$1,000,000,000,000 Problem: The F-35 Nightmare Just Won't End
The F-35 is still an advanced and capable aircraft that the United States and its allies will absolutely need in a future conflict. If these problems aren’t rectified, then at best the Lightning II is just an expensive target on the ground.
The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is routinely touted as being one of the most capable combat aircraft ever produced. It is arguably the most widely produced fifth-generation multirole fighter—with more than 1,000 of the stealth aircraft delivered to operators around the world.
In addition, it is combat-proven and to date, not a single Lightning II has been shot down.
By all accounts, the F-35 is a success, and yet, it has more than its share of detractors and vocal critics. The cost of the system—more than $1 trillion over the course of its lifetime—has been a common complaint, but according to a government watchdog, the high price tag is just the tip of the iceberg.
The Washington-based Project on Government Oversight (POGO) obtained a Pentagon document via a Freedom of Information Act request that highlighted ongoing issues with the F-35’s reliability, maintainability, and readiness. These are issues that Greg Williams, the director of the POGO Center for Defense Information, said need to be addressed by the incoming Trump administration.
Not a Reliable Aircraft
At the center of the F-35 Lightning II’s problems is its availability. The aircraft simply has not been as reliable and not at the availability rates the U.S. military requires.
“The F-35’s reliability and availability challenges are well known and longstanding, and common to other high-tech combat aircraft,” POGO warned. POGO cited reports that while the Department of Defense (DoD) had previously directed that combat aircraft have mission capable rates of 80% by the end of fiscal year 2019, the rate was set to only 70% for the Lightning II.
Yet, the best rate any of the F-35 variants were able to achieve in testing was a mission-capable rate of just 62%, far below any other combat aircraft.
“Overall, the F-35 failed to meet all but one of its availability, reliability, and maintainability requirements,” POGO emphasized.
Not Where It Is Needed Most
Another major concern surrounding the F-35 is its ability to be readily deployed. Training exercises with NATO member Finland earlier this fall highlighted how the fifth-generation fighter can operate from austere locations, including remote airbases, and even be serviced on a highway.
Yet, the untold part of the story is what is needed to support such operations where the aircraft could be sortied to strike enemy targets, return, re-arm, and do it again—instead of flying thousands of miles round-trip. To be combat effective, the F-35 will need to be forward deployed near its intended targets.
“The Air Force plans to do this by flying their support equipment to forward locations in big cargo planes like the C-17. The Marines’ plan is to deploy them on amphibious assault ships. The Navy will get the F-35 to the front lines by deploying them on enormous supercarriers like the Nimitz and Ford CVN-class ships,” the POGO report noted.
This “logistics footprint” will include the equipment, supplies, and even maintainers on the ground.
POGO cited the F-35 testing office’s report, which warned this is far from a simple proposition:
“The logistics footprint for land-based deployments exceeds the requirement by about two times the number of C-17 loads (mostly due to the size of support equipment). The F-35B did not meet the logistics footprint for LHD/LHA6-class ship-based deployments (it met the weight, but did not meet the volume requirements), while the F-35C did meet the logistics footprint for CVN-class ship-based deployments.”
The Air Force may simply not have enough time or planes to get all of the F-35’s gear, ordnance, fuel, etc. where it needs to be quickly enough—and that is even if the Lightning II was ready for action. The situation with the USMC isn’t much better.
“For Marine F-35Bs, not being able to fit the required support equipment on an amphibious assault ship presents an even more serious problem. It may mean they can’t be deployed to the intended amphibious assault ships at all. They will either have to put to sea with less support equipment, likely making their availability even worse, or they’ll have to take away space from other mission-critical equipment carried on those ships,” the watchdog added.
Fortunately, the U.S. Navy with its massive nuclear-powered supercarriers doesn’t face the same troubles. The floating air bases have everything the F-35 will need to accomplish its mission.
More Woes for the F-35
The POGO report further said issues such as the F-35’s stealth capabilities haven’t been fully tested, and its maintenance issues should be addressed; the gun in the F-35A model also continues to have problems.
Taken together, these are shortcomings that lawmakers—and the incoming administration—need to address. The F-35 is still an advanced and capable aircraft that the United States and its allies will absolutely need in a future conflict. If these problems aren’t rectified, then at best the Lightning II is just an expensive target on the ground.
Author Experience and Expertise: Peter Suciu
Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer. He has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers, and websites with over 3,200 published pieces over a twenty-year career in journalism. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity, politics, and international affairs. Peter is also a Contributing Writer for Forbes and Clearance Jobs. You can follow him on Twitter: @PeterSuciu. You can email the author: [email protected].
Image Credit: Creative Commons and/or Shutterstock.