“Lockheed Martin playing the American taxpayer like a fiddle. Business as usual.”
I don’t know how to assess this. You could find a million articles about the Bradley that read exactly like this. They turned out to be (1) liberal attempts to hurt defense or (2) political crap within the DoD. The Bradley has been a magnificent vehicle for the armed forces.
Why should I give all the F-35 articles any more credence than the Bradley articles were entitled to?
“I don’t know how to assess this. You could find a million articles about the Bradley that read exactly like this.”
I remember the Bradley articles as well. I was a tanker; but, I got to play around on a Bradley a little. I also spent alot of time on the piece of equipment it was meant to replace - the M113.
Bradley - Fast, fires a missile, has a moving turret, powerful gun, and advanced fire control system.
M113 - Slow, giant box, and you can mount a machine gun to it.
I remember being shocked at how good a vehicle the Bradley was, after growing up and seeing countless bad stories about it.
Another piece of equipment I remember getting bad press was the kevlar helmet. 60 minutes did an almost sarcastic piece about it, and how wasteful it was to develop it. I can’t begin to explain how big an improvement it was over the ‘steel pot’....both in comfort and safety.
And my favorite - the M1 tank. The media whined about its cost of course. But, they also were fixated on its range (100 miles..ish). They went on and on and on about this. They never mentioned some of the amazing features that made it without a doubt the best tank in the world at the time, and most likely it still holds that title, although some will argue with me.
I know nothing about this airplane; but, I have a healthy (yet civil of course) skepticism about this article.