3 ms·

If you really need three (or even two) JF-17s to counter one F-35, that makes the F-35 seem like a pretty good deal to me. That means you have to maintain and

If you really need three (or even two) JF-17s to counter one F-35, that makes the F-35 seem like a pretty good deal to me. That means you have to maintain and store 1/3 as many jets, train 1/3 as many pilots, burn 1/3 the fuel. Those are not insignificant costs to having an air force, and skilled pilots are a very limited resource.

RcouF1uZ4gsC 8y ago
> and skilled pilots are a very limited resource. This gets under-appreciated. One of the big reasons the Battle of Midway was such a turning point, wasn't mainly the destruction of ships, but the loss of so many well-trained Japanese carrier pilots. Over time, the American advantage in trained carrier pilots paid very huge dividends: 1) Because of better pilots, the American carriers were at an advantage over Japanese carriers. 2) Because there were already a large cadre of trained carrier pilots already, the US pilot schools could afford to spend more time training the student pilots before they ever got into combat. In Japan, the carrier pilots were rushed out as as fast as possible to meet the demand.
obmelvin 8y ago
And on top of that, if you read what pilots have to say about the F-35 [1], the flight systems are powerful enough that they enhance a pilots ability so less skilled pilots are able to pull of particular maneuvers. 1 - https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/f-35-faces-most-critical-test-180971734/ https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/f-35-faces-mos... (was posted here in the past couple days)