Posted on 04/01/2016 3:57:03 PM PDT by Mariner
And they know that while the F-35 is superior to the F-16 in overall warfighting, it costs too much.
They also hear the Pentagon calling for some F-15c-2040's and the Navy for more Super Hornets...both from McDonnell Douglas.
Now, all we need is the corrupt US Congress aboard. They are paid to protect the existing F-35 production lines. In many cases their reelection depends on it.
What? HERESY!!! How DARE you insult the F-35!!! Why don’t you know what an amazing aircraft it is?
If you don’t then be patient and one of the Kool-Aid sippers will be along any moment to tell you how it’s superior to the A-10, the F-16, the F-22, the B-2, the B-52, the C-5, the X-wing, the TIE fighter, flying saucers, and the Millennium Falcon. All for the bargain price of OH, MY GOD!!!
We could probably just buy them direct from China by now.
The F-35 is not superior to the F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22 and I’ll go all the way back to the F-4 & F-14.
The F-35 is a piece of shit, it can’t do a 3rd of what it was desighed for and has been beaten badly in match ups against the F-15 & 16.
Yep!
Start that F-22 line back up!
But it has stealth features. Isn’t that what REALLY counts?
Bleeding-edge technology is very, very expensive. And has anybody defined a set of charactaristics that would constitute “6th Generation”?
Regarding you suggestion that Lockheed bribes politicians.....
If you care to take a look, on average they contribute $500 to every D and R on the list.
No more manned fighters.
You are measuring the wrong metrics.
The F-35 is FAR superior to the F-16 as currently outfitted.
Stealth, Avionics and Weapons Systems outclass ANYTHING the F-16 has to offer.
While it's true the F-16 beats it in acrobatics and range, that matters little in modern warfare from 100 miles out.
That said, ALL of those capabilities could be added to the F-16 except for the stealth.
But there's not a trillion dollars to be skimmed by the Congress to do that.
Please consider PAC's, Super PAC's, speaking engagements, party contributions, family employment and jobs after un-election.
Lockheed has a much bigger "political" budget than that.
Hmmm, we are buying unmanned target vehicles from Russia now, why not stock up on Su-35s? Got to be cheaper than F-35 is and kicks butt.
And the big, fat, juicy contributions that make their way back to politicians.
Note For the iGeneration:
Dwight D. Eisenhower was the US Army five-star general during World War II who was appointed
Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe. He later was elected as the 34th President of
the USA and served two terms in that capacity from 1953 to 1961.
“They also hear the Pentagon calling for some F-15c-2040’s and the Navy for more Super Hornets...both from McDonnell Douglas.”
Last time I looked McDD was out of business. Sold years ago to Boeing!
I’m familiar with their PACs.
They spread it just as thinly there.
You should see the maps of where Lockheed facilities are located.
Pretty sure it’s all 50 states and Hundreds of CDs.
Hundreds of Congressional Districts.
Defense contractors are smart. They place offices and manufacturing plants all over the country, often in small towns, so there is always some congressman defending whatever it is they are peddling to the military. Military procurement is almost entirely political now. The only military people who have influence are the retired ones hired as lobbyists. Lockheed Martin has a history of selling our military expensive crap that doesn’t work.
I'd like to see some F-15s, F-16s and F/A-18s fitted with the same level of weapons and avionics as the F-35 (including the $400K helmet and related sensors), just to better evaluate the advantages that the remaining differences truly offer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.