24 Feb 21
@wildgrass saidThe F35 has capabilities that no other aircraft has that are based in situational awareness, communications and coordinating allied units. It also provides stealth fighter-bomber capabilities at a fraction of the cost of an F22 or B2. It provides capability; whether this adds to national security is an unknowable question for philosophers.
Can't we call it a failure since it has not contributed necessary added benefit to US national security over previously existing technology?
Again, I'm not a retired war general or anything, but this article cites a lockheed official stating that the F-35 is cool, shiny, powerful etc. but does not do anything in terms of practical tactical advantage against an enemy. htt ...[text shortened]... failure and cut losses. The price tag of this one vehicle is the equivalent of all US student debt.
24 Feb 21
@wildgrass saidSo cancel all US student debt. It's a fraction of what we spend on fancy airplanes after all!
Can't we call it a failure since it has not contributed necessary added benefit to US national security over previously existing technology?
Again, I'm not a retired war general or anything, but this article cites a lockheed official stating that the F-35 is cool, shiny, powerful etc. but does not do anything better than prior tech in terms of practical tactical advantag ...[text shortened]... failure and cut losses. The price tag of this one vehicle is the equivalent of all US student debt.
24 Feb 21
2 edits
@wildgrass said
Can't we call it a failure since it has not contributed necessary added benefit to US national security over previously existing technology?
I am hard pressed to imagine a scenario in which we'd need to use a bunch of these to keep America safe. We have many thousands of other jets that can basically do the same thing and drones do most of the heavy lifting in terms of b ...[text shortened]... failure and cut losses. The price tag of this one vehicle is the equivalent of all US student debt.
I am hard pressed to imagine a scenario in which we'd need to use a bunch of these to keep America safe.
Defending an aircraft carrier from enemies with guided missiles perhaps. F35 stealth capability makes it hard to hit with guided missiles. F18s would get blown out of the air.
24 Feb 21
@athousandyoung saidThe point of an aircraft carrier is to store and move aircrafts. So, the logic of needing the aircrafts to defend the carrier is circular.I am hard pressed to imagine a scenario in which we'd need to use a bunch of these to keep America safe.
Defending an aircraft carrier from enemies with guided missiles perhaps. F35 stealth capability makes it hard to hit with guided missiles. F18s would get blown out of the air.
[youtube Binkov F35 defending]P-M9jA1INk8[/youtube]
[youtube Binkov F35 attacking]xjS8j2PWtK4[/youtube]
25 Feb 21
@wildgrass saidThey were useful when Japan blew up Pearl Harbor. If you are an isolationist just say so. Was WW2 in Europe good for national security?
The point of an aircraft carrier is to store and move aircrafts. So, the logic of needing the aircrafts to defend the carrier is circular.