>>Think what an F-16 could do with a bit of stealth technology, canards, and vector thrust exhaust nozzles. What could the F-14 do with similar technology?<<
That was what led to the F-35. Had they stayed on that track, the F-35 could have unified and advanced MRFs. A homogeneous platform would save billions (maybe trillions over time) and countless man-hours since repairs and parts would be readily available at any NATO (or friendly) country.
To use stealth, canards, variable thrust, etc. is a redesign of the airframe which, if you were to look at what an F-16/18 would look like with those would be... TA DA! The F-35!
The F-35 has been on the drawing board for over a decade (IIRC). It took 27 months to go from a paper napkin to an operation craft called the SR-71.
Silly goose! You actually think that the stuff the military buys has anything to do with being the best it can get? Lockheed Martin, in particular, has been selling the US government overpriced junk for years. All these companies have been shrewd in putting facilities in small towns in every state. That means Congress is all for spending as much money as possible, regardless of what the military gets in return.
It’s a big racket. Retired colonels and generals become lobbyists for these companies, and it’s a wholesale looting of the treasury. Just like the welfare and food stamp racket, which is about big agriculture businesses, military procurement is all about enriching defenses companies and Congress.
F-35 doesn’t have canards.
It only took 120 days from start to flight for the Mustang.
Kelly Johnson isn’t around anymore.
“It took 27 months to go from a paper napkin to an operation craft called the SR-71.”
Kelly Johnson was still alive and in charge then!!!!
At that time engineers don't use CAD and weren't forced to make Power Point progress reports.
Most important: the man in charge did listen to the engineers.
Example for not listening: STS-51-L