First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply Meet America's New $1 Trillion Fighter Jet, the F-35...
666 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Greensboro North...
Offline
Posted 7/10/15
We can buy this but not bullet trains
Posted 7/10/15
Such a waste of taxpayers' money.
4733 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Chicago, Illinois
Offline
Posted 7/10/15 , edited 7/10/15

LONGNAMEYOUWONTMISS wrote:

That is completely useless in dogfights and long range fighting against even fighter jets from the 1970s.



No, you did not read that price tag incorrectly, it will cost $400 billion to build and $1 trillion to maintain the 2,443 planes that the Pentagon has ordered. They are history's most expensive weapon. And they are useless.

It can't turn or climb fast enough to hit an enemy plane during a dogfight or to dodge the enemy’s own gunfire. During test runs the F-35 lost to a F-16, a fighter from the '70s. Also, the helmet was too large for the space inside the canopy to adequately see behind the aircraft, allowing the F-16 to sneak up behind it. Essentially, if it enters a dogfight or any close range engagement, it's toast.

Oh but don't worry, the plane's manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, came out and said that the F-35 is meant for long range combat (even though it was originally proposed to be a dog fighter). That should justify its production right? NOPE because it's not even good at that either. The stealth fighter lacks the sensors, weapons and speed that allow a warplane to reliably detect and shoot down other modern planes in combat. It's good at detecting things on the ground from short distances, but it's a blind bird in the air. It also has VERY limited ammunition.

So the F-35 essentially can't fight other planes from any distance, is inferior to its Russian and Chinese counterparts, is supposed to replace many current jets, and costs $1 trillion. Seems legit.

It's great that arms manufacturers continue to lobby Congress to produce more weapons for the military so they can put more money into their bank account.



Sources:

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-pilot-admits-the-f-35-can-t-dogfight-cdb9d11a875
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/no-the-f-35-can-t-fight-at-long-range-either-5508913252dd


you are so unknowledgeable on the military it's not even funny. So I'll be brief and easy to understand while correcting you.

The jet is not 1 trillion dollars. its 98 million, compared to the F-22 raptor's disgusting 200 million dollar price tag, it's a good deal for a multi-purpose stealth fighter. Not to mention the F-22 raptor is a turkey because it was made to combat any fighter the Soviets had; in case you didn't know there is no more Soviet Union, so what do you do with the plane? Nothing. There's also 2 versions. The marines are getting the VTOL (Verticle Take-Off and Landing) model, navy and air force are getting the STOL (Standard Take-Off and Landing) model, I prefer the STOL model just because VTOL puts a heavy burden on an aircraft because you give up top speed and weapons to get it to hover in the air. There will also be a helmet made for the F-35 that looks like it's straight from the video game "Titanfall", and has a built in computer integrated with the plane, with built in X-ray vision and IR.

The US isn't the only country interested in the Lightning. Japan ordered 40 of them and they are also designing their own stealth fighter. Britain ordered about 50 of them as well. The price for unit in a few years will also drop to 60 million when the ease of manufacture gets easier. So, this thread in inaccurate as far as the jet costing 1 trillion dollars. The project costed about 700 billion to develop the plane, yes, but that's not how much the plane is worth.
1606 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Earth
Offline
Posted 7/10/15 , edited 7/10/15

AirMarshall wrote:


LONGNAMEYOUWONTMISS wrote:

That is completely useless in dogfights and long range fighting against even fighter jets from the 1970s.



No, you did not read that price tag incorrectly, it will cost $400 billion to build and $1 trillion to maintain the 2,443 planes that the Pentagon has ordered. They are history's most expensive weapon. And they are useless.

It can't turn or climb fast enough to hit an enemy plane during a dogfight or to dodge the enemy’s own gunfire. During test runs the F-35 lost to a F-16, a fighter from the '70s. Also, the helmet was too large for the space inside the canopy to adequately see behind the aircraft, allowing the F-16 to sneak up behind it. Essentially, if it enters a dogfight or any close range engagement, it's toast.

Oh but don't worry, the plane's manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, came out and said that the F-35 is meant for long range combat (even though it was originally proposed to be a dog fighter). That should justify its production right? NOPE because it's not even good at that either. The stealth fighter lacks the sensors, weapons and speed that allow a warplane to reliably detect and shoot down other modern planes in combat. It's good at detecting things on the ground from short distances, but it's a blind bird in the air. It also has VERY limited ammunition.

So the F-35 essentially can't fight other planes from any distance, is inferior to its Russian and Chinese counterparts, is supposed to replace many current jets, and costs $1 trillion. Seems legit.

It's great that arms manufacturers continue to lobby Congress to produce more weapons for the military so they can put more money into their bank account.



Sources:

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-pilot-admits-the-f-35-can-t-dogfight-cdb9d11a875
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/no-the-f-35-can-t-fight-at-long-range-either-5508913252dd


you are so unknowledgeable on the military it's not even funny. So I'll be brief and easy to understand while correcting you.

The jet is not 1 trillion dollars. its 98 million, compared to the F-22 raptor's disgusting 200 million dollar price tag, it's a good deal for a multi-purpose stealth fighter. Not to mention the F-22 raptor is a turkey because it was made to combat any fighter the Soviets had; in case you didn't know there is no more Soviet Union, so what do you do with the plane? Nothing. There's also 2 versions. The marines are getting the VTOL (Verticle Take-Off and Landing) model, navy and air force are getting the STOL (Standard Take-Off and Landing) model, I prefer the STOL model just because VTOL puts a heavy burden on an aircraft because you give up top speed and weapons to get it to hover in the air. There will also be a helmet made for the F-35 that looks like it's straight from the video game "Titanfall", and has a built in computer integrated with the plane, with built in X-ray vision and IR.

The US isn't the only country interested in the Lightning. Japan ordered 40 of them and they are also designing their own stealth fighter. Britain ordered about 50 of them as well. The price for unit in a few years will also drop to 60 million when the ease of manufacture gets easier. So, this thread in inaccurate as far as the jet costing 1 trillion dollars. The project costed about 700 billion to develop the plane, yes, but that's not how much the plane is worth.


Yes yes yes more money towards the military. It's not like we could've used that money for anything else.
69336 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / South of sanity.
Offline
Posted 7/10/15

AirMarshall

you are so unknowledgeable on the military it's not even funny. So I'll be brief and easy to understand while correcting you.

The jet is not 1 trillion dollars. its 98 million, compared to the F-22 raptor's disgusting 200 million dollar price tag, it's a good deal for a multi-purpose stealth fighter. Not to mention the F-22 raptor is a turkey because it was made to combat any fighter the Soviets had; in case you didn't know there is no more Soviet Union, so what do you do with the plane? Nothing. There's also 2 versions. The marines are getting the VTOL (Verticle Take-Off and Landing) model, navy and air force are getting the STOL (Standard Take-Off and Landing) model, I prefer the STOL model just because VTOL puts a heavy burden on an aircraft because you give up top speed and weapons to get it to hover in the air. There will also be a helmet made for the F-35 that looks like it's straight from the video game "Titanfall", and has a built in computer integrated with the plane, with built in X-ray vision and IR.

The US isn't the only country interested in the Lightning. Japan ordered 40 of them and they are also designing their own stealth fighter. Britain ordered about 50 of them as well. The price for unit in a few years will also drop to 60 million when the ease of manufacture gets easier. So, this thread in inaccurate as far as the jet costing 1 trillion dollars. The project costed about 700 billion to develop the plane, yes, but that's not how much the plane is worth.


Agree with the above. People like to talk about jet fighter dog fights like this shit happens all the time. In reality we have no adversaries. The F-35 is not even designed as an air-superiority fighter. The F-22 is the air superiority fighter and after a production run of less than 200 was cancelled because there is nothing for it to do.

The F-35 is primarily designed for air to ground attacks while utilizing stealth technology. People like to slam it because it has poor performance in simulated dogfights but I remember seeing a list of air-to-air loses in the last 30 years and the U.S has lost like 3 planes. Hence the cancellation of the F-22 which fulfilled that role.
11041 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
14 / F / California
Offline
Posted 7/10/15

PapaGregory wrote:

We can buy this but not bullet trains


Just FYI, that would be too costly. In order to do bullet lines that do any good in the USA, you'd need to build 3x the world current total amount of high speed rail.

15023 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Seattle
Offline
Posted 7/10/15
Dog fighting? Against who? Aliens?

But yeah, probably should put that money elsewhere. Our infrastructure maybe
17889 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / outer wall, level...
Offline
Posted 7/10/15 , edited 7/10/15

Man_Of_Leisure wrote:


AirMarshall

you are so unknowledgeable on the military it's not even funny. So I'll be brief and easy to understand while correcting you.

The jet is not 1 trillion dollars. its 98 million, compared to the F-22 raptor's disgusting 200 million dollar price tag, it's a good deal for a multi-purpose stealth fighter. Not to mention the F-22 raptor is a turkey because it was made to combat any fighter the Soviets had; in case you didn't know there is no more Soviet Union, so what do you do with the plane? Nothing. There's also 2 versions. The marines are getting the VTOL (Verticle Take-Off and Landing) model, navy and air force are getting the STOL (Standard Take-Off and Landing) model, I prefer the STOL model just because VTOL puts a heavy burden on an aircraft because you give up top speed and weapons to get it to hover in the air. There will also be a helmet made for the F-35 that looks like it's straight from the video game "Titanfall", and has a built in computer integrated with the plane, with built in X-ray vision and IR.

The US isn't the only country interested in the Lightning. Japan ordered 40 of them and they are also designing their own stealth fighter. Britain ordered about 50 of them as well. The price for unit in a few years will also drop to 60 million when the ease of manufacture gets easier. So, this thread in inaccurate as far as the jet costing 1 trillion dollars. The project costed about 700 billion to develop the plane, yes, but that's not how much the plane is worth.


Agree with the above. People like to talk about jet fighter dog fights like this shit happens all the time. In reality we have no adversaries. The F-35 is not even designed as an air-superiority fighter. The F-22 is the air superiority fighter and after a production run of less than 200 was cancelled because there is nothing for it to do.

The F-35 is primarily designed for air to ground attacks while utilizing stealth technology. People like to slam it because it has poor performance in simulated dogfights but I remember seeing a list of air-to-air loses in the last 30 years and the U.S has lost like 3 planes. Hence the cancellation of the F-22 which fulfilled that role.


It's the CAS get that has me worried. It too fast for the job, not enough armor. Not a lot of ammo on the main gun. A lot of the air force missions are CAS in all there low intensity conflicts.
Edit: vtol f35 on the new Japanese flat top heli carriers would be cool too.
5733 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / Palatine, Illinois
Offline
Posted 7/10/15
;_; bruh.
20928 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Online
Posted 7/10/15 , edited 7/10/15
The Russian still maintain their Sukhoi Su-25 while US will dismiss the A-10... yes...
The F35 should be the A-10 and it cant even got close air support to ground units. Even veteran state that.
11618 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 7/10/15

AirMarshall wrote:


LONGNAMEYOUWONTMISS wrote:

That is completely useless in dogfights and long range fighting against even fighter jets from the 1970s.



No, you did not read that price tag incorrectly, it will cost $400 billion to build and $1 trillion to maintain the 2,443 planes that the Pentagon has ordered. They are history's most expensive weapon. And they are useless.

It can't turn or climb fast enough to hit an enemy plane during a dogfight or to dodge the enemy’s own gunfire. During test runs the F-35 lost to a F-16, a fighter from the '70s. Also, the helmet was too large for the space inside the canopy to adequately see behind the aircraft, allowing the F-16 to sneak up behind it. Essentially, if it enters a dogfight or any close range engagement, it's toast.

Oh but don't worry, the plane's manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, came out and said that the F-35 is meant for long range combat (even though it was originally proposed to be a dog fighter). That should justify its production right? NOPE because it's not even good at that either. The stealth fighter lacks the sensors, weapons and speed that allow a warplane to reliably detect and shoot down other modern planes in combat. It's good at detecting things on the ground from short distances, but it's a blind bird in the air. It also has VERY limited ammunition.

So the F-35 essentially can't fight other planes from any distance, is inferior to its Russian and Chinese counterparts, is supposed to replace many current jets, and costs $1 trillion. Seems legit.

It's great that arms manufacturers continue to lobby Congress to produce more weapons for the military so they can put more money into their bank account.



Sources:

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-pilot-admits-the-f-35-can-t-dogfight-cdb9d11a875
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/no-the-f-35-can-t-fight-at-long-range-either-5508913252dd


you are so unknowledgeable on the military it's not even funny. So I'll be brief and easy to understand while correcting you.

The jet is not 1 trillion dollars. its 98 million, compared to the F-22 raptor's disgusting 200 million dollar price tag, it's a good deal for a multi-purpose stealth fighter. Not to mention the F-22 raptor is a turkey because it was made to combat any fighter the Soviets had; in case you didn't know there is no more Soviet Union, so what do you do with the plane? Nothing. There's also 2 versions. The marines are getting the VTOL (Verticle Take-Off and Landing) model, navy and air force are getting the STOL (Standard Take-Off and Landing) model, I prefer the STOL model just because VTOL puts a heavy burden on an aircraft because you give up top speed and weapons to get it to hover in the air. There will also be a helmet made for the F-35 that looks like it's straight from the video game "Titanfall", and has a built in computer integrated with the plane, with built in X-ray vision and IR.

The US isn't the only country interested in the Lightning. Japan ordered 40 of them and they are also designing their own stealth fighter. Britain ordered about 50 of them as well. The price for unit in a few years will also drop to 60 million when the ease of manufacture gets easier. So, this thread in inaccurate as far as the jet costing 1 trillion dollars. The project costed about 700 billion to develop the plane, yes, but that's not how much the plane is worth.


You tried so hard but failed. That price tag encompasses the entire f-35 project. Not a single plane... derp
53352 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 7/10/15
Whoever thought this was a good idea was clearly discharged from the mental hospital too soon. Who in the right mind spends that kind of money on something completely worthless?!?! Not even the North Koreans would spend a quarter of that money on that piece of junk.
4733 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Chicago, Illinois
Offline
Posted 7/10/15

LONGNAMEYOUWONTMISS wrote:


AirMarshall wrote:


LONGNAMEYOUWONTMISS wrote:

That is completely useless in dogfights and long range fighting against even fighter jets from the 1970s.



No, you did not read that price tag incorrectly, it will cost $400 billion to build and $1 trillion to maintain the 2,443 planes that the Pentagon has ordered. They are history's most expensive weapon. And they are useless.

It can't turn or climb fast enough to hit an enemy plane during a dogfight or to dodge the enemy’s own gunfire. During test runs the F-35 lost to a F-16, a fighter from the '70s. Also, the helmet was too large for the space inside the canopy to adequately see behind the aircraft, allowing the F-16 to sneak up behind it. Essentially, if it enters a dogfight or any close range engagement, it's toast.

Oh but don't worry, the plane's manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, came out and said that the F-35 is meant for long range combat (even though it was originally proposed to be a dog fighter). That should justify its production right? NOPE because it's not even good at that either. The stealth fighter lacks the sensors, weapons and speed that allow a warplane to reliably detect and shoot down other modern planes in combat. It's good at detecting things on the ground from short distances, but it's a blind bird in the air. It also has VERY limited ammunition.

So the F-35 essentially can't fight other planes from any distance, is inferior to its Russian and Chinese counterparts, is supposed to replace many current jets, and costs $1 trillion. Seems legit.

It's great that arms manufacturers continue to lobby Congress to produce more weapons for the military so they can put more money into their bank account.



Sources:

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-pilot-admits-the-f-35-can-t-dogfight-cdb9d11a875
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/no-the-f-35-can-t-fight-at-long-range-either-5508913252dd


you are so unknowledgeable on the military it's not even funny. So I'll be brief and easy to understand while correcting you.

The jet is not 1 trillion dollars. its 98 million, compared to the F-22 raptor's disgusting 200 million dollar price tag, it's a good deal for a multi-purpose stealth fighter. Not to mention the F-22 raptor is a turkey because it was made to combat any fighter the Soviets had; in case you didn't know there is no more Soviet Union, so what do you do with the plane? Nothing. There's also 2 versions. The marines are getting the VTOL (Verticle Take-Off and Landing) model, navy and air force are getting the STOL (Standard Take-Off and Landing) model, I prefer the STOL model just because VTOL puts a heavy burden on an aircraft because you give up top speed and weapons to get it to hover in the air. There will also be a helmet made for the F-35 that looks like it's straight from the video game "Titanfall", and has a built in computer integrated with the plane, with built in X-ray vision and IR.

The US isn't the only country interested in the Lightning. Japan ordered 40 of them and they are also designing their own stealth fighter. Britain ordered about 50 of them as well. The price for unit in a few years will also drop to 60 million when the ease of manufacture gets easier. So, this thread in inaccurate as far as the jet costing 1 trillion dollars. The project costed about 700 billion to develop the plane, yes, but that's not how much the plane is worth.


Yes yes yes more money towards the military. It's not like we could've used that money for anything else.


What do you suggest, putting all the money in a program that will be bankrupt in 25 years (Social Security), and go to having a military of technologically inferiors? Having a high military budget is an important thing... my friends dad who used to work in an office, now works in a tent because of budget cuts. My friend who attended ROTC didn't even have textbooks during the classroom days because of budget cuts. Now the old stuff that we have is still great, like F-15s, F-16s, A-10s... I mean the B-52 doesn't even have a retirement date because it's so good, and the CH-47 Chinook will outlive the AH-64 Apache, but eventually we need to evolve and get stuff that's better, and that's what the F-35 is.

4733 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Chicago, Illinois
Offline
Posted 7/10/15

Wrathfulram wrote:


AirMarshall wrote:


LONGNAMEYOUWONTMISS wrote:

That is completely useless in dogfights and long range fighting against even fighter jets from the 1970s.



No, you did not read that price tag incorrectly, it will cost $400 billion to build and $1 trillion to maintain the 2,443 planes that the Pentagon has ordered. They are history's most expensive weapon. And they are useless.

It can't turn or climb fast enough to hit an enemy plane during a dogfight or to dodge the enemy’s own gunfire. During test runs the F-35 lost to a F-16, a fighter from the '70s. Also, the helmet was too large for the space inside the canopy to adequately see behind the aircraft, allowing the F-16 to sneak up behind it. Essentially, if it enters a dogfight or any close range engagement, it's toast.

Oh but don't worry, the plane's manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, came out and said that the F-35 is meant for long range combat (even though it was originally proposed to be a dog fighter). That should justify its production right? NOPE because it's not even good at that either. The stealth fighter lacks the sensors, weapons and speed that allow a warplane to reliably detect and shoot down other modern planes in combat. It's good at detecting things on the ground from short distances, but it's a blind bird in the air. It also has VERY limited ammunition.

So the F-35 essentially can't fight other planes from any distance, is inferior to its Russian and Chinese counterparts, is supposed to replace many current jets, and costs $1 trillion. Seems legit.

It's great that arms manufacturers continue to lobby Congress to produce more weapons for the military so they can put more money into their bank account.



Sources:

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-pilot-admits-the-f-35-can-t-dogfight-cdb9d11a875
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/no-the-f-35-can-t-fight-at-long-range-either-5508913252dd


you are so unknowledgeable on the military it's not even funny. So I'll be brief and easy to understand while correcting you.

The jet is not 1 trillion dollars. its 98 million, compared to the F-22 raptor's disgusting 200 million dollar price tag, it's a good deal for a multi-purpose stealth fighter. Not to mention the F-22 raptor is a turkey because it was made to combat any fighter the Soviets had; in case you didn't know there is no more Soviet Union, so what do you do with the plane? Nothing. There's also 2 versions. The marines are getting the VTOL (Verticle Take-Off and Landing) model, navy and air force are getting the STOL (Standard Take-Off and Landing) model, I prefer the STOL model just because VTOL puts a heavy burden on an aircraft because you give up top speed and weapons to get it to hover in the air. There will also be a helmet made for the F-35 that looks like it's straight from the video game "Titanfall", and has a built in computer integrated with the plane, with built in X-ray vision and IR.

The US isn't the only country interested in the Lightning. Japan ordered 40 of them and they are also designing their own stealth fighter. Britain ordered about 50 of them as well. The price for unit in a few years will also drop to 60 million when the ease of manufacture gets easier. So, this thread in inaccurate as far as the jet costing 1 trillion dollars. The project costed about 700 billion to develop the plane, yes, but that's not how much the plane is worth.


You tried so hard but failed. That price tag encompasses the entire f-35 project. Not a single plane... derp


The project costs about 700 billion dollars, as I stated. "Derp"
1606 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Earth
Offline
Posted 7/10/15 , edited 7/12/15


Social Security can't go bankrupt because bankruptcy isn't possible with the current system, it's here to stay and we should be expanding it. The welfare of citizens is more important than the bloated military's. Put the money into education, infrastructure, science, and healthcare. All of these are sensible places to spend on instead of the military. The military can go play with the current toys they already have.

Simply put, war is a waste of money.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.