F-35 fighter has become a clumsy white elephant

• Source: Global Times
• [21:57 March 24 2010]
• Comments

GT: Why have the F-35s become so expensive? Are the technical barriers too high, or was there poor financial management? Or were the original requirements simply not reasonable?

Chen: The problems exist in all these aspects. The final reason is that one piece of hardware has been required to perform so many tasks, but the requirements from the air force, navy and marine corps are different.

Under this united criteria, four major indicators were set for the fourth-generation fighter aircraft.

It needed to be stealthy, fly at supersonic speeds, have advanced electronic systems and have a good capability to maneuver in the air.

The US military has often suffered financial losses because of the pursuit of versatility. Because manufacturers in the US are not owned by the state, they are used to producing complicated technology for more profits.

The best way for them to profit is through entirely new models of aircraft, not gradual reform, which drives them into aiming for large-scale integration and producing multi-functional hardware. Another plane, the F-111, initially designed as an "all-round fighter", finally turned out to be useless

GT: Does the US have a tendency to pursue unrealistic security demands?

Chen: The term "security demands" is not accurate, since the US has no problem with security. Can any country attack the US? We can say they are working toward their military requirements, but not security demands, because US behavior has far exceeded the concepts of national defense and security.

The military strategy of the US is an offensive one, which requires their weapons to be equipped to a high standard. They attempt to overwhelm others in military actions.

The original idea of their fourth-generation fighters is to have an aircraft capable of beating any other contender. They put too heavy a burden on it, so the final product has become an oversized monstrosity capable of doing nothing.

GT: What does the US need to do now?

Chen: To ensure new equipment affordable, the emphasis needs to move to audits after the R&D process has started. Audits are also important throughout the process of pre-feasibility studies, R&D, and deployments.

Some large-scale military hardware projects, like the F-35, seem to be nothing more than fishing trips designed to test the waters for new equipment and make as much money as possible.

The original plan held up the F-35 as being less expensive, but that's fallen through. Since the research company wanted to pursue the maximum profit, it is impossible for them to set the price of new generation aircraft at the same level as old ones.

The original price for the F-35 is $50 million. After the F-22 was withdrawn, the price of the F-35 was inevitably pushed higher and higher.

GT: What China can learn from this experience?

Chen: The experience of the F-35 is meaningful to China. Lots of countries are engaged in building fourth-generation fighters. Should we copy the US pattern, or work toward our own needs?

Russia has designed their own fourth-generation fighter, the T-50, which is not exactly the same as the F-35 or F-22. The US requires that their own fighters can be used globally and are equipped with offensive functions.

China, as a developing country, doesn't have the same demands.

What are the demands of China's security environment, and what requirements do these place on military development? China's policy emphasizes national defense, so our military hardware should reflect this.

We mainly focus on the defense of the homeland, and our strategy cannot be entirely passive. So we need offensive capabilities, but not to the same degree as the US.