re: #365 lawhawk

re: #366 The Vicious Babushka

Hm. Maybe so as they say. But the critics have a history of being spectacularly wrong.

If you go back you will see similar complaints about almost every advanced weapon. You know those precision guided smart missiles we now depend on? The critics phrase was “gold plated weapons” that could not possibly be produced in sufficient numbers given the expense. Then we put cheap precision kits on old vietnam era dumb bombs and dropped them into particular windows of particular buildings wrecking enemy facilities whilst leaving nearby civilian facilities almost undamaged.

The F-15 was called a boondoggle, a huge mistake in comparison to the cheaper lighter f-16. Today the F-15 has an air to air combat record unmatched in the history of air combat. It’s biggest problem is age. Funny how that turned out.

The B-2 is said to become visible if it gets wet. False. Stealth is said to be vulnerable to long wave radar-Somewhat true but long wave is useless for weapons control. A point missed in all the critics articles on the point. And established tactics of dealing with layered threats somehow stay out of these critics memos.

The devices that the F-35 won’t carry are assumed to be too large now and forever apparently. But as a network centric plane it’s not supposed to carry those sensors, it’s supposed to use their data from other craft. Plus in one part of the article it’s claimed they could have planned ahead, but in another admit certain capacities were “undreamed of” when the plane was designed. Newsflash-Development in combat with established craft always proceeds faster than prototypical design.