One of the things that haunts me about the F-35 is the possibility that the hack of the Joint Strike Fighter program introduced still undiscovered vulnerabilities or revealed information that greatly decreases its effectiveness, which the U.S. would only discover in combat.
I think there was another qui tam, the notes of which i am not locating presently, but i am going from memory, which alleged that Lockheed program managers were deliberately allocating budget over runs long before the project started, between subcontractors. Yes! Read that again! Long before a project had even begun, the gains from overbilling were being parcelled out. I mean...that's the limit!
I suggest that you publish a list of retired 3-stars and 4-stars who have taken well-compensated positions with defense contractors and consultants to the defense establishment. In my experience, the retired lower-ranked officers who take jobs as defense industry project managers cannot help but deferring to their previous commanders.
The outsourcing of work without adequate management controls that DoD did on the F-35 was what the FAA did with Boeing on the 737 Max leading to tragic deaths. The moral hazard that arises when suppliers inspect their own work or manage elements of the project beyond design and manufacturing are beyond dispute -- except in Congress.
you haven't read those articles mentioning how, like an Android/Apple smartphone, every sensor on the F-35 "phones home". Any country's war plans become visible to US DoD!
One of the things that haunts me about the F-35 is the possibility that the hack of the Joint Strike Fighter program introduced still undiscovered vulnerabilities or revealed information that greatly decreases its effectiveness, which the U.S. would only discover in combat.
It would be instructional, if you wish to follow up on this post, to have a compendium of Lockheed qui tam suits, and the allegations within to illuminate the techniques. So, for example, there is the "deliberate underbidding" angle: https://bergermontague.com/false-claims-act-court-rules-lockheed-martin-can-be-sued-for-underbidding-on-government-projects/
I think there was another qui tam, the notes of which i am not locating presently, but i am going from memory, which alleged that Lockheed program managers were deliberately allocating budget over runs long before the project started, between subcontractors. Yes! Read that again! Long before a project had even begun, the gains from overbilling were being parcelled out. I mean...that's the limit!
I suggest that you publish a list of retired 3-stars and 4-stars who have taken well-compensated positions with defense contractors and consultants to the defense establishment. In my experience, the retired lower-ranked officers who take jobs as defense industry project managers cannot help but deferring to their previous commanders.
The outsourcing of work without adequate management controls that DoD did on the F-35 was what the FAA did with Boeing on the 737 Max leading to tragic deaths. The moral hazard that arises when suppliers inspect their own work or manage elements of the project beyond design and manufacturing are beyond dispute -- except in Congress.
When American vassals and satraps buy the F-35, in most cases they aren't really given a choice.
Another protection racket.
you haven't read those articles mentioning how, like an Android/Apple smartphone, every sensor on the F-35 "phones home". Any country's war plans become visible to US DoD!