© Amir Cohen / Reuters
The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) will pay around £80 million ($103 million) more for its F-35s, which have faced widespread criticism due to a number of technical mishaps, undermining their performance in almost every key area.
The UK is purchasing 138 F-35s for use by the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force.
Weapons experts have blasted the MoD's £150 billion order, however, as the aircraft is plagued by an "unbelievably abnormal number of issues."
Paul Sprey, a leading aviation analyst, blasted the costly planes, telling the Times their "maneuverability is appallingly bad."
"It has terrific problems trying to fly fast at low altitude.
"It overheats, and when you detect the overheating, you have to open the bomb bay doors to cool the missiles that are inside," Sprey said.
Another troubling area is the plane's operational software, which remains vulnerable to cyber-attacks and may not be compatible with the Royal Navy ships, which the F-35s are supposed to support in combat.
This is a significant cause for concern, since Britain's new aircraft carrier, HMS Queen Elizabeth, which is supposed to field 36 F-35s, may be unable to receive transmissions from higher-tier planes.
These technical faults compelled the US Department of Defense (DoD) to spend nearly $4 billion to modernize the fighter jets.
As the UK remains a tier-one partner in the F-35 program, it is expected to shoulder a significant portion of these costs.
At the same time, Lockheed Martin, the US-based arms giant, which produces the F-35s, made almost $89 million in profit at the expense of British taxpayers in just three months by repairing the poorly manufactured jets.
Lockheed Chief Financial Officer Bruce Tanner boasted to the Times that his company's profits are likely to increase.
"You're seeing tremendous growth potential in both production and sustainment for the F-35 program," Tanner said.
The total acquisition cost of the F-35 project is almost $400 billion, but the "operating and sustainment costs," which include repairs, boost the overall expense to more than $1 trillion.
Reader Comments
You see, machines and buildings have spirits and the F-35s are depressed over their bad P.R.
Similarly, on 9/11 WTC 1, 2 AND 7 were like brothers, (Papa Larry Silverstein) (#'s 3 - 6 were owned/leased by others.) and even though WTC-7 didn't get hit by a plane,* and though it was the farthest from WTC's 1 & 2, and the least damaged of the seven, that it felt so bad for their deaths, that it collapsed in sympathy.
Above is purest in sarcasm.
R.C.
*Most likely because the passengers on flight 93 DID gain control over the aircraft and it was shot or escorted down and all were killed.
RC
But, the flaw there is the fact of the insiders pulling off all four hits is like winning a quadrifecta. I personally see flight n93 as most likely the fact that Murphy's law applies to all human attempts. If the plan was for NO plane to crash in the building: well, that would be pretty dumb but that appears to be what happened. I'll stick with my theory as more likely.
R.C.
However, if you start noticing carefully, most of the applications and tools we use in our every day
lives come from wars and I'm serious about it...Two examples and I'll finish the post. You don't like the F-35, but a free First Class flight wouldn't be so bad eh ? A second example : Sugar. Ok, who doesn't like ice creams, chocolate and all that ? Who was using chocolate during WW2 ? The allied forces. Who was using candy, sugar in pure form ? The Germans...
People , the military ALWAYS HAS THE BEST EQUIPMENT AND THE BEST INTEL because (sigh) bitter experience has shown us that unless you defend crucial installations like the place you sleep at night bad things happen to put it mildly. Over and out.