Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

Scorpion82 said:
Some bribery here and there, some general "lawyer" with no proper understanding of the subject matter at hand... There can be many reasons. Contracts of that magnitude often include inflation clauses, as there are many external factors that can dramatically impact the price. Just consider the current energy costs which dramatically impacts manufacture, shipping and travel costs. Things like these must not be ignored and aren't entirely predictable, and the longer such a project runs, the more uncertainities are in there. People are then shocked about price increases, they should check their own paycheck and living expanses balance. They'll notice they haven't forseen this or that and may need to adapt here and there. For such complex programs it's even worse.
Click to expand...
I never spoke of bribes. As for the rest, everyone knows it (even if the "lawyers" aspect of the current case has only very recently come to light).

But the fact is that, when announcing the competition results, Swiss decision-makers stated that the cost of 36 Swiss F-35s would be 15.5 billion Swiss francs over 30 years—"2 billion less" than the cheapest of the other three contenders (Rafale, Typhoon, Super Hornet)—and that the price was "fixed" and "legally binding" for the US side. That was false...
 
Last edited:
Deltafan said:
I never spoke of bribes. As for the rest, everyone knows it (even if the "lawyers" aspect of the current case has only very recently come to light).
Click to expand...

That was my insertion, I didn't accuse you for talking about bribery.

But the fact is that, when announcing the competition results, Swiss decision-makers stated that the cost of 36 Swiss F-35s would be 15.5 billion Swiss francs over 30 years—"2 billion less" than the cheapest of the other three contenders (Rafale, Typhoon, Super Hornet)—and that the price was "fixed" and "legally binding" for the US side. That was false...
Click to expand...

Apparently, surprising news that we are lied to by politicians/officials.
 
JetBrain said:
https://news.bgov.com/federal-contracting/pentagon-blocks-watchdogs-review-of-costly-f-35-program
Click to expand...

Basically..........

The Pentagon has blocked the public release of a major annual Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the F-35 program. In July 2026, the Department of Defence designated the GAO's yearly assessment of the F-35's production and modernization efforts as "Controlled Unclassified Information" (CUI), keeping the full document from reaching the public for the first time in over 20 years.

The figures cited regarding readiness are accurate: Full Mission Capable Rate: A separate public GAO report released in June 2026 confirmed that the F-35 fleet's full mission capable rate had plummeted to 25% (exactly 1 in 4 aircraft). This means only a quarter of the jets are capable of performing all of their assigned missions at any given time, down from 38% in 2021

The percentage of time the aircraft can perform at least one tasked mission dropped from 67% to 44% over the same period.

$2 trillion. Calls from pundits and citizens to heavily penalize or even "nationalize" parts of Lockheed Martin stem from growing frustration over these readiness declines, chronic spare parts shortages, and the fact that the Pentagon paid hundreds of millions in contractor performance incentives that failed to yield results.

Regards,
 
Halcyon66 said:
. Calls from pundits and citizens to heavily penalize or even "nationalize" parts of Lockheed Martin stem from growing frustration over these readiness declines, chronic spare parts shortages, and the fact that the Pentagon paid hundreds of millions in contractor performance incentives that failed to yield results.
Click to expand...

It looks like LM's senior management needs a boot up its' collective arse.
 
so if it a controlled UNclassified information document, how does it differ from a classified document, in practice? Where and how can one obtain it or read it? Or is it off limits to individuals without a certain clearance level? (But in that case, it should be labeled as classfied, and not unclassified?)
 
totoro said:
so if it a controlled UNclassified information document, how does it differ from a classified document, in practice? Where and how can one obtain it or read it? Or is it off limits to individuals without a certain clearance level? (But in that case, it should be labeled as classfied, and not unclassified?)
Click to expand...
It doesn't. "Controlled Unclassified Information" is just the post truth way of saying some infos will not be public, thus classified.
Because labelling it as classified would look bad, ie one doesn't want to show some embarrassing datas, but also doesn't want it to be too obvious .
 
totoro said:
so if it a controlled UNclassified information document, how does it differ from a classified document, in practice? Where and how can one obtain it or read it? Or is it off limits to individuals without a certain clearance level? (But in that case, it should be labeled as classfied, and not unclassified?)
Click to expand...
CUI in this context would probably be export-controlled technical information compared to national security information like operations or intelligence that would be classified under the Confidential/Secret/Top Secret system.
 
NMaude said:
Wouldn't such information be classified as "Confidential"?
Click to expand...
No that is a different classification.

The U.S. government uses the term Controlled Unclassified Information to refer to information that is not Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret, but the dissemination of which is still restricted.[12]

Reasons for such restrictions can include export controls, privacy regulations, court orders, and ongoing criminal investigations, as well as national security.
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States
 
galgot said:
It doesn't. "Controlled Unclassified Information" is just the post truth way of saying some infos will not be public, thus classified.
Because labelling it as classified would look bad, ie one doesn't want to show some embarrassing datas, but also doesn't want it to be too obvious .
Click to expand...
totoro said:
so if it a controlled UNclassified information document, how does it differ from a classified document, in practice? Where and how can one obtain it or read it? Or is it off limits to individuals without a certain clearance level? (But in that case, it should be labeled as classfied, and not unclassified?)
Click to expand...

As a former military that had to deal with CUI all the time, the difference between that and classified information is that CUI is not classified but both are protected.

The main difference is how they are handled. Classified information is stricter, requiring very specific methods of delivery, storage, and destruction. Who can view it are on a need to know basis. CUI is generally more flexibile and does not require security clearance. If you're an employee, you can more easily see CUI just lying about inside some office space or desk.

The information they contain tend to be different. A lot of CUI include employee information, or pricing from bidders, etc. Classified info has three levels of information, but all three contain vital information that could cause damage to national security, like say, how a certain weapon system will be used for the defense of an installation.
 
helmutkohl said:
As a former military that had to deal with CUI all the time, the difference between that and classified information is that CUI is not classified but both are protected.

The main difference is how they are handled. Classified information is stricter, requiring very specific methods of delivery, storage, and destruction. Who can view it are on a need to know basis. CUI is generally more flexibile and does not require security clearance. If you're an employee, you can more easily see CUI just lying about inside some office space or desk.

The information they contain tend to be different. A lot of CUI include employee information, or pricing from bidders, etc. Classified info has three levels of information, but all three contain vital information that could cause damage to national security, like say, how a certain weapon system will be used for the defense of an installation.
Click to expand...
Thanks for these precisions. it's less "secret" than classified then.
Out of interest, checked out a bit :
Additionally, the misuse of CUI can include labeling information as CUI to avoid public scrutiny or Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, effectively hiding potentially embarrassing or inconvenient information from public view.
Click to expand...
So even though not classified as such, it can still be used to hide embarrassing stuff to the public.
 
galgot said:
So even though not classified as such, it can still be used to hide embarrassing stuff to the public.
Click to expand...

Just like A400M, NH90 and now Rafale availability rates (although, for the latter, this might have changed - Question)...
 
totoro said:
so if it a controlled UNclassified information document, how does it differ from a classified document, in practice? Where and how can one obtain it or read it? Or is it off limits to individuals without a certain clearance level? (But in that case, it should be labeled as classfied, and not unclassified?)
Click to expand...
That gets a bit complex.

Generally, classified stuff needs to be kept locked up, usually double locked: kept in a locked safe inside a locked building (or a building constantly manned). A person would have to have a clearance and a Need to Know to be able to see it. Just because I had an appropriate clearance from the Navy didn't mean I had the need to know some USAF stuff.


Controlled information is effectively "Business Confidential," more or less everyone in the business could be assumed to have the need to know it, but it's not supposed to be released to the general public and there's no background check beyond a resume/references review. IIRC CUI is just kept inside the locked building, and out of the public spaces of that building.
 
In 39 years with a government contractor, I never heard of CUI. However, it seem similar to FOUO- For Official Use Only. Useful within your area of operation, not to be released to the public. Unless you were a Washington level official authorized leaker….
 
F119Doctor said:
In 39 years with a government contractor, I never heard of CUI. However, it seem similar to FOUO- For Official Use Only. Useful within your area of operation, not to be released to the public. Unless you were a Washington level official authorized leaker….
Click to expand...
CUI replaced FOUO in the late 2010s.
 
F119Doctor said:
In 39 years with a government contractor, I never heard of CUI. However, it seem similar to FOUO- For Official Use Only. Useful within your area of operation, not to be released to the public. Unless you were a Washington level official authorized leaker….
Click to expand...
Obama made CIU official with Executive Order 13556. It essentially wrapped up a whole bunch of different low classification schemes into a much smaller bucket.
 
Ozair said:
It essentially wrapped up a whole bunch of different low classification schemes into a much smaller bucket.
Click to expand...

So basically simplifying and reducing the associated paperwork?
 
Last edited:
Halcyon66 said:
Air Force fighter pilots fall below sortie minimum to be deemed combat ready

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/...low-sortie-minimum-to-be-deemed-combat-ready/

Another issue to add to the mix.

Regards,
Click to expand...
While I agree aircrew need to fly more the reality is it is money that is impacting this. There is simply not enough spares being acquired as well as not enough depot support in the O&M budgets with the personnel to actually return aircraft to serviceable condition. Squadrons deployed on ops are also sucking the spare parts and so the rest of the fleet suffers.

Also why would a comparison between Desert Storm and Epic Fury on the number of aircraft be relevant.
Venable compared that figure to Desert Storm, saying the number of aircraft is about half of what the Air Force alone used in the Gulf War operation.

“If you look schematically at the whole picture, 325 aircraft, combat-coded fighter aircraft, is half of what we had in Desert Storm, and it’s about all we can muster today,” Venable said.
Click to expand...
The capability of aircraft in Desert Strom is vastly different to what the USAF can field today. I would be very surprised if we transplanted those same 325 aircraft back into 1991 that they weren't able to accomplish the same result.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom