Hon]

Quote: Nitarius

and you look at WESTERN HANGARS ... WHERE THERE IS ANY element chippers for air nozzles .. this is nonsense and nothing more!
If the equipment is designed for normal storage .. and aggressive air flows ... then nothing will happen to it under normal rainfall!
And believe me .. SHOW AND NO MORE! Repair yes .. But storage clearly!

yes fools in general. Well this is necessary, we thought carefully of the technique.

[Foofighter]

were not fools - you would not buy into this, and did not give the USA their "loonies"

[GSH-18]

Quote: Vladimirets

Well, this is understandable, it’s just a pity when expensive equipment is worth it.

This expensive equipment is made of materials that do not care: + 50C or -50C, whether it is raining or snowing.
Hangars are needed for attendants. Aircraft fighters, like elite girls, after every prominade need the FULLEST. You can not say about our aircraft, originally adapted to the military situation.

[Vladimirets]

Quote: GSH-18

This expensive equipment is made of materials that do not care: + 50C or -50C, whether it is raining or snowing.

There is not a single technique that would be "all the same", precipitation, sun, wind, sand, birds affect ANY unit, to a greater or lesser extent. I'm not saying that we, as Britons, need to build an entertainment and educational center with swimming pools, courts and cafeterias for 150 kilo-bucks. But, probably, the equipment can be driven under the roof, especially now there are a lot of options with pre-fabricated structures, look at how fast all sorts of super-hypermarkets are being built.

Quote: GSH-18

Hangars are needed for attendants.

The techies will probably say thanks too.

[GSH-18]

Quote: Vladimirets

There is not a single technique that would be "all the same", precipitation, sun, wind, sand, birds affect ANY unit, to a greater or lesser extent. I'm not saying that we, like Britons, need to build for 150 kilobucks

Quote: Vladimirets

But, you can probably drive the equipment under the roof

They drive her when necessary. Aircraft are operated in accordance with the statement of work for their production and operation.

Quote: Vladimirets

The techies will probably say thanks too. yes

And that's what they do. Look, look, even on "Vostochny" a vertical pre-launch tower was made by servants for a rocket. Military equipment is military, which does not need excesses. But the necessary technical facilities must be according to the airfield regulations, and they ARE where it is needed.

[Vadim237]

No one has canceled the chemical rains and corrosion, well, our planes would have been made of metal materials, as well as aluminum and titanium alloys.

[Cat man null]

Quote: Vadim237

Nobody canceled chemical rains and corrosion

- how scary it is to live (my profile-producing department was "Corrosion and protection of metals", if anything)

Quote: Vadim237

well, our planes would be made of metal materials, as well as aluminum and titanium alloys

- and what are "metomaterials"?
- why are titanium alloys bad?

Once upon a time I had practice at the marvelous enterprise GNIIHP (GosNIIHlorProekt, Moscow). So: the plant produced chlorine and chlorine derivatives (mainly explosives), the main reagent was hot hydrochloric acid (HCl), and the equipment was made from titanium.

So, even in a hot hodgepodge, the equipment was guaranteed to "stand" for six months ..

Somehow

[Foofighter]

and what are "metomaterials"?

oh don't even ask tin
their connection with "chemical rains" especially smiled.

[Vadim237]

So you have a 100% effective way to protect metals from corrosion. All metals are susceptible to this problem - a violation of the oxide film - and there greetings.

[Cat man null]

Quote: Vadim237

So you have a 100% effective way to protect metals from corrosion

- there are many of them, and they are different .. about cathodic protection, as an example, you, naturally, have never heard
- a similar thing - tread protection. Talk to your car a piece of magnesium, and sleep peacefully .. while the magnesium is still there, there will be no rust on your car. At least on those parts that have electrical contact with this .. magnesium

Quote: Vadim237

All metals are susceptible to this problem - a violation of the oxide film - and there hi

- oxide films are also different ..

Damn, Vadim .. that’s why I love you - this is your aplomb .. you are torn into battle where you don’t own the item .. like with Armata .. like with corrosion protection

[Hon]

Quote: VovanFalcon

If only in the form of ARZ, well, there may be a TEC (in large compounds). In other cases, that is, in the field, the aircraft must be operated and be maintainable.

then something is stargazing due to equipment failure, but then the conditions of detention are field, we can say Spartan

[Vovanfalcon]

If only in the form of ARZ, well, there may be a TEC (in large compounds). In other cases, that is, in the field, the aircraft must be operated and be maintainable.

[DarkMatter]

By the way, I don’t understand, do we have all planes, helicopters in the open air? Is it because of this that almost all Migi have become unusable?
Why can not you build very simple hangars? And then all the time in the rain and snow, I think the construction of conventional hangars without bells and whistles will be much more profitable for the budget than the constant deterioration of the condition of aircraft, which will need to be repaired more often (but at least stupidly to install 4 wooden logs with a cardboard roof ).
Explain to the fool

[your1970]

There were underground caponiers of anti-aircraft defense in the Soviet times, if you think that they greatly increased the resource of airplanes, then there is none, the resource was exactly the same as that of those standing in the open wind.
The only thing that spoils from open storage is tires. 10 years of storage until 6 years of operation or until the first cord (MI-8) - but at the same time it’s not a global cost, but the rest is plugs, put on covers and let the birds even if they die from diarrhea, this doesn’t have a serious effect on the condition of the equipment. Question of serviceability - Avia Tech is usually equipped with all the facilities necessary for normal maintenance.

[GSH-18]

Quote: Vladimirets

We would also not be prevented by such structures.

Where necessary, they are.

[Gray brother]

Quote: Vladimirets

We would also not be prevented by such structures.

At least prefabricated.

[VIT101]

Quote: Vladimirets

We would also not be prevented by such structures.

What for? The local "smart guys" on the forum think that it is not necessary. True, these clever men saw a combat plane live only at MAKS, but they did not see how it was serviced in the cold, they dug out of the snow, a cover that was frozen to the planes was torn off in the frost.
The culture of servicing equipment as well as the culture of production is an indicator of the technical level of the country. Creating normal conditions for servicing aircraft is the most important task. First of all, accident-free flight operation depends on it. Unfortunately, in our aviation this is considered a secondary problem. And so it goes. Closed-type concrete arched shelters were built in the Soviet Army in the event of a nuclear strike, but this was done only in the border districts. In the rest - only an embankment from three sides. Border districts remained abroad. Currently, all of our aircraft are in the open. Like a hundred years ago.

[vnedra]

and dust off them, hangars are certainly good, but what about the field conditions, what they will do there!

[HAM]

For "funny" planes, nothing is a pity ... What kind of "field" conditions are we talking about? If they are afraid of rain anyway ..

[Hon]

Quote: HAM

For "funny" planes, nothing is a pity ...

funny, no one came across these planes, their capabilities are judged by the yellow articles, and are absolutely sure that they are not combat-ready. Look in ukrsmi, they write that the tank has armata, the tower is cardboard

[HAM]

Maybe you’re right, but for some reason I’m sure that no one will encounter them. Expensive. Therefore, they teach us that we should be afraid of only one of their kind. (Recent statement by one of the US generals)

[Hon]

for Americans there is no concept expensive, they have a budget like all armies combined

[HAM]

Berezovsky also believed that he was immortal ..

[Hon]

where does Berezovsky? the United States has a very large military budget, and they can afford very expensive purchases, and not only them, equipment is becoming more expensive. Armat’s tank turned out to be not very cheap, I think the T-50 will also cost more than current fighters

[HAM]

Just an analogy .... He was rich, omnipotent, and ended up on a scarf for a couple of dollars.

[your1970]

In the event of a serious conflict (I will make a reservation of a non-nuclear one: otherwise these planes are not needed by anyone for scrap) - the USA will receive a reset of its candy wrappers to itself from ALL sides. Next two ways: 1) to accept - and then mad inflation will gobble up these planes inside the USA, 2) refuse to accept, and then furious inflation on these pieces of paper OUTSIDE the USA will devour everything, including these aircraft from the US allies ..
In general, a similar story already happened - with battleships. Tirpitz, Yamato, etc. - stood frantically (including access to the sea) - and the actual combat action was zero point-ten hell ......

[Leto]

Quote: vnedra

and dust off them

no, it’s better to leave it outside in the rain and snow, so that you can write it off ahead of time ...

[Ros 56]

So the builders will be delighted to take part in the tender, or is it like everywhere else, only for their own?

[Vladimirets]

Quote: Ros 56

or is it like everywhere else, only for your own?

"Lockheed Martin will engage BAE Systems as the main subcontractor for the design and construction of these facilities."

One "kid" will be helped by another.

[forester]

Hangars, go, will also be invisible?

[Grbear]

Beautiful, but somehow toy ...
Others are seriously preparing for a possible "democratization".
China

Swedes

Swedes

And as with the British, one tactical nuclear weapon will get there and there are no three dozen lard.

[Foofighter]

Why TNW? Just shrapnel.

[iliya87]

And when they brought the plane to mind did not say? By 2020, by 2030, or will they even hit this paper plane?

[Hon]

Quote: iliya87

And when they brought the plane to mind did not say? By 2020, by 2030, or will they even hit this paper plane?

you will be personally informed about this as a chief specialist

[iliya87]

To begin with they would tell

[Foofighter]

they will hammer on everything except F-35A (the article is not about him) which also has its own jambs, this one will be left so that the satellites are not offended
F-22 will tear it all the same if some country of the free world rebels against the SGA
F-15 will tear the rest

[Altona]

Apparently the hangars will be crammed with almost factory equipment. For the device has a considerable number of jambs, both in software and constructively. In addition, periodically needs to be updated radar absorbing coating. Such a tender device. A list of kosyachki? Annoy followers?
1) Low bomb load, if used as stealth
2) Dangerous bailout system for pilots lighter than 68 kg
3) The high cost of flight, beyond
4) Errors in target recognition
5) Low maneuverability
6) Speed ​​without afterburner not corresponding to generation 5, low thrust-to-weight ratio
7) Weak landing gear
Well, probably enough for trolling

[Leto]

Quote: Altona

Well, probably enough for trolling

That's right, for "trolling", not for serious analysis ...

[Altona]

Quote: Leto

That's right, for "trolling", not for serious analysis ...

------------------------
What kind of analysis could be for an aircraft with a flight hour of $ 50000? And trolling is that now adherents of "technological weapons" will come, which are simply unthinkable to use in modern warfare because of their high cost, and will argue how "the F-35 looks good in modern combat." What does he look like? What can he do? To gain air superiority? What, a pregnant belly? Overcome a modern air defense system? Well, well, what next to fire a couple of pathetic missiles and be spotted and shot down? Do not make me laugh.

[Hon]

and what modern equipment is cheap to purchase and operate? Maybe the S-400 is an inexpensive toy? if the plane really gives an advantage in the air. then do not care how much it costs an hour of his flight, since an enemy shot down aircraft is becoming more expensive early

[your1970]

"it doesn't matter how much an hour of his flight costs, since the downed enemy plane is more expensive early on"
if he’s ONE with the enemy, then don’t give a damn - and if there are a thousand? And if there are one thousand? 50 lyam bucks a day for 1 flight hours !!! How many hollowed about the relatively weak S. Hussein? Libya? Yugoslavia? days of the week, months .. I even I won’t take the calculator in hand — there will not be enough zeros for a combat operation lasting for example in 100 hours ..
Or do they think that they will pile in bulk and everything will be decided in an hour?

[voyaka uh]

"How much did they hammer the relatively weak S. Hussein?" ///

Not for long.
The offensive began on March 20, 2003, and the capital of Baghdad was taken on April 12. Iraq capitulated.

[saturn.mmm]

Quote: voyaka uh

Not for long.

What happened with Fallujah?

[Hon]

Quote: your1970

"it doesn't matter how much an hour of his flight costs, since the downed enemy plane is more expensive early on"
if he’s ONE with the enemy, then don’t give a damn - and if there are a thousand? And if there are one thousand? 50 lyam bucks a day for 1 flight hours !!! How many hollowed about the relatively weak S. Hussein? Libya? Yugoslavia? days of the week, months .. I even I won’t take the calculator in hand — there will not be enough zeros for a combat operation lasting for example in 100 hours ..
Or do they think that they will pile in bulk and everything will be decided in an hour?

almost five hundred billion dollars in their military budget. do not compete with them financially, the navel will untie

[Leto]

Quote: Altona

What analysis can be for an airplane whose flight hour is $ 50000?

Following your logic, you should obstruct the creators of the MiG-31 whose flight time is an order of magnitude more expensive than the Su-15 flight hour, not to mention the MiG-19.

Quote: Altona

Do not make me laugh.

Your arguments apply equally to any combat vehicle, regardless of the country of manufacture.

[Foofighter]

Do not compare the MiG-31 with this cu ....

[Foofighter]

Do not compare the MiG-31 with this cu ....

[Foofighter]

Seriously, everything is much simpler and consists of three points, two of which are unremovable ...

[voyaka uh]

"In addition, the radio-absorbing coverage periodically needs updating" ///

The T-50 has the same radar absorbing coating - requiring careful inter-flight
service. Otherwise, it deteriorates and the EPR grows. New reality ...

[Foofighter]

Was it the same on the F-117?

[retardu]

Quite a normal load, even for stealth
About pilots generally nonsense. There is the same percentage as on all aircraft. Just for some reason, for f35 the problem was inflated
the cost of the flight as well as f22 eye 25 thousand. What is beyond? Well, the rest is far-fetched

[Mihalich17]

Yards have gone into the development of the F-35, yards will go to hangars!
Let go! )))
So far, the f-35 results are not impressive!
It does not fly, IT ... as you want.
Let the money of their "taxpayers" spend!
But such Karasavtsy-hangars would not hurt us!

[Vadim237]

"It doesn't fly, IT ... the way you want." But on the contrary, the F 35 flies perfectly - it has problems only with electronic equipment.

[Foofighter]

What really chtol? And on the penagon website they write something else!

[Hon]

Quote: FooFighter

What really chtol? And on the penagon website they write something else!

and often do you read the Pentagon sites? or is it the media allegedly linking to the Pentagon website?

[Foofighter]

Yes, do you think you missed something? You can also write in the comments there.

[Cananecat]

Not well, but cho ... a football field, a couple of concert venues, a dozen bars, well, there are 5 cinemas (a bath / sauna is with us) ... I almost forgot ... a complex of psychological rehabilitation for pilots who received psychological trauma after the meeting with planes of "Sukhoi" company there are ... dtsat beds, although not ... perhaps a hundred. Hmm ... have you forgotten anything? Not? ... and well, yes, and a couple more lard to cut. Now that's all.

[rotmistr60]

The cost of the agreements amounted to £ 142 million

Plus the cost of aircraft, plus the cost of maintenance, etc. In short, it will cost the budget of a small country. And another question - will there be airplanes by 2018?

[Foofighter]

will only be brief

[mvg]

Quote: Vladimirets

Quote: VovanFalcon

If only in the form of ARZ, well, there may be a TEC (in large compounds). In other cases, that is, in the field, the aircraft must be operated and be maintainable.

Well, this is understandable, it’s just a pity when expensive equipment is worth it.

Moreover, the cost of hangars is not so great .. comparable to the cost of 2-3 aircraft .. And then yesterday I spoke about a special about Tu-22M3 that out of 25-27 aircraft in the base, in flight there were already 4 pieces .. queues and flew, so that the pilots did their 60-100 hours of flight.

[RuslanNN]

This is certainly good for an exhibition, but hardly suitable for military operations. So in Afghanistan, our turntables fly after any bullet storms, and foreign ones have to disassemble and clean almost a screw. Same thing with airplanes.

[pts-m]

F-35, imposing sybarite and womanizer in NATO circles, demand privileges if only he could justify his ambitions. Russian planes pretend to be simpletons, but they know their service clearly and fulfill all the commanding whims of the command on time.

[Hon]

Quote: PTS-m

F-35, imposing sybarite and womanizer in NATO circles, demand privileges if only he could justify his ambitions. Russian planes pretend to be simpletons, but they know their service clearly and fulfill all the commanding whims of the command on time.

and when our planes pretended to be simpletons, they always demonstrated technologically parity with the enemy and often superiority.

[Mountain shooter]

Hangar storage in any way increases the resource of aircraft and preserves the health and strength of the technical staff. The aircraft has to withstand field service, but "garage storage" is better.
As for the specific hangars for these aircraft, it comes to mind: "My eyes would not look at him." Hide out of sight. Some kind of plane that violates the aesthetic sense.

[Foofighter]

it is, and Senator McCain will be appointed chief fire safety officer

[iliitchitch]

Oh how, suckers-martins will already be engaged in construction, YES SUCH A WAY! Sad of their affairs, it seems, the pepelats did not work. Also take a Boeing with you to the bottom and a general electrician, we do not mind.

[Foofighter]

but they say that robots do not know how to think

[cte power]

construction companies also need to slice a piece of the budget
design is also not the last thing - it costs money

Well, the walls in rhinestones

[aviator1913]

Good aircraft hangars. What is so here. In Russia, hangars are also being built, especially for Bombers and the like; in Crimea, hangars on Belbek and under fighter jets stand.

I consider the laughter at a good engineering structure, which is being built for ease of operation, to increase the service life of the aircraft, to be a sign of a near mind.

Such people in winter in -30 degrees, probably also laugh at people in hats.

[SIMM]

But what, this bullshit can’t even be found in the open air?!?)))
Well, although that's right, all early "this" does not fly, so why take up space ...

[demiurg]

Concrete hangars protect against bombing. Guided by a concrete bomb / rocket, the hangar is likely to break through, but break through only one and there will be no mass knocking out of planes by one bomber breaking through, which threw cluster iron. Mass drank Arab aviation in the war 72 years recall? What is shown in the picture is nonsense of some kind of artist.
The question is, in which news do not stick, everything BAE does, from cartridges to hangars. Supercorporation is direct.

[Vadim237]

BAE Systems is one of the largest defense companies in the world with its weapons, space, materials and much more fields, it employs 120000 people and an annual turnover of 40 billion pounds.

[Verdun]

I understand that 142 million pounds - is it for a start? And then it’s not good when the price of the hangar is behind the price of the plane.

[Russia]

For F-35 in Britain will build large-scale hangars

For the "most terrible" aircraft for the Russian Aerospace Forces - the largest hangars.

Or rather, they continue to "milk the cow" named "F-35B" (to cut the budget).

[Alex von Dorn]

Let the British spend it ... A plane seems so-so. Let them buy it.