The F-35 joint strike fighter would be cut in a Trump administration, with the businessman and 2016 GOP front-runner saying it doesn’t make sense to spend so much money on a plane that critics say doesn’t work as advertised.
Donald Trump told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt on Thursday that the delayed, over-budget program that has produced planes with glitches has “big problems” and wouldn’t continue if he were commander in chief.
Trump said his decision is based on reviews of test pilots, one of whom wrote recently that the F-35 repeatedly performs worse than the planes its designed to replace.
“I do hear that it’s not very good. I’m hearing that our existing planes are better. And one of the pilots came out of the plane, one of the test pilots, and said this isn’t as good as what we already have,” Trump said. “And to spend billions and billions of dollars on something that maybe isn’t as good …
“They’re saying it doesn’t perform as well as our existing equipment, which is much less expensive. So when I hear that, immediately I say we have to do something, because you know, they’re spending billions. This is a plane, there’s never been anything like it in terms of cost. And how about, you know, we’re retooling with planes that aren’t as good as the ones we have, and the test pilots are amazing people. They know better than anybody, okay, and I think you would accept that.”
The F-35 program includes variants for the Marine Corps, Air Force and Navy, and also has international developmental partners and customers. The fighter program has been plagued by numerous problems from helmet glitches that made pilots air sick to software issues. Most recently, the services discovered that pilots weighing less than 136 pounds could be killed by whiplash if they needed to eject
While the Pentagon works on a solution, lighter weight pilots are restricted from flying the F-35.
Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan, program manager of the F-35, told Congress last week that the U.S. military will not pay for fixes to the ejection seat, but that it could take at least another year before the problem is fixed.
(h/t the Fiscal Times)
