this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2024
300 points (96.9% liked)

World News

39385 readers
2292 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Lockheed Martin UK’s chief, Paul Livingston, defended the F-35 stealth jet program after Elon Musk called it obsolete due to advances in unmanned drones.

Livingston emphasized the F-35’s unmatched capabilities, including stealth, battlefield data-sharing, and cost-efficiency by replacing multiple aircraft types.

While Musk labeled the program overly expensive and poorly designed, Livingston argued drones alone can’t match the F-35’s capabilities or defend against threats like China’s J20 jets.

Despite criticism over cost and reliability, the F-35 remains integral to NATO defenses, with widespread adoption across 19 nations, including the UK.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Here's the thing; every bad thing you've ever heard about the F-35 comes either directly or indirectly from Pierre Sprey.

And Pierre Sprey also believed that modern aircraft shouldn't have missiles or radar. He is not a man to be taken seriously, and neither are his criticisms of the F-35.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The criticism I've heard came from flag officers making statements like "It can't run, can't climb, and can't fight"...

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yes. Indirectly or directly echoing ideas that have propogated through the military from Pierre Sprey and his allies in the "Fighter plane mafia." Its genuinely hard to express what an undue influence these people have had on military thinking over the decades. These are the same people who convinced everyone that the Bradley (y'know, the one that has been fucking up tanks in Ukraine) is a bad vehicle.

"Can't run, can't climb, can't fight" is the sort of thing you say when you're under the impression that it's still 1939 and we're still using energy maneuver theory.

Dogfighting is as meaningful to modern combat as cavalry charges. The officers echoing this bullshit are no different than the ones who claimed that machine guns were overrated. Warfare has changed. Modern fighters operate like submarines; the goal is to detect and kill the enemy before they detect and kill you. Maneuverability has nothing to do with it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

As someone who has fought war...

You're not right. You're not even wrong.

Get back to me after you've at least done PLDC or BNOC.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

I'm in Canada, we don't have those. PLQ would probably be the closest equivalent up here.

Also PLDC is called WLC now. Sorry, I know it's tough having to move with the times, but you really do have to try to keep up.