3 ms·

The Truth About the Useless F-35 (2015) [video]

25 points by rfreytag 10y ago

slater 10y ago
"With the axe about to fall on military spending" oh, those heady days.... :(
valuearb 10y ago
It's not useless, it's gonna feed a lot of military contractors and their families for the next 20 years.
- PopsiclePete 10y ago
  So is paying 5000 people to dig holes in the dessert and another 5000 to later fill in those holes. I lived through something similar to that in Eastern Europe in the 1990's. Spoiler alert: doesn't end well.
  - Unklejoe 10y ago
    ...yet a large number of people here seem to support a UBI. I'm not saying I agree with wasting money, but I feel like this very same argument usually gets shunned when it comes up in UBI debates. Maybe shunned isn't the right word...perhaps "less well received". I also don't mean to imply that you support a UBI.
    - tdb7893 10y ago
      I'm not sure how this is relevant to UBI. I thought UBI was supposed to simplify welfare issues and would have nothing to do with military contracts
    - marcosdumay 10y ago
      People receiving UBI still have time to work on useful stuff. That makes it completely different from the keynesianist digging and covering of holes.
    - saiya-jin 10y ago
      you won't find many supporters of UBI in eastern europe countries, at least not among employed population. we've been through some idealistic crap back there and then that looked great on the paper, but failed due to human nature... as always
  - informatimago 10y ago
    Indeed! Imagine if instead, they've paid a universal basic income to everybody with that money, and people, including those engineers were free to work on useful stuff!
threeseed 10y ago
These claims had been debunked many times back in 2015 and it really isn't relevant at all in 2017. The fact is that the F-35 has seen a lot of improvements in the recent block releases and is shaping up to be the central part of the military strategy going forward. People keep thinking the F-35 is supposed to be a fighter jet when it isn't. That's what the F-22 is for. F-35 is designed to silently collect information about potential targets and relay it to planes that are flying behind.
- dingaling 10y ago
  It is indeed less of a dedicated fighter and more of a jack-of-all trades like the old Phantom II was[0]. And suffers from the same problem of being shoehorned into the F-for-fighter series. EFA-35 or even M-35 for multmission would have been more accurate. [0] in fact the weight, size, thrust and payload are all on-par with the F-4E version except the back-seater has been replaced by computers.
caycep 10y ago
I've been hearing a lot about the F-35's inferior kinematics, but its all been hearsay. I think it is reasonable to assume it is inferior to the F-16, but I think the big question is - how do the new information-based tech and the new strategies hold up in the real world? i.e., is the sacrifice in kinematics worth the gain the decreased detection, sensor fusion, etc? The other question, I think is - how well does the supercruise make up for the F-35's deficiencies? The rough balance equation in my mind is: F-35 - designed to be able to supercruise to the area where needed quicker than current gen aircraft and deliver payload/weaponry (air to air, air to ground, etc) and get out, while integrated to the DoD's battle network. They have sacrificed/are not designed for a dogfight (F-16's area of expertise) as a trade off to achieve this
exabrial 10y ago
Could have been a good plane... They should have focused on reuse of developed systems instead of a one-size-fits-none platform.

25 points by rfreytag 10y ago

slater 10y ago

"With the axe about to fall on military spending" oh, those heady days.... :(

valuearb 10y ago

It's not useless, it's gonna feed a lot of military contractors and their families for the next 20 years.

PopsiclePete 10y ago
So is paying 5000 people to dig holes in the dessert and another 5000 to later fill in those holes. I lived through something similar to that in Eastern Europe in the 1990's. Spoiler alert: doesn't end well.
- Unklejoe 10y ago
  ...yet a large number of people here seem to support a UBI. I'm not saying I agree with wasting money, but I feel like this very same argument usually gets shunned when it comes up in UBI debates. Maybe shunned isn't the right word...perhaps "less well received". I also don't mean to imply that you support a UBI.
  - tdb7893 10y ago
    I'm not sure how this is relevant to UBI. I thought UBI was supposed to simplify welfare issues and would have nothing to do with military contracts
  - marcosdumay 10y ago
    People receiving UBI still have time to work on useful stuff. That makes it completely different from the keynesianist digging and covering of holes.
  - saiya-jin 10y ago
    you won't find many supporters of UBI in eastern europe countries, at least not among employed population. we've been through some idealistic crap back there and then that looked great on the paper, but failed due to human nature... as always
- informatimago 10y ago
  Indeed! Imagine if instead, they've paid a universal basic income to everybody with that money, and people, including those engineers were free to work on useful stuff!

threeseed 10y ago

These claims had been debunked many times back in 2015 and it really isn't relevant at all in 2017. The fact is that the F-35 has seen a lot of improvements in the recent block releases and is shaping up to be the central part of the military strategy going forward. People keep thinking the F-35 is supposed to be a fighter jet when it isn't. That's what the F-22 is for. F-35 is designed to silently collect information about potential targets and relay it to planes that are flying behind.

dingaling 10y ago
It is indeed less of a dedicated fighter and more of a jack-of-all trades like the old Phantom II was[0]. And suffers from the same problem of being shoehorned into the F-for-fighter series. EFA-35 or even M-35 for multmission would have been more accurate. [0] in fact the weight, size, thrust and payload are all on-par with the F-4E version except the back-seater has been replaced by computers.

caycep 10y ago

I've been hearing a lot about the F-35's inferior kinematics, but its all been hearsay. I think it is reasonable to assume it is inferior to the F-16, but I think the big question is - how do the new information-based tech and the new strategies hold up in the real world? i.e., is the sacrifice in kinematics worth the gain the decreased detection, sensor fusion, etc? The other question, I think is - how well does the supercruise make up for the F-35's deficiencies? The rough balance equation in my mind is: F-35 - designed to be able to supercruise to the area where needed quicker than current gen aircraft and deliver payload/weaponry (air to air, air to ground, etc) and get out, while integrated to the DoD's battle network. They have sacrificed/are not designed for a dogfight (F-16's area of expertise) as a trade off to achieve this

exabrial 10y ago

Could have been a good plane... They should have focused on reuse of developed systems instead of a one-size-fits-none platform.