Skip to content

another strike against the F-35

Political Discussion
55 9 1.2k
  • Because they don't fucking dogfight anymore you stupid drunk.

  • Because they don't fucking dogfight anymore you stupid drunk.

    @legacy-fan said:

    Because they don't fucking dogfight anymore you stupid drunk.

    1) I don't drink "at all"

    2) I guess you didn't take the time nor the intellectual effort to view the links I posted to the last time the U.S military said "we don't need to dogfight anymore". Are you afraid you'll pull something if you actually have to do some kind of intellectual labor you lazy fuck?

  • Go on and educate yourself what happened to the phantoms in Vietnam against shitty little migs when those migs managed to get inside their missiles. It's pure arrogance with a side of abject gross incompetence to yet again build a jet that like that. And, for the umpteenth time in this thread.....it's costing us one fucking trillion dollars. Sorry legacy, for that money the thing should move like a flying fucking saucer. It's flight patterns should look like a fucking Tron cycle in the sky. Dafuq is wrong with you dude? Why is this so hard for you? We're paying 1T dollars for a stealth plane that is ONE technological advancement away from being obsoleted. Know why the F-16's are still around even though they couldn't sneak through a 4th world countries radar net? CAUSE THAT NGR CAN FLY son.

  • Posted Today, 02:48 PM

    it's all cals fault. Cleve

    *****************************

    I warped your psyche and all you could do

    was use your right mouse button.

    How many different planes are you going to talk about, to ignore

    that you don't have a clue about the F-35 and lost your argument?

  • @legacy-fan said:

    Because they don't fucking dogfight anymore you stupid drunk.

    1) I don't drink "at all"

    2) I guess you didn't take the time nor the intellectual effort to view the links I posted to the last time the U.S military said "we don't need to dogfight anymore". Are you afraid you'll pull something if you actually have to do some kind of intellectual labor you lazy fuck?

    @clevfan4life said:

    1) I don't drink "at all"

    2) I guess you didn't take the time nor the intellectual effort to view the links I posted to the last time the U.S military said "we don't need to dogfight anymore". Are you afraid you'll pull something if you actually have to do some kind of intellectual labor you lazy fuck?

    We've been through this before - when you say "at all" here it just makes you sound like you drink all the time. You don't drink *at all*

  • #QuotesForEmphasis

  • "I don't have a problem with drinking. I've quit a thousand times"

  • @clevfan4life said:

    1) I don't drink "at all"

    2) I guess you didn't take the time nor the intellectual effort to view the links I posted to the last time the U.S military said "we don't need to dogfight anymore". Are you afraid you'll pull something if you actually have to do some kind of intellectual labor you lazy fuck?

    We've been through this before - when you say "at all" here it just makes you sound like you drink all the time. You don't drink *at all*

    @gftchris said:

    We've been through this before - when you say "at all" here it just makes you sound like you drink all the time. You don't drink *at all*

    The quotes are meant to emphasize that I intake zero alcohol...how would someone construe those quotes as to me saying I drink all the time?

  • @gftchris said:

    We've been through this before - when you say "at all" here it just makes you sound like you drink all the time. You don't drink *at all*

    The quotes are meant to emphasize that I intake zero alcohol...how would someone construe those quotes as to me saying I drink all the time?

    @clevfan4life said:

    The quotes are meant to emphasize that I intake zero alcohol...how would someone construe those quotes as to me saying I drink all the time?

  • Posted Today, 02:48 PM

    it's all cals fault. Cleve

    *****************************

    I warped your psyche and all you could do

    was use your right mouse button.

    How many different planes are you going to talk about, to ignore

    that you don't have a clue about the F-35 and lost your argument?

    @calfoxwc said:

    Posted Today, 02:48 PM

    it's all cals fault. Cleve

    *****************************

    I warped your psyche and all you could do

    was use your right mouse button.

    How many different planes are you going to talk about, to ignore

    that you don't have a clue about the F-35 and lost your argument?

    How have I lost my argument when I've provided now multiple links to articles that say it's a flying Shiite box? AND I've provided a link to articles about the last time the U.S military decided that dogfighting was antiquated, with disastrous loss of life kind of consequences.

  • @clevfan4life said:

    The quotes are meant to emphasize that I intake zero alcohol...how would someone construe those quotes as to me saying I drink all the time?

    @gftchris said:

    So in Britain quotes are used facetiously? lols. Here in the U.S quotes aren't usually meant to convey duplicity, friends episode not withstanding.

  • Imagine it's something like: 'there's no way that so called "president" is worthy of the name'

    or: 'yeah, I like granola muffins "loads"'

  • @calfoxwc said:

    1) It's an article from redstate

    2) Not surprisingly, it showcases only information from Lockheed...who of course are going to say it's the greatest thing ever made. What I provided were accounts from actual pilots that flew it and against it.

    Did you even really read the article? Or did you just knee jerk something from redstate? It says F-35 in the title and it's from redstate, ergo I must link it. Do I have that about right? You basically re linked a Lockheed press release. Don't worry everyone the plane is awesome, well worth the fleecing we're gonna lay on you for decades of cost overruns to come. Thank you

  • haha. You liberal-ways just dissed the source,

    then admitted the actual story

    was straight from the horses' mouth.

    Of course there are always struggles with developing advanced

    fighter planes.

    Sure, the cost is very high to do that. But the development cost is not

    the same as production line costs when it's up and running.

  • My last job was working for Lockheed Martin at their Akron location (Old Air Doc). Huge freaking place, but its closing down, or maybe closed already.

  • Lockheed Martin's GPA cutoff for engineers was a 3.7. They also stopped going to career fairs and only held info sessions at about a dozen schools. Pretty strict application process

  • Lockheed Martin's GPA cutoff for engineers was a 3.7. They also stopped going to career fairs and only held info sessions at about a dozen schools. Pretty strict application process

    @mld-woody said:

    Lockheed Martin's GPA cutoff for engineers was a 3.7. They also stopped going to career fairs and only held info sessions at about a dozen schools. Pretty strict application process

    oh I'll bet, I know the business model. Guys just throw in every fancy system you can so we can jack the taxpayer for max damage. Probably barely paid attention to the actual pilots they have saying Ummm, yeah that's not gonna turn very well...or retain energy very well.....so what dogfightings for ngrs. God help any pilot that has to deal with a Russian 5th gen in that thing at close range. The Russians develop any kind of tech to see the thing and it's curtains.

    People think the Russian planes just "turn real good"..that they're not also developing beyond visual range weapons and also weapons you don't have to be looking straight at your enemy to fire. They're all working on the same shit.

  • haha. You liberal-ways just dissed the source,

    then admitted the actual story

    was straight from the horses' mouth.

    Of course there are always struggles with developing advanced

    fighter planes.

    Sure, the cost is very high to do that. But the development cost is not

    the same as production line costs when it's up and running.

    @calfoxwc said:

    haha. You liberal-ways just dissed the source,

    then admitted the actual story

    was straight from the horses' mouth.

    Let me baby step you through this, you can't post information from the actual producer of the plane as some sort of hard proof that the naysayers of the plane are wrong. Why? Because under no circumstances would any employee of Lockheed bad mouth a TRILLION DOLLAR AIRPLANE!!

    I'm beyond vexed that you don't get that. Seriously. As if the guy wouldn't be sleeping with fishes within a day if he said...yeah the thing doesn't turn for squat, pilots are going to die horribly in it if any plane built after 1980 gets within gun range of it. Jesus fucking Christ cal.

  • Cleve, just shut the fuck up already. You know nothing about aeronautical engineering, flying fighter jet, or anything. Stuff it.