Marcus Aurelius: Boeing Co's F-15 Silent Eagle and the Eurofighter Typhoon, built by EADS, Finmeccanica SpA and BAE Systems Plc, are also competing for the contractThe F-15 Silent Eagle should be the plane we're buying instead of the F-35. It has better payload, better range, better performance, a much lower unit cost, and is built on an airframe that has never been downed in air-to-air combat.
TuteTibiImperes: MythDragon: [www.airforce-technology.com image 620x371]Who needs anything else?That thing is more like a flying tank than a fighter plane, but they are very cool.
Enemabag Jones: michiganftl,The M-16 always worked fine (ok, maybe a few small additions, like a forward assist helped), it was just some stupid army guys who saw 'outer space parts' and believed that it never had to be cleaned. Once they issued cleaning kits (pretty quickly, because, ya know, it's not cheap to train a grunt and then have him die) they worked fine.I don't claim to have the 1000 yard stare here, but when the enemy leaves weapons by dead soldiers that is a strong indication they are junk, or at least were.I swear I heard a source state that part of the problem was stick powder vs ball power, but don't swear by it.
pkellmey: A stealthy, networked, drone fighter fleet would put most manned fighters to shame. Plus, in total, it would be a less expensive project and not put pilots at risk.
Public Savant: The F-35 is just like the Nazis Tiger tanks - awesome but too complex and expensive.
MythDragon: [www.airforce-technology.com image 620x371]Who needs anything else?
miss diminutive: Can't we just go back to the golden days when gentlemen in fabulous mustaches graced the skies in multiple-wing wicker baskets and threw bricks at one another?
SuperNinjaToad: UNC_Samurai: Part of me thinks that having a standardized cross-service fighter is a little too similar to the standardization of equipment that was attempted under the McNamara DoD.But then again, the M-16 eventually worked, and we're still using variants of it to this day. So maybe in time the F-35 will have been worth it.The M-16 took dozens of years for it to work properly. It also caused thousands of lives because it didn't work properly for the longest time.We can't have that type of a problem with a 5th Gen jet fighter. The risk is just too great!
doglover: Why do we need a new jet fighter?With existing tech, we can just make a kind of phalanx of guided missiles. Maybe one misses. For the price of an F-35, we can just launch 100.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jul 28 2017 09:12:15
Runtime: 0.305 sec (305 ms)