4 ms·

These sorts of advertisements make no sense for me. Who is the buyer? Some senator on some appropriations committee? Maybe some nato equivalent? And they need a

by asdff 9mo ago

These sorts of advertisements make no sense for me. Who is the buyer? Some senator on some appropriations committee? Maybe some nato equivalent? And they need a 10 second flyover during a superbowl to be reminded of the existence of the f-35 program?

bigyabai 9mo ago
Again, 99.999% of the viewers aren't really in the position to finance a $120 million fighter jet. However, the ~0.001% that are in that position will probably be watching, and feel FOMO for not having the iPhone of strike fighters. Even if it only moves the needle on 2-3 sales every decade, the ROI is probably great.
- asdff 9mo ago
  I'm just saying, that random saudi prince or whatever with $120 million and the green light to buy military hardware is probably well aware of the f35 already. Plus only plane nerds in the know are going to know what the hell just flew over. For everyone else its a military jet shaped jet same as the rest.
  - bigyabai 9mo ago
    That ticks both the boxes. Plane nerds are blogging online, and the Saudi princes are doing napkin math in the VIP booth. 3,000lbs of avgas is only a few thousand dollars, you can run a formation flight for less than $15,000 plus maintenance. Cynically speaking, that's a bit of a steal when you've got the private sector paying millions for a 30-second ad spot.
wyldfire 9mo ago
> Who is the buyer? Who do you know who is currently sitting in a seat of massive power in the US Government, watches TV and says things like, "I need to have that! Why do we not have that already? It will project strength, and all the best governments project strength at every opportunity!"
- asdff 9mo ago
  Pretty sure trump knows about the f35 already
  - wyldfire 9mo ago
    "How many of those did we order? Let's get some more. Super-size me!"
    - pseudohadamard 9mo ago
      "And they should be called Trump Jets, and have gold trim on them! And be on a memecoin with my name on it".
godelski 9mo ago
> Who is the buyer? You are With your tax money. With your votes. They're there not to sell you a plane directly but to make you happy with the money spent. To make you excited about the machines. Think of it as a political ad, not a sales ad
- jerkstate 9mo ago
  Is there a way an American can vote to not buy F-35s?
  - cheonn638 9mo ago
    [dead]
  - bigyabai 9mo ago
    You can try; the plane is already made and exported, and for certain customers (eg. the US Navy) they're going to struggle to find anything that replaces it. The best way to invest "against" the F-35 is to put money in companies like Embraer and Saab, which have put up a strong fight on the export market.
    - jerkstate 9mo ago
      Why? What makes an expensive murder machine manufactured in Brazil or Sweden more morally acceptable than a murder machine manufactured in the USA?
      - bigyabai 9mo ago
        In case it wasn't clear, my answer to your original question is "no" with a nice bit of set-dressing to help you feel better. FWIW, the Super Tucano and Gripen are more "morally acceptable" in that they are not power-gap level planes. The F-35 was basically designed from the ground-up to molest denied airspace and violate every rule of diplomatic exchange. The Super Tucano is useless outside COIN operations, and the Gripen is decidedly a defensive fighter and not a strike fighter.
  - 9mo ago
HillRat 9mo ago
If you see it on the DC metro, the buyer is a Hill staffer or a Pentagon action officer; if you see it at the Super Bowl, the buyer is you (assuming you're an American taxpayer), to help maintain a certain amount of public political capital when Congress starts looking at whether they want to fully fund TR-3 and Block 4. Cutting a military program popularly seen as successful is a whole lot harder than cutting one popularly seen as a wasteful failure, and doesn't garner the politician behind it nearly as much positive PR.

by asdff 9mo ago

bigyabai 9mo ago

Again, 99.999% of the viewers aren't really in the position to finance a $120 million fighter jet. However, the ~0.001% that are in that position will probably be watching, and feel FOMO for not having the iPhone of strike fighters. Even if it only moves the needle on 2-3 sales every decade, the ROI is probably great.

asdff 9mo ago
I'm just saying, that random saudi prince or whatever with $120 million and the green light to buy military hardware is probably well aware of the f35 already. Plus only plane nerds in the know are going to know what the hell just flew over. For everyone else its a military jet shaped jet same as the rest.
- bigyabai 9mo ago
  That ticks both the boxes. Plane nerds are blogging online, and the Saudi princes are doing napkin math in the VIP booth. 3,000lbs of avgas is only a few thousand dollars, you can run a formation flight for less than $15,000 plus maintenance. Cynically speaking, that's a bit of a steal when you've got the private sector paying millions for a 30-second ad spot.

wyldfire 9mo ago

> Who is the buyer? Who do you know who is currently sitting in a seat of massive power in the US Government, watches TV and says things like, "I need to have that! Why do we not have that already? It will project strength, and all the best governments project strength at every opportunity!"

asdff 9mo ago
Pretty sure trump knows about the f35 already
- wyldfire 9mo ago
  "How many of those did we order? Let's get some more. Super-size me!"
  - pseudohadamard 9mo ago
    "And they should be called Trump Jets, and have gold trim on them! And be on a memecoin with my name on it".

godelski 9mo ago

> Who is the buyer? You are With your tax money. With your votes. They're there not to sell you a plane directly but to make you happy with the money spent. To make you excited about the machines. Think of it as a political ad, not a sales ad

jerkstate 9mo ago
Is there a way an American can vote to not buy F-35s?
- cheonn638 9mo ago
  [dead]
- bigyabai 9mo ago
  You can try; the plane is already made and exported, and for certain customers (eg. the US Navy) they're going to struggle to find anything that replaces it. The best way to invest "against" the F-35 is to put money in companies like Embraer and Saab, which have put up a strong fight on the export market.
  - jerkstate 9mo ago
    Why? What makes an expensive murder machine manufactured in Brazil or Sweden more morally acceptable than a murder machine manufactured in the USA?
    - bigyabai 9mo ago
      In case it wasn't clear, my answer to your original question is "no" with a nice bit of set-dressing to help you feel better. FWIW, the Super Tucano and Gripen are more "morally acceptable" in that they are not power-gap level planes. The F-35 was basically designed from the ground-up to molest denied airspace and violate every rule of diplomatic exchange. The Super Tucano is useless outside COIN operations, and the Gripen is decidedly a defensive fighter and not a strike fighter.
- 9mo ago

HillRat 9mo ago

If you see it on the DC metro, the buyer is a Hill staffer or a Pentagon action officer; if you see it at the Super Bowl, the buyer is you (assuming you're an American taxpayer), to help maintain a certain amount of public political capital when Congress starts looking at whether they want to fully fund TR-3 and Block 4. Cutting a military program popularly seen as successful is a whole lot harder than cutting one popularly seen as a wasteful failure, and doesn't garner the politician behind it nearly as much positive PR.