F-35: Stealth Fighter Review Doesn't Go Far Enough, Says Expert

Posted: 04/ 9/2012 4:02 pm Updated: 04/ 9/2012 8:10 pm

OTTAWA - The Canadian government is not going far enough in its review and oversight of the F-35 and it should examine what the stealth fighter can and cannot do, says an expert who's tracked the controversial program.

Winslow Wheeler, of the Washington-based Centre for Defence Information, says the debate following last week's auditor general report needs to move beyond the eye-popping cost, muddied procurement process and what cabinet ministers knew — or didn't know.

"It needs serious and objective people to look at it and to come up with fact-filled findings that translate into conclusions and recommendations, rather than vague, fuzzy-worded auditor reports and high-octane politician statements," Wheeler said in an interview Monday.

"Your opposition parties seem to be acting like typically weak politicians, crying foul and demanding resignations knowing that not much is going to happen. I'm not sure where all of this is going other than adding to the volume level of Canadian politics."

In its response to auditor general Michael Ferguson's inaugural report, the Harper government last week committed to specifically reviewing the acquisition and sustainment costs of the F-35.

It also said, among other things, the Defence Department will provide "technical briefs as needed on performance schedule and cost" to the new secretariat that will oversee the replacement of the air force's aging CF-18s.

But Wheeler questioned whether the military, which was accused in Ferguson's report of overselling the merits of the plane, is capable of delivering an impartial assessment.

No one in either Canada or the U.S. is asking what they're getting for the billions of dollars they're about to spend and whether the aircraft will perform as promised, he said.

"Even if this flying piano works, it will still be a gigantic disappointment in terms of performance," said Wheeler, who's testified before Parliament on the F-35 and spent years as an analyst at the U.S. General Accounting Office.

Specifically, he says an ongoing, independent analysis should challenge the manufacturer's "glitzy" claims on things such as the term fifth-generation aircraft, which he describes as slick marketing.

Tough questions need to be asked about the aircraft's actual stealth capability because there are certain types of radar, already in existence, that can detect the F-35, said Wheeler.

Other questions need to be asked about the aircraft's ability to defend itself from air-to-air missiles fired at a distance and how it performs as a fighter.

"These are all very basic questions that neither your country, nor mine has looked into," he said.

Last week, the Pentagon released a Selected Acquisition Report for the Joint Strike Fighter and it suggests operational testing and evaluation of the F-35 will not be completed now until 2019.

"We won't know what (kind of aircraft) we have until after that testing and the laundry list of fixes is in and we can cost them out," said Wheeler.

A former head of the air force, retired lieutenant-general Ken Pennie, said all new aircraft go through teething pains.

"Seems to me the problems of performance on F-35 are relatively minor and not much different than any other complex aircraft at this stage of development," said Pennie, who was chief of air staff between 2003 and 2005. "I'm not sure there is much to audit until it gets out of the development cycle and we know more."

And even if the research is conducted, he said the "issue of costs is so highly charged nobody will really listen to the facts."

Wheeler said waiting until 2019 to evaluate the plane would be a disaster for the Royal Canadian Air Force because the current fleet of CF-18s only have enough airframe life to take them into the early 2020's.

The country's top military commander, Gen. Walt Natynczyk, gave the plane a vote of confidence on Monday.

"This is a research and development project that has come a long way," Natynczyk said while attending a ceremony in Ottawa marking the 95th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge. "It is flying and it will have all of the tools that our men and women need."

Loading Slideshow...
  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    FIIn this file photo taken on July 14, 2011 and released by U.S. Air Force, a USAF F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter (JSF) aircraft soars over Destin, Fla., before landing at its new home at Eglin Air Force Base. Japan selected the Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth fighter Tuesday, Dec. 20, 2011, to replace aging jets in its air force and bolster its defense capability amid regional uncertainty. (AP Photo/U.S. Air Force, Staff Sgt. Joely Santiago)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    A F-35 Lightning II sits on stage during the United Kingdom F-35 Lightning II delivery ceremony on July 19, 2012 at Lockheed Martin Corporation in Fort Worth, Texas. The ceremony marked the first international delivery of an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to a partner nation. (Photo by Tom Pennington/Getty Images)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    (Photo by Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    Plane models stand outside the Lockheed Martin Corporation during the United Kingdom F-35 Lightning II Delivery Ceremony on July 19, 2012 in Fort Worth, Texas. The ceremony marked the first international delivery of an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to a partner nation. (Photo by Tom Pennington/Getty Images)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jet sits in front the entrance of the Asian Aerospace 2004 show in Singapore 24 February 2004. The Asia Pacific offers one of the world's strongest prospects for defence-related spending, US aerospace giant Lockheed Martin said Tuesday as it expressed confidence in remaining a major supplier to the region's governments (AFP PHOTO/ROSLAN RAHMAN)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    (AFP PHOTO/CARL DE SOUZA)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    A Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lighning II fighter jet sits on the tarmac for static display at the Singapore Airshow in Singapore on February 12, 2012. Boeing's much-delayed 787 Dreamliner is set to star at the Singapore Airshow this week where companies touting private jets and defence hardware to the Asian market will also be out in force. (ROSLAN RAHMAN/AFP/Getty Images)

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    (ROSLAN RAHMAN/AFP/Getty Images)

  • F35 JSF Take Off

  • F-35A Flight with External Stores

    On Feb. 16, 2012, the first external weapons test mission was flown by an F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) aircraft at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. The F-35A is designed to carry up to 18000 pounds on 10 weapon stations featuring four weapon stations inside two weapon bays, for maximum stealth capability, and an additional three weapon stations on each wing.

  • F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

    IN AIR, NAVAL AIR STATION PATUXENT RIVER, MD - FEBRUARY 11: (EDITORS NOTE: Image has been received by U.S. Military prior to transmission) In this image released by the U.S. Navy courtesy of Lockheed Martin, the U.S. Navy variant of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the F-35C, conducts a test flight February 11, 2011 over the Chesapeake Bay. Lt. Cmdr. Eric 'Magic' Buus flew the F-35C for two hours, checking instruments that will measure structural loads on the airframe during flight maneuvers. The F-35C is distinct from the F-35A and F-35B variants with larger wing surfaces and reinforced landing gear for greater control when operating in the demanding carrier take-off and landing environment. (Photo by U.S. Navy photo courtesy Lockheed Martin via Getty Images)

  • F-35 First Ship Landing

    Courtesy: NAVAIR/JSF Program/Lockheed Martin

  • F35 Hovering

  • F-35 Flight Test Highlights

    Highlights of F-35 flight testing at NAS Patuxent River, Md., NAS Fort Worth Joint Reserve Base, and Edwards AFB, Calif.

  • F-35 Performs First Night Flight

    The first night flight in the history of the Lockheed Martin F-35 program was completed on Jan. 19, 2012 in the skies above Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. Piloted by Lockheed Martin Test Pilot Mark Ward, AF-6, an F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variant, launched at 5:05 pm PST and landed after sunset at 6:22 pm

  • F-35 Airstart Testing

    An F-35 test pilot talks about airstart testing at Edwards AFB, Calif., in early 2012.

  • F35 Air Show

FOLLOW CANADA POLITICS

OTTAWA - The Canadian government is not going far enough in its review and oversight of the F-35 and it should examine what the stealth fighter can and cannot do, says an expert who's tracked the cont...
OTTAWA - The Canadian government is not going far enough in its review and oversight of the F-35 and it should examine what the stealth fighter can and cannot do, says an expert who's tracked the cont...
Filed by Christian Cotroneo  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 42
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
11:00 AM on 04/10/2012
So if we don't have the evidence that this jet will do what its marketing says, why don't we go for jets that has already prove that they are worth what we are going to pay for ? Avec des > on arrive à Paris, mais avec des >, on reste là !
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Whistlejackett
Hey stop doing that
03:15 AM on 04/10/2012
Interesting that Australia is soon to take delivery of 14F35's soon for training, with a total of 100 on order. Canada a much larger country not taking any orders for training with a total of 65. This brings up many questions.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Taylor Jay
I don't align myself with any political party.
03:09 AM on 04/10/2012
nobody realizes that this is our defence for world war 3 when it starts...

i think since were selling oil to china, they better hook us some jets. There far better than the f-35s that's our best bet.
photo
albertarick
These are questions for wise men with skinny arms
01:07 PM on 04/10/2012
That's right trust our soldiers lives with good old Chinese reliability. Ever wonder why parts for your everything don't last or work the way they used to.
photo
SiameseTrainer
...we are Sia..mese if you don't please..
02:04 AM on 04/10/2012
Why are we committed to buying this "ghost fighter" again, I forget? No one in the US or Canada knows how much it is ultimately going to cost. No one in the US or Canada knows whether it will do what it is supposed to do now, let alone whether it will be competitive in 2020. And no one will know either of these fairly important things until 2019 when they might start to work the bugs out and think about actual production. KARAP! What is it with CONS and LIBS and buying the highest priced garbage on the market.? The Swedish Grippen is in the market now, it is about half of the "projected" cost and its actual performance is equal to the "promised" performance of this American ephemera, and it is capable of being kitted out with all of the American weaponry now, and it is designed to defend areas in the Northern Hemisphere. Check it out; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJQKCUjcslM. Lets see some real fiscal responsibility and not more "I'll scratch your back"
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:19 AM on 04/10/2012
Good point - Canada should be making its own planes. (Avro Arrow etc)
If Sweden can do it - why not us ? (...Well ok....all those as Stevie Cameron defined as "On the Take," could be holding us back a bit....etc...)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:27 AM on 04/10/2012
(There's nothing like a few hundred thousand in cash)
photo
SiameseTrainer
...we are Sia..mese if you don't please..
02:35 AM on 04/10/2012
Don't even get me started on the Arrow Mr. Another colossal Con sell out and screw up!
07:59 AM on 04/10/2012
And if they wanted a really good deal they could probably purchase Mig29`s from the Russians for about half of that price! and they probably have an upgraded version of that by now
Rantibus
Cogito, Ergo Rant
01:53 AM on 04/10/2012
"Seems to me the problems of performance on F-35 are relatively minor "

Of course not - you're not going to fly it .They're not if you're the one in it in a combat situation.

"issue of costs is so highly charged nobody will really listen to the facts."

And the fact is that the US cost per unit is now between $197 to $230 million depending on which of the three models you choose. Do you honestly think the price is going to go down the farther the project goes into cost over-runs?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:03 AM on 04/10/2012
How many 'combat situations' is Canada going to be in?

Who's going to be attacking us and why ? (Show work)
Rantibus
Cogito, Ergo Rant
04:36 PM on 04/10/2012
For the "work" you'll have to talk to CSIS, CSE and Military Intelligence. You might recall the RCAF flew CAP in the first Gulf war and although we have seen combat on the ground in Bosnia and Afghanistan, there's no guarantee, the political climate being what it is, that a future exigency might require the use of air support. It's not a question of who may or may not attack us - it's what our politicians allow themselves to be dragged into.
And planes still do crash in non-combat incidents. The F-35 has a lot of issues, but bottom line is that if anyone goes down in one, it isn't going to be the execrable Defense Minister.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CreepyThinMan
More dapper than Don Draper.
01:32 AM on 04/10/2012
For get the teeth, where's the nose hair clippers?!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:50 AM on 04/10/2012
Are you people shiiiiillls ? (Or just Canadian parliamentarians?)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
piceaglauca
The picture says it all....
01:19 AM on 04/10/2012
This is what one American thinks of Canadian politics and it is probably very true of many more. We really need them meddling in our domestic affairs. Even Pinnochio 's nose wasn't as long but he was a liar.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:48 AM on 04/10/2012
And your point is ?
photo
albertarick
These are questions for wise men with skinny arms
01:17 PM on 04/10/2012
That, American interference in Canadian domestic decision making has almost always been for their gain, not ours. Therefore it is not welcome.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:04 AM on 04/10/2012
Test Time People.
Who are we planning to kill with these new planes exactly ? (Terror?) (Is Halloween going to be 'busy' ?)

Who exactly is trying to kill us ? (and why ? Show work) (Obviously include the Gr8 parliamentarian debate on reasons for Canadians being killed in Afghanistan - Oh right - there was no debate..'Rode the six hundred.')

Ever heard of the "military industrial complex" ? (Big words - so look up)

Ever heard of Smedley Butler ? (Research context of this comment - Barf at today's world)

Obviously Canadian politicians have flunked these basic questions. We deserve better.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ginta California
02:02 AM on 04/10/2012
Who are we planning on killing? Aparently are pilots with that junky aircraft!
Who exactly is trying to kill us? Are military industrial complex with massive debt!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:56 PM on 04/09/2012
In actual fact, the only one calling for resiginations is Bob Rae. And I have been watching QP and the NDP and Mulcair are in fine form on this. Mulcair even said he was holding back on calling for anyone's resigination without knowing more. And the Defence critic for the OO has been all over this.

What the so called expert really mans is "darn, the Libs aren't handling this very well". Typical spin. Sorry, the Libs aren't the OO, the NDP is, Mulcair is Oppostion Leader, and he'll get to the bottom on it the way a resonable Oppostion Leader and his party is supposed to. Period.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Doogs62
To see by faith is to shut the eye of reason
11:25 PM on 04/09/2012
"This is a research and development project that has come a long way," Natynczyk said while attending a ceremony in Ottawa marking the 95th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge. "It is flying and it will have all of the tools that our men and women need."

Based on what criteria? How well suited will it be in 4 years or 8 years when it's actually in full production and operational? Until the DND states clearly what real world criteria is required and the actual capabilities the aircraft will have I would say these comments by Natynczyk are short-sighted.

The Canadian Forces are in desperate need of a reset and until our state of readiness is at an acceptable level the purchase of jets are not a priority. We are a peace keeping force not a combat force and first strike capabilities are not a prime requirement at this time. Let's make sure our ground forces are capable of fulfilling their mandate and the Air Force is capable of supporting them before we buy toys for the fighter mafia.
Rantibus
Cogito, Ergo Rant
01:55 AM on 04/10/2012
The last time Canadian pilots flew CAP was in the first Gulf war in 1991. We need air interdiction as part of our national defense force, but a stealth aircraft - and this one's far from being "stealthy" in any way, shape or form - is only a necessary attribute for ground attack.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aesops
Appearances often are deceiving
11:17 PM on 04/09/2012
The operational testing on the F-35 will not be completed until 2019??!! By the time this fighter is operational (assuming it can even become operational) it will be edging toward obsolescence...There was a time in aerospace design that competition kept fighter program costs reasonably high and failures in design were disposed of quickley. Now execution failures are strung along for decades before the aircraft are even in use and by then the technology is outdated. From the F-117 to the V-22 Osprey to the F-22, this is simply corporate welfare for a consolidated US aerospace industry.

We will never fight a war with Russia and win. Our only need for these aircraft is presence and some low level of deterrence. The Saab Gripen, Dassault Rafale, and Eurofighter are all more than a match for Russian and other BRIC nations fighter aircraft.

For Canada, the key need is a multipurpose fighter with range - since our country is massive. On this score the F-35 is an abject failure. It's range is approx 2,000 km. The Eurofighter and Rafale both have ferry ranges of 3,300+. Let's pick a cheaper, operationally proven fighter that we can upgrade over time rather than a $25bn bet on an aircraft that may never be ready.
11:34 PM on 04/09/2012
You're correct, but it's even worse than your description describes. Actually all manned fighter jets are pretty much obsolete. The only reason the U.S. military-industrial complex still orders them by the gross is that the profits margins are so obscenely large, and that's what military spending is really about. The next war will be fought with high-performance missiles -- at which Russia and China excel and the U.S. lags behind -- and with drones and attack helicopters. And the F-22 and F-35 are so notoriously prone to mechanical failure that the war probably would be over before they could get out of the maintenance hangars. I can't imagine why anyone would want to buy those things when the updated F-18s and F-15s could better carry out the limited role of jet fighters in the next major war.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Doogs62
To see by faith is to shut the eye of reason
11:45 PM on 04/09/2012
Exactly! The UAV/UCAV will be the way of the future and we are in a technological and manufacturing ideal to develop and build our own systems. $25B would be much better spent in creating an environment conducive to rebuilding our own defence industry. We certainly have the talent and capabilities to excel at this field and be a player in global development of such systems (UAV as opposed to UCAV wouldn't want to suffer through another ARROW situation).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aesops
Appearances often are deceiving
11:52 PM on 04/09/2012
Yeah exactly. The age of manned fighters is coming to an end. Unfortunately our procurement process has started in a transition period when no unmanned fighter can really play an air superiority role. But it's coming, and when you look at the Chinese anti-ship missile that has a huge range, the dynamics of real war are changing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Doogs62
To see by faith is to shut the eye of reason
11:35 PM on 04/09/2012
Excellent post! The one thing I will say is the Eurofighter is not for sale at this time to any countries that didn't invest in development costs. That's not to say they wouldn't make an exception for us as Canadians. I think if we were to show interest they may be willing to come to an agreement.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aesops
Appearances often are deceiving
11:46 PM on 04/09/2012
Thanks for the info - I remember the consortium, but was not aware that it was not for external export. I mean all of these fighters plus the F/A-18 Super Hornet are possible contenders, and are way cheaper. It's annoying that the news can't detail that clearly and only deal in he said/she said.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:51 PM on 04/09/2012
Unfortunately, much like the States, it seems our politicians read from the same playbook.
Beginning to see Broadbent`s concern about moving to the centre`` represented by Thomas Mulcair. Let alone Pat Martin`s loony pleas to join the Liberals.
08:10 PM on 04/09/2012
Why does the article above include video clips primarily featuring F-35B, short-take off and vertical-landing (STOVL) variant an aircraft Canada is NOT buying? The RCAF is to be equipped with the F-35A, conventional take off and landing (CTOL) variant.
It the Huffington Post editorial staff has such a poor understanding of the story they are presenting (or incompetent fact checking) how are we to trust them to accurate with the rest of the story??

It would be really nice if SOMEONE in the media did some work on the story and gave us a unbiased comparison between the kinds of problems the F35 Project is having and other (successful) cutting edge Military systems went through, like lets say the M1 Abrams.

I may be wrong, but I believe partisan politics and media hype aside the development of the F35 is coming along very well. Their are always bumps on the road, I remember call to cancel the Abram because of problems in development.

Please do your job..give the Canadian public ALL the information we need to make informed decisions. Stop being lazy and give us well researched background material not just the biased self serving hype from politicians (on both sides).

We have freedom of the Press, that is a right in this country...the other side of that coin is that the Press has a RESPONIBLITY to provide the information Canadians need to make informed decisions.
08:07 PM on 04/09/2012
The F35 is like the Harper governmet - a wate of money and not good for anything.