• Tankiedesantski [he/him]
    ·
    7 months ago

    How long before F-35 apologists start claiming that being able to fly is not a key combat role?

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
      ·
      7 months ago

      I pop in to the Chapo discord and there's always at least one guy who is die-hard "Aktuly the F-35 is a really good program and the naysayers are just in the bag for the F-22, so you shouldn't listen to them."

      Incidentally, I've also heard all the critics of Boeing are being paid by Airbus.

        • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
          ·
          7 months ago

          There's inevitably a centrist take that amounts to "There's a secret shadowy organization behind the news article telling you the F-35 is bad, and its intentions are even worse!"

          But the end result is a pedantic argument over some functionally unknowable question of which overpriced, badly engineered Pentagon vanity project is the biggest waste of money. Less MIC leg-humping and more "Um, aktuly, you've fallen for Pentagon 11D chess!" contrarianness.

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]
        ·
        7 months ago

        I'm in the bag for the damn F-16. It should have never been abandoned, they should have just built hundreds and hundreds of the things with robot brains.

        • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Okay but 16 is less than half of 35

          More seriously, they do have F-16s with robot brains. They're called Predators and they're terrifying, particularly when employed inside a defensive perimeter.

          But they're not great at power projection. F-22s/35s are built for extended range.