Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC-US)   U.S. Military grounds all F-35s, sends them to their hangars without dinner   ( bbc.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, faulty fuel tubes, World War I, North Carolina, expensive weapons programme, F-35, United Kingdom, Fighter aircraft, World War II  
•       •       •

6872 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Oct 2018 at 10:35 AM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2018-10-11 10:27:02 AM  
37 votes:
The F-35 is way too expensive to waste on things like flying.  Too dangerous.
2018-10-11 10:42:41 AM  
29 votes:

Circusdog320: Take off the wheels...add some frickin' lasers...put a little radiation shielding on that puppy and you got yourself the beginnings of SPACE FORCE!


i.pinimg.comView Full Size
2018-10-11 10:34:16 AM  
29 votes:

Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.


I don't understand why your Navy has an Army that has its own Air Force and Navy, while also having their own Air Force.
2018-10-11 10:40:42 AM  
27 votes:

Tr0mBoNe: Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.

I don't understand why your Navy has an Army that has its own Air Force and Navy, while also having their own Air Force.


Confused?  You will be after we add the Space Force to that mix.
2018-10-11 10:42:10 AM  
23 votes:
i.pinimg.comView Full Size
2018-10-11 10:50:29 AM  
22 votes:
People criticize the F-35s trillion dollar cost and its impact on all other Pentagon and civilian programs without acknowledging that an F-35 has successfully flattened one mud hut in Afghanistan.
2018-10-11 10:31:54 AM  
22 votes:
Built FORD tough.
2018-10-11 10:24:49 AM  
21 votes:
Don't forget to get them to undercoat while they're down there checking the fuel lines.

/giggidy
2018-10-11 10:32:39 AM  
19 votes:
Take off the wheels...add some frickin' lasers...put a little radiation shielding on that puppy and you got yourself the beginnings of SPACE FORCE!
2018-10-11 10:42:44 AM  
17 votes:

Tr0mBoNe: Don't forget to get them to undercoat while they're down there checking the fuel lines.

/giggidy


mtbnj.comView Full Size


/you're gonna want that truecoat
2018-10-11 11:23:47 AM  
13 votes:

jaytkay: People criticize the F-35s trillion dollar cost and its impact on all other Pentagon and civilian programs without acknowledging that an F-35 has successfully flattened one mud hut in Afghanistan.


One crashed on top of a mud hut in Afghanistan?
2018-10-11 10:56:58 AM  
13 votes:

jaytkay: People criticize the F-35s trillion dollar cost and its impact on all other Pentagon and civilian programs without acknowledging that an F-35 has successfully flattened one mud hut in Afghanistan.


So much misinformation in this post. The fact of the matter is that the only combat missions flown by an F35 have been by the Israelis, which means they have flattened mud huts in Syria.

The whole of Fark awaits your apology.
2018-10-11 10:52:34 AM  
13 votes:

jaytkay: People criticize the F-35s trillion dollar cost and its impact on all other Pentagon and civilian programs without acknowledging that an F-35 has successfully flattened one mud hut in Afghanistan.


It has yet to be confirmed that the mud hut did not collapse on its own. Nor has it been disproven that Hillary Clinton use to run a pizza shop out of that mud hut.
2018-10-11 11:03:17 AM  
11 votes:
The F35 is a research project.  They wanted to build a plane that was above and beyond what was already available, which means you're going to be pushing into unknown territory.  R&D is super-expensive.  By the time they FINALLY get all the problems worked out it will no longer be cutting edge, but hopefully your engineers gained the knowledge and experience to build the next perpetual R&D money hole.

That sounds trite, but having the lead in R&D is actually quite vital to our national interests and is beneficial to all areas, not just defense.
2018-10-11 10:56:36 AM  
11 votes:

ar393: jaytkay: People criticize the F-35s trillion dollar cost and its impact on all other Pentagon and civilian programs without acknowledging that an F-35 has successfully flattened one mud hut in Afghanistan.

at this point im pretty sure we could have still paid all of those people the same amount of money, given those employees all the same amount of income, all for no work during that time and then not had to have bought the materials....it could have been a no-work/no-show contract that would have saved the country money


Shiat, we could have also paid the guy in the mud hut to tear it down himself
2018-10-11 10:53:04 AM  
11 votes:

phalamir: Marine


MAss Rides INavy Equip​ment
Muscles Are Required, Intelligence Not Essential
2018-10-11 11:04:02 AM  
10 votes:

CarnySaur: NO WIRE HANGARS!!!


Until Roe vs. Wade is repealed.
2018-10-11 01:22:20 PM  
8 votes:
Ah, the F-35.

img.fark.netView Full Size
2018-10-11 12:54:08 PM  
7 votes:
The F35 is a necessary fake airplane to offset the threat of this fake threat:
img.fark.netView Full Size
2018-10-11 12:40:06 PM  
7 votes:

backhand.slap.of.reason: Always so much bullshiat from the liberal media.  True please know that the F-35 is invisible just as Trump said.


img.fark.netView Full Size
2018-10-11 10:49:13 AM  
7 votes:
We're not mad. We're disappointed.
2018-10-11 10:46:26 AM  
7 votes:

Public Call Box: Circusdog320: Take off the wheels...add some frickin' lasers...put a little radiation shielding on that puppy and you got yourself the beginnings of SPACE FORCE!

[i.pinimg.com image 850x531]


Fake news. No True American would serve in a UN military!
2018-10-11 10:36:37 AM  
7 votes:
NO WIRE HANGARS!!!
2018-10-11 02:11:24 PM  
6 votes:
img.fark.netView Full Size
img.fark.netView Full Size

/oblig
2018-10-11 12:08:48 PM  
6 votes:
img.fark.netView Full Size
2018-10-11 12:01:31 PM  
5 votes:

Man with the Red Eyes: Tr0mBoNe: Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.

I don't understand why your Navy has an Army that has its own Air Force and Navy, while also having their own Air Force.

Get this:  our Army has a Navy and an Air Force, too!

[img.fark.net image 412x516]


img.fark.netView Full Size
2018-10-11 12:29:05 PM  
4 votes:

patrick767: I for one am glad we're spending a trillion dollars on the F-35 rather than giving people health care coverage, improving our infrastructure, or some other stupid waste of money. Jets are SO COOL!
/ Highway to the DANGER ZONE! Wooooooooo!


*slaps roof of F-35*
You can kill so many copilots with this baby.
2018-10-11 11:43:57 AM  
4 votes:
The A-10s though, you can't ground them.  They will just sneak out, hunt down their own grub, and hand out with a rowdy crowd behind your back.  That is why the Air Force is trying to kick them out of the family.
2018-10-11 10:56:31 AM  
4 votes:

ar393: jaytkay: People criticize the F-35s trillion dollar cost and its impact on all other Pentagon and civilian programs without acknowledging that an F-35 has successfully flattened one mud hut in Afghanistan.

at this point im pretty sure we could have still paid all of those people the same amount of money, given those employees all the same amount of income, all for no work during that time and then not had to have bought the materials....it could have been a no-work/no-show contract that would have saved the country money


A pilot program for universal income? That sounds dangerously socialist.
2018-10-11 10:46:38 AM  
4 votes:

Tr0mBoNe: Don't forget to get them to undercoat while they're down there checking the fuel lines.

/giggidy


probably all need blinker fluid
2018-10-11 12:13:16 PM  
3 votes:

PlaidJaguar: [img.fark.net image 720x446]


img.fark.netView Full Size
2018-10-11 11:24:00 AM  
3 votes:

phalamir: Tr0mBoNe: Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.

I don't understand why your Navy has an Army that has its own Air Force and Navy, while also having their own Air Force.

Marines exist because people used to actually fight other people on ships - you don't want to have the guys trying to make your ship going put-put to also have to go slashie-slashie.

The Air Force used to be part of the Army.  But the Navy needed planes also to kill other ships.  The Air Force was created because Spureme High Gods of The True Air cannot accept orders from ground- and water-bound peons.  Also, having their own service lets them suck directly from that sweet, sweet Congressional teat.


Plus the Marines have to go get muddy and fight for days at a time. The Navy has no time for that. Not when there are Thai hookers to bang and coffee to drink. So let the Marines go pound ground. The only time a Sailor is gonna get muddy is when he is wrestling a Thai hooker in a bar.
2018-10-11 11:18:37 AM  
3 votes:
How do they know it crashed if it's invisible?
2018-10-11 10:58:53 AM  
3 votes:

phalamir: ar393: jaytkay: People criticize the F-35s trillion dollar cost and its impact on all other Pentagon and civilian programs without acknowledging that an F-35 has successfully flattened one mud hut in Afghanistan.

at this point im pretty sure we could have still paid all of those people the same amount of money, given those employees all the same amount of income, all for no work during that time and then not had to have bought the materials....it could have been a no-work/no-show contract that would have saved the country money

Shiat, we could have also paid the guy in the mud hut to tear it down himself


That's called foreign aid money.
2018-10-11 10:41:01 AM  
3 votes:

NewportBarGuy: Built FORD tough.


Sorry to say, more like a '76 Dodge Aspen/Plymouth Volare.
2018-10-11 03:15:08 PM  
2 votes:

smd31: Only one pic of an A-10 in this thread?!?

Shame!  SHAME!


thechive.files.wordpress.comView Full Size


i.imgur.comView Full Size
2018-10-11 01:22:13 PM  
2 votes:

Gravitationally Challenged: MythDragon: Gravitationally Challenged: adj_m: Public Call Box: Circusdog320: Take off the wheels...add some frickin' lasers...put a little radiation shielding on that puppy and you got yourself the beginnings of SPACE FORCE!

[i.pinimg.com image 850x531]

lol, I like how what looks to be twin giant space cannons are connected directly to one of the rear space thrusters (presumably where the space ammunition would be stored/loaded).

This picture checks out.

I also like how a space craft needs wings and what look like air intakes. LOL indeed!

They also do atmospheric flight, which as you know, kinda requires wings, and you'll want air intakes so you're not using up your oxidizer.

That presumes they will go into the atmosphere. Better get some heat shielding or some serious reverse thrusters on that thing. Otherwise it's going to be a really cool streak in the sky.


Can't we just retrofit the Yamato like they did in Star Blazers?
2018-10-11 01:14:33 PM  
2 votes:

PlaidJaguar: [img.fark.net image 720x446]


agrees.
img.fark.netView Full Size
2018-10-11 01:11:55 PM  
2 votes:

Lt. Cheese Weasel: The F35 is a necessary fake airplane to offset the threat of this fake threat:
[img.fark.net image 850x566]


S:AAB did it first:

i.pinimg.comView Full Size


There was an obscure article when the show came out that had pictures someone captured of the above ground prop for the show and claimed it was a new super-secret military jet fighter.
2018-10-11 12:49:03 PM  
2 votes:

NOLAhd: Explodo: The F35 is a research project.  They wanted to build a plane that was above and beyond what was already available, which means you're going to be pushing into unknown territory.  R&D is super-expensive.  By the time they FINALLY get all the problems worked out it will no longer be cutting edge, but hopefully your engineers gained the knowledge and experience to build the next perpetual R&D money hole.

That sounds trite, but having the lead in R&D is actually quite vital to our national interests and is beneficial to all areas, not just defense.

Swell. Let's have the stockholders pick up the tab for that R&D rather than the taxpayers


cah.utexas.eduView Full Size
2018-10-11 12:27:23 PM  
2 votes:

jso2897: The more bumptious blather I hear from Fark's military gearheads, the more I am convinced that this thing is a f**king turkey.


Just ask Les Nessman how well turkeys fly.
2018-10-11 12:25:38 PM  
2 votes:
I for one am glad we're spending a trillion dollars on the F-35 rather than giving people health care coverage, improving our infrastructure, or some other stupid waste of money. Jets are SO COOL!
/ Highway to the DANGER ZONE! Wooooooooo!
2018-10-11 12:18:40 PM  
2 votes:

phalamir: Tr0mBoNe: Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.

I don't understand why your Navy has an Army that has its own Air Force and Navy, while also having their own Air Force.

Marines exist because people used to actually fight other people on ships - you don't want to have the guys trying to make your ship going put-put to also have to go slashie-slashie.

The Air Force used to be part of the Army.  But the Navy needed planes also to kill other ships.  The Air Force was created because Spureme High Gods of The True Air cannot accept orders from ground- and water-bound peons.  Also, having their own service lets them suck directly from that sweet, sweet Congressional teat.


You sure it's the teat they're sucking from? I heard things about sailors...
2018-10-11 11:31:41 AM  
2 votes:

Gravitationally Challenged: adj_m: Public Call Box: Circusdog320: Take off the wheels...add some frickin' lasers...put a little radiation shielding on that puppy and you got yourself the beginnings of SPACE FORCE!

[i.pinimg.com image 850x531]

lol, I like how what looks to be twin giant space cannons are connected directly to one of the rear space thrusters (presumably where the space ammunition would be stored/loaded).

This picture checks out.

I also like how a space craft needs wings and what look like air intakes. LOL indeed!


scontent-atl3-1.cdninstagram.comView Full Size
Well, footpads and thrusters...
2018-10-11 11:24:32 AM  
2 votes:

Sharksfan: The thing that I don't get is let's say we got into a full blown shooting war somewhere and started to lose F-35's.  What's the plan? How the heck are we going to pay to crank out another 100 or 1000 of them?


You sound like the guys who, during the 70's and 80's, complained about the cost of the F-15 and F-16 and a variety of other, hyper expensive weaponry.

Then '91 rolled around and we went into a for reals shooting war against the 4th largest army in the world and the most combat tested Air Force at the time. And all that money we sank into state of the art planes and gear allowed us to absolutely cornhole that enemy with barely any losses.

Thats why you spend a shiat ton of money on new tech. because attrition warfare sucks and its better to expend money and ordnance than lives. Just look at how the US army fared in WW2 before we got aboard THAT clue train.
2018-10-11 11:14:36 AM  
2 votes:

Sharksfan: The thing that I don't get is let's say we got into a full blown shooting war somewhere and started to lose F-35's.  What's the plan? How the heck are we going to pay to crank out another 100 or 1000 of them?


Another way to think of it is like the Protoss spending tons of gas on Void Rays and sending them against Marines.
2018-10-11 11:07:41 AM  
2 votes:

Gaddiel: The F-35 has surely paid for some Lockheed Martin executive to build a lavish summer home. If this is a just universe, the next F-35 to crash will swan dive directly into that summer home.

/I know
//It's not a just universe
///if it was, I wouldn't be farking at work


That's what you do at work?

/changes their Fark color to "WooHoo" hot pink
/  ;-)
2018-10-11 11:00:56 AM  
2 votes:

Tr0mBoNe: Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.

I don't understand why your Navy has an Army that has its own Air Force and Navy, while also having their own Air Force.


it means we dont have to anser no dam foriner questins so shut up
2018-10-11 10:46:11 AM  
2 votes:
Check for Corrosion while you're down there. F35-biggest misuse of taxpayer funds for military purposes EVER. F22 is where its at.
2018-10-11 10:46:02 AM  
2 votes:
"Inspections are to be carried out on faulty fuel tubes."

Well there's your problem right there
2018-10-11 10:45:05 AM  
2 votes:
The F-35 has surely paid for some Lockheed Martin executive to build a lavish summer home. If this is a just universe, the next F-35 to crash will swan dive directly into that summer home.

/I know
//It's not a just universe
///if it was, I wouldn't be farking at work
2018-10-11 10:44:50 AM  
2 votes:
Well it looks like we won't be able to invade Canada after all. I was looking forward to hoarding the poutine.
2018-10-12 03:43:00 PM  
1 vote:
Yeah, that's totally it. The United States Armed Forces and several militaries around the world are all idiots and you're a genius.
2018-10-12 01:12:02 PM  
1 vote:

mjbok: it is nearly impossible to believe that developing three distinct aircraft would not only have been cheaper, the planes themselves would have been better.


Just because you personally have a hard time believing it doesn't mean anything. Show me an example of a set of distinct designs of 5th gen. airplanes that is cheaper than a multi-role platform. There aren't even many  airplanes that do a singular role that perform better than the JSF does at that role.

mjbok: 8 years after the first flight the plane was 7 YEARS behind schedule and 163 billion dollars over budget. This is a plane to replace planes that (by unit cost) are 4 times cheaper and god knows how many times over more reliable.


I will say that the pre-Bogden development was milking the taxpayer shamelessly. Seven years compared to what schedule? Who made a better plane faster? These aren't Toyota Corollas. These are cutting edge military tech to which there is no superior example of speed of delivery. Lockheed might be 7 years behind but Sukhoi is 30 years behind. Probably 2-3x the cost (F-15E v F-35A) and you don't have to ask God how more reliable. It's maybe 80-90% the sortie readiness rate of the previous designs. That's not a huge deal.

Kit Fister: Sorry, man, but the F-35 is a dud, no matter how you try to spin it.


Put your bong down, hippy, man. You're conflating if it was a good use of money and if it does its job well. It might be a solid gold toaster but it makes toast well.

Kit Fister: It's not like we couldn't have selected an airframe that already fills most of the major roles for fighter jets


The major roles are not getting shot down by S-400s so, no, we couldn't have selected an existing airframe. There is no off the shelf gen. 5 airframes to pick from.

And for every picture of an A-10 with battle damage there's a record of a shot down A-10 and a million pointy nose jets that didn't get a bloody nose in the first place. A-10s survivability record is actually quite poor. The USAF coddles the A-10 in mission profile and it gets into trouble anyway. Yes, it makes a good coffee table book to see one landed with holes in it but that isn't the intellectual analysis.
2018-10-12 09:30:40 AM  
1 vote:

Kit Fister: Frederf: I'm an F-35 defender in the sense that I call BS on it not being a capable airplane nor that it was a bad idea to have a joint effort. Software development is about 50% of the procurement cost of such a project and even though parts commonality isn't that great by simple counting, software similarity is important both to save initial costs and to avoid the costs of developing compatibility between different projects (see how much work will have to go into making F-22/JSF interoperable).

A jack of all trades is a master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one." The multirole fighter has been proven to be superior to dedicated task-specific platforms since about 1970. That's just a fact. This opinion that it would be so great that we make 20 designs for 20 mission profiles is demonstrably false.

An important factor in this particular issue is concurrent development which is basically the pain of developing as you go. There are costly mistakes that a design first-build second approach would not have. If that is worth it to have your 2001 design fly sometime before 2031 I don't know but I see the trade off.

I'm not an F-35 defender in the sense that we need to spend this much or invest in defense in this particular way. Apart from more subtle changes in investment, I'm of the firm belief that it is better that more Americans die in a war of their initiation. Over-over-over match military capability is so good that it's bad. Having 100:0 kill ratios is contrary to the saying "it is good that war is so horrible lest we grow too fond of it." Well, it isn't horrible enough and we have grown too fond of it.

My problem with all of this is that they're trying to shoe-horn the design into roles that are so incredibly different with such incredibly different requirements that it makes no sense. It's like expecting someone to be  Surgeon, Veterinarian, and Machinist.

You want a multi-role jet that spans services to handle fighter jobs, bombing jobs, inte ...


lolwut? So youre saying its easier for a base to host and support multiple aircraft configured for hyper specific roles, in this case, hosting both F-15C's and A-10's, to perform a CAS mission package, rather than have a base hosting a single airframe where specific aircraft can be armed for CAP protection and the others CAS work? Because thats how it would work. Instead of having F16's flying top cover, and a package of A-10's carrying PGM to hit ground targets, you'd have F35's configured for A2A flying top cover for F35's configured for strike. The beauty being an airframe lost has minimal impact since any other airframe on the roster can be reconfigured later for any other task. Other than the alternative where an F16 is down for maintenance and now your CAP fleet is seriously hindered.

With close air support now being done with guided munitions, the most important things for a CAS bird now is
-speed of arrival
-sensor suite
-survivability.

The F-35 exceeds the A-10 in all 3 of those because its less likely to get engaged by enemy weapon systems, and the lethality of modern air defenses means that regardless of the planes ability to SURVIVE a hit, getting hit aborts the CAS mission immediately. So the trick is to see which plane is less likely to get hit anyway. or do you think A-10's with a missing wing and fuselage full of 23mm flak holes continue flying around deliving ordnance?
2018-10-12 03:58:43 AM  
1 vote:
Wait, when did they ever leave the ground in the first place?
2018-10-11 08:41:01 PM  
1 vote:

Kit Fister: the voice of raisin: Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.

Simple answer: logisitcs

Some Examples:
Maintenance -
The maintenance that works on the F-35s that the Navy uses can (theoretically) be re-tasked to work on the F-35s that the Air Force uses, and then shift to work on the F-35s that the Marines use.

Training -
1 training program can now cover the majority of pilots in all services, with specialties for carrier landing and/or S/VTOL.

Cheaper (in theory) to provide planes and parts for 1 aircraft (with some extras for B & C variants) than for 5 different aircraft.

Out of curiousity, I'd be curious to see a cost comparison between the F-35 and all of the planes it is supposed to replace.

We've found out time and again that the old saying "jack of all trades, master of none" is 100% true and applicable.

You design equipment to handle specific circumstances and excel at it, and you train men and women to specialize in that kind of work.  Otherwise, you have gear and trained people that can kinda sorta do it all but will get their asses kicked as they catch up to where a specialist would've been.


img.fark.netView Full Size

/Jack of many trades
2018-10-11 08:32:49 PM  
1 vote:
I'm an F-35 defender in the sense that I call BS on it not being a capable airplane nor that it was a bad idea to have a joint effort. Software development is about 50% of the procurement cost of such a project and even though parts commonality isn't that great by simple counting, software similarity is important both to save initial costs and to avoid the costs of developing compatibility between different projects (see how much work will have to go into making F-22/JSF interoperable).

A jack of all trades is a master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one." The multirole fighter has been proven to be superior to dedicated task-specific platforms since about 1970. That's just a fact. This opinion that it would be so great that we make 20 designs for 20 mission profiles is demonstrably false.

An important factor in this particular issue is concurrent development which is basically the pain of developing as you go. There are costly mistakes that a design first-build second approach would not have. If that is worth it to have your 2001 design fly sometime before 2031 I don't know but I see the trade off.

I'm not an F-35 defender in the sense that we need to spend this much or invest in defense in this particular way. Apart from more subtle changes in investment, I'm of the firm belief that it is better that more Americans die in a war of their initiation. Over-over-over match military capability is so good that it's bad. Having 100:0 kill ratios is contrary to the saying "it is good that war is so horrible lest we grow too fond of it." Well, it isn't horrible enough and we have grown too fond of it.
2018-10-11 03:50:41 PM  
1 vote:

jaytkay: Rent Party: The military generally has a higher level of education than the populace as a whole.   You have to be a college graduate to be an officer, and generally you have to have a high school diploma to enlist.

Derp

Most military people are not officers and most Americans are high school graduates.


I'm sorry if facts offend you.  Perhaps you should get some money back on your education.

i.huffpost.comView Full Size
2018-10-11 03:34:35 PM  
1 vote:

FlippityFlap: Explodo: PickleBarrel: Did you really just cite a failure as reason to stop spending money on R&D in a field?   Like...F-35?

Did you JUST forget about that whole Primary, and Secondary shiat that was posted above?

I hear constant circular reasoning from these warmongers and just about any argument for spending for R&D on Military can also be applied to the private sector.

The F35 is a research project.  Research is hard.  In large projects many unforeseen problems arise, sometimes even after they're "released."  It doesn't help that the govt tends to not be extremely concrete in what they want.  Did you know that the military shifts people around every two years?  That means that the guy pushing for a project that takes 3 years to complete will be gone before it's finished...and the new guy might either not share his vision for what is needed or might not even want to spend his budget on it anymore.  Mid-project requirements change!  Everybody loves that!

Dude, shut the hell up. It's a giant piece of shiat, built for a war that is either not going to happen OR be the end of civilization. And it doesn't even work well. I Q/A hardware and software for a $25 Billion/year corporation and these farkers would have been sent packing a decade ago in the real world.


Look, a small but not insignificant portion of the budget is to ensure that there are people like Explodo out there to promote and defend the honor of the F-35. Don't give him a hard time, in this economy, you gotta take whatever jobs you can.
2018-10-11 03:22:38 PM  
1 vote:

DanInKansas: MythDragon: phalamir: Tr0mBoNe: Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.

I don't understand why your Navy has an Army that has its own Air Force and Navy, while also having their own Air Force.

Marines exist because people used to actually fight other people on ships - you don't want to have the guys trying to make your ship going put-put to also have to go slashie-slashie.

The Air Force used to be part of the Army.  But the Navy needed planes also to kill other ships.  The Air Force was created because Spureme High Gods of The True Air cannot accept orders from ground- and water-bound peons.  Also, having their own service lets them suck directly from that sweet, sweet Congressional teat.

Plus the Marines have to go get muddy and fight for days at a time. The Navy has no time for that. Not when there are Thai hookers to bang and coffee to drink. So let the Marines go pound ground. The only time a Sailor is gonna get muddy is when he is wrestling a Thai hooker in a bar.

When sailors die in combat, it's a combination of being burned to death while being crushed by twisting metal.

Though sometimes they just get crushed by an incoming wall of water.


Or diabetes from all of the donuts. Uniforms come in the following sizes: small, medium, large, extra-large, and Master Chief.
2018-10-11 03:15:15 PM  
1 vote:

Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.


Simple answer: logisitcs

Some Examples:
Maintenance -
The maintenance that works on the F-35s that the Navy uses can (theoretically) be re-tasked to work on the F-35s that the Air Force uses, and then shift to work on the F-35s that the Marines use.

Training -
1 training program can now cover the majority of pilots in all services, with specialties for carrier landing and/or S/VTOL.

Cheaper (in theory) to provide planes and parts for 1 aircraft (with some extras for B & C variants) than for 5 different aircraft.

Out of curiousity, I'd be curious to see a cost comparison between the F-35 and all of the planes it is supposed to replace.
2018-10-11 03:13:22 PM  
1 vote:

FarkKnuckleDos: jaytkay: People criticize the F-35s trillion dollar cost and its impact on all other Pentagon and civilian programs without acknowledging that an F-35 has successfully flattened one mud hut in Afghanistan.

One crashed on top of a mud hut in Afghanistan?


No. The pilot's ejection sear did.
2018-10-11 03:03:02 PM  
1 vote:

chewd: Explodo: We could spend all that money on having the healthiest, most well-educated, happiest citizenry in the world.

Educated healthy happy citizens dont vote GOP tho. The GOP needs angry ignoramuses to buy into their BS.

The conspiracy theorist in me tends to think that the only reason we have such a huge military budget in the first place is to keep us from having a huge education budget. Its a LOT easier to manipulate people that are uneducated & desperate.


The military generally has a higher level of education than the populace as a whole.   You have to be a college graduate to be an officer, and generally you have to have a high school diploma to enlist.   The military actively encourages it's members to pursue education while serving.  The Air Force even runs a community college.

The reason we have a huge military is because after WWII, we did not draw down the military like we had after every other war because of the scary Commies.   Our military might has historically been based on our ability to convert massive industrial capabilities to wartime efforts.    We don't have that any more.
2018-10-11 02:48:39 PM  
1 vote:
Too bad they can't ground their EA-18s. Sick of that shiat.
2018-10-11 01:52:56 PM  
1 vote:

Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.


I remember back in the '80s someone lamented that if current trends continued eventually the USAF would consist of a single aircraft costing a trillion dollar$.
2018-10-11 01:32:41 PM  
1 vote:

Explodo: The F35 is a research project.


Yeah - research into how many dollars broke hillbillies are willing to shovel into the pockets of the military industrial complex because some lying dotard told them to.
2018-10-11 01:30:33 PM  
1 vote:

Gaddiel: The F-35 has surely paid for some Lockheed Martin executive to build a lavish summer home. If this is a just universe, the next F-35 to crash will swan dive directly into that summer home.

/I know
//It's not a just universe
///if it was, I wouldn't be farking at work


Where the hell do you work? Are you a pronstar?
2018-10-11 01:29:07 PM  
1 vote:
Dinner for planes...
img.fark.netView Full Size
2018-10-11 01:26:45 PM  
1 vote:

Gravitationally Challenged: adj_m: Public Call Box: Circusdog320: Take off the wheels...add some frickin' lasers...put a little radiation shielding on that puppy and you got yourself the beginnings of SPACE FORCE!

[i.pinimg.com image 850x531]

lol, I like how what looks to be twin giant space cannons are connected directly to one of the rear space thrusters (presumably where the space ammunition would be stored/loaded).

This picture checks out.

I also like how a space craft needs wings and what look like air intakes. LOL indeed!


Wait until you hear the pew pew pew.
2018-10-11 01:19:11 PM  
1 vote:

Explodo: Explodo: PickleBarrel: Explodo: NOLAhd: Explodo: The F35 is a research project.  They wanted to build a plane that was above and beyond what was already available, which means you're going to be pushing into unknown territory.  R&D is super-expensive.  By the time they FINALLY get all the problems worked out it will no longer be cutting edge, but hopefully your engineers gained the knowledge and experience to build the next perpetual R&D money hole.

That sounds trite, but having the lead in R&D is actually quite vital to our national interests and is beneficial to all areas, not just defense.

Swell. Let's have the stockholders pick up the tab for that R&D rather than the taxpayers

There's this funny thing about defense work...there's generally no non-defense market for the primary thing created.  In order to create that primary thing you may have to pioneer some technology that has crossover value, but that research might not have been done without trying to solve the problems created by making the primary thing.  Due to the lack of market outside of defense, without someone asking for the product, the associated research would generally not be done.

Sure, the end goal is to have self-sustaining companies that can make their way in a non-government-funded marketplace, but if a company only makes specialized technology that's only useful to defense situations then that company will be perpetually on the government dime.  Losing their expertise is bad for national security.  The military knows this.  Most high-level government people know this.

You'd be really surprised how many people in the US are actually employed due to defense spending.

That's circular reasoning: Look at all the people employed in Blah sector when the government spends money in the Blah sector.  Therefore the government should continue spending money in the Blah sector so those jobs won't be lost!

The last time the govt dumped a lot of money into non-defense was....the CCC?  Look at all the communa ...

Or look at it like this:  We could spend all that money on having the healthiest, most well-educated, happiest citizenry in the world.  It could be a real swords-into-plowshares utopia.  That wouldn't stop another country with more advanced weapons and angry, bitter citizens from coming over and killing us until we submit to their angry/bitter way of life.  It's sad but true.

I would greatly prefer the happy/healthy/educated scenario.


Nukes. We have nukes.
2018-10-11 12:56:49 PM  
1 vote:

Gravitationally Challenged: adj_m: Public Call Box: Circusdog320: Take off the wheels...add some frickin' lasers...put a little radiation shielding on that puppy and you got yourself the beginnings of SPACE FORCE!

[i.pinimg.com image 850x531]

lol, I like how what looks to be twin giant space cannons are connected directly to one of the rear space thrusters (presumably where the space ammunition would be stored/loaded).

This picture checks out.

I also like how a space craft needs wings and what look like air intakes. LOL indeed!


well you clearly haven't played Kerbal Space Program with cheaty modded parts. It's a regular plane, AND a spaceship, and a car, and a boat. Definitely vertical takeoff.
2018-10-11 12:52:24 PM  
1 vote:

Hospitaller: phalamir: ar393: phalamir: Marine

My Ass Rides In Navy Equipment
Muscles Are Required, Intelligence Not Essential

Intelligence Negated Entirely

What if I told you that the Marines require higher ASVAB test scores for electronics and mechanical MOS than the navy?


I guess that makes sense why the US Navy has a hard time identifying civilian airliners from war planes and shoots them down...even when not in a war with that country.
2018-10-11 12:45:13 PM  
1 vote:
None of this is true
2018-10-11 12:39:20 PM  
1 vote:

punkwrestler: Kit Fister: So, we're once again recognizing that the F35 is a massively expensive boondoggle that *still* can't make it out of the hangar?

Wasn't their a Fark military guy who said in the last military equipment thread that were were all wrong about the F-35 being a piece of crap?


Yeah.  He was bragging on the 100,000 hours of flight time it  had racked up.   For a plane that first flew 18 years ago.
2018-10-11 12:37:45 PM  
1 vote:

phalamir: ar393: phalamir: Marine

My Ass Rides In Navy Equipment
Muscles Are Required, Intelligence Not Essential

Intelligence Negated Entirely


What if I told you that the Marines require higher ASVAB test scores for electronics and mechanical MOS than the navy?
2018-10-11 12:37:31 PM  
1 vote:

MythDragon: Plus the Marines have to go get muddy and fight for days at a time. The Navy has no time for that. Not when there are Thai hookers to bang and coffee to drink. So let the Marines go pound ground. The only time a Sailor is gonna get muddy is when he is wrestling a Thai hooker in a bar.


Exactly.  Someone has to charge that machine gun nest, and it sure as fark ain't gonna be me.
2018-10-11 12:34:50 PM  
1 vote:
It promises to be the centrepiece of US air power for decades to come.

Looks pretty, takes up space, and is ultimately a waste of money.  Centerpiece indeed.  Should've gotten the side piece or made peace.  We'll be making payments for the next century.
2018-10-11 12:29:15 PM  
1 vote:
img.fark.netView Full Size
Its all ball bearings these days
2018-10-11 12:28:24 PM  
1 vote:
Always so much bullshiat from the liberal media.  True please know that the F-35 is invisible just as Trump said.
2018-10-11 12:25:07 PM  
1 vote:
bing.comView Full Size

Maybe give them cool paint job while you're at it.
2018-10-11 12:20:01 PM  
1 vote:

Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.


SHHH!!! Think of the Military Industrial complex and the retired Generals! They too need to keep making money after their illustrious careers!

Seriously, this is Pentagon Wars all over again. The F-35 was supposed to be filler Data Link fighters meant to augment the F-22 with some stealth. It wasn't supposed to be this all in one fighter. this idea to have a reduced force capable of doing it all for special missions is dumb. People don't seem to forget that our enemies Russia and China still have big conventional forces. the idea we would never fight militaries like that ever again was a dumb short sighted mistake.

I hate it when Eisenhower was right.
2018-10-11 12:04:13 PM  
1 vote:

PickleBarrel: Did you really just cite a failure as reason to stop spending money on R&D in a field?   Like...F-35?

Did you JUST forget about that whole Primary, and Secondary shiat that was posted above?

I hear constant circular reasoning from these warmongers and just about any argument for spending for R&D on Military can also be applied to the private sector.


The F35 is a research project.  Research is hard.  In large projects many unforeseen problems arise, sometimes even after they're "released."  It doesn't help that the govt tends to not be extremely concrete in what they want.  Did you know that the military shifts people around every two years?  That means that the guy pushing for a project that takes 3 years to complete will be gone before it's finished...and the new guy might either not share his vision for what is needed or might not even want to spend his budget on it anymore.  Mid-project requirements change!  Everybody loves that!
2018-10-11 11:57:20 AM  
1 vote:

Tr0mBoNe: Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.

I don't understand why your Navy has an Army that has its own Air Force and Navy, while also having their own Air Force.


Get this:  our Army has a Navy and an Air Force, too!

img.fark.netView Full Size
2018-10-11 11:54:48 AM  
1 vote:

Explodo: We could spend all that money on having the healthiest, most well-educated, happiest citizenry in the world.


Educated healthy happy citizens dont vote GOP tho. The GOP needs angry ignoramuses to buy into their BS.

The conspiracy theorist in me tends to think that the only reason we have such a huge military budget in the first place is to keep us from having a huge education budget. Its a LOT easier to manipulate people that are uneducated & desperate.
2018-10-11 11:27:54 AM  
1 vote:

Evil Mackerel: Public Call Box: Circusdog320: Take off the wheels...add some frickin' lasers...put a little radiation shielding on that puppy and you got yourself the beginnings of SPACE FORCE!

[i.pinimg.com image 850x531]

We'ed  be lucky to to get these.
[img.fark.net image 850x306]


The Hammerhead was awesome and so were the Wild Cards.
2018-10-11 11:25:53 AM  
1 vote:

adj_m: Public Call Box: Circusdog320: Take off the wheels...add some frickin' lasers...put a little radiation shielding on that puppy and you got yourself the beginnings of SPACE FORCE!

[i.pinimg.com image 850x531]

lol, I like how what looks to be twin giant space cannons are connected directly to one of the rear space thrusters (presumably where the space ammunition would be stored/loaded).

This picture checks out.


The space cannons fire thrust. Since its already being used by the engine right there, they just share the thrust.
2018-10-11 11:18:11 AM  
1 vote:

Marcus Aurelius: The F-35 is way too expensive to waste on things like flying.  Too dangerous.


Park them next to the littoral combat ships.  Inside.  Plywood and MDF tends to rot when wet.
I heard a rumor both programs were slightly over budget.
2018-10-11 11:08:35 AM  
1 vote:
We need Dr. Barnhouse more than ever.
2018-10-11 10:47:56 AM  
1 vote:

Tr0mBoNe: Old_Chief_Scott: I detest the military's trend in the last 30 years to try and find the one aircraft that "does it all". A few squadrons of an F-35 type aircraft for special missions and a horde of simpler, more mission specific aircraft that can be built and maintained at a much lower cost. The F-20 Tigershark is a good example.

I don't understand why your Navy has an Army that has its own Air Force and Navy, while also having their own Air Force.


Marines exist because people used to actually fight other people on ships - you don't want to have the guys trying to make your ship going put-put to also have to go slashie-slashie.

The Air Force used to be part of the Army.  But the Navy needed planes also to kill other ships.  The Air Force was created because Spureme High Gods of The True Air cannot accept orders from ground- and water-bound peons.  Also, having their own service lets them suck directly from that sweet, sweet Congressional teat.
 
Displayed 90 of 90 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report