A-10C Thunderbolt II makes a comeback

[Smitty-48]

Spend money: on infrastructure, soldiers/training, and produce whatever we currently can mass produce.

Developing the next superjet to be piloted by people should be an incredibly low priority.

I don't set the priorities for the United States, but full spectrum dominance in one theater war plus one theater holding action, against current and foreseeable horizon threats, is a stated priority, of which having a replacement for the F-16 and F/A-18, until such time as Commander Data is ordered to take over, is central to American military doctrine.

F-35 is a cost limited replacement with significantly increased capabilities, at the same price as a fourth generation fighter, as per the stated requirements.

[nmoore63]

Spend money: on infrastructure, soldiers/training, and produce whatever we currently can mass produce.

Developing the next superjet to be piloted by people should be an incredibly low priority.

I don't set the priorities for the United States, but full spectrum dominance in one theater war plus one theater holding action, against current and foreseeable horizon threats, is a stated priority, of which having a replacement for the F-16 and F/A-18, until such time as Commander Data is ordered to take over, is central to American military doctrine.

All of which can be accomplished with mass production of whatever we have.
If its a great war, whatever we design will be more useless than having more of a current cheaper something. Well almost everything will become useless, but having more useless rather than less, will likely be more helpful in buying the time to develop the useful things.

It is as I said, new manned superjets are a giant waste of resources.

[StCapps]

Spend money: on infrastructure, soldiers/training, and produce whatever we currently can mass produce.

Developing the next superjet to be piloted by people should be an incredibly low priority.

I don't set the priorities for the United States, but full spectrum dominance in one theater war plus one theater holding action, against current and foreseeable horizon threats, is a stated priority, of which having a replacement for the F-16 and F/A-18, until such time as Commander Data is ordered to take over, is central to American military doctrine.

All of which can be accomplished with mass production of whatever we have.
If its a great war, whatever we design will be more useless than having more of a current cheaper something. Well almost everything will become useless, but having more useless rather than less, will likely be more helpful in buying the time to develop the useful things.

It is as I said, new manned superjets are a giant waste of resources.

What military technology isn't a giant waste of resources to you? What percentage of GDP would you recommend spending on the military?

It seems like you are just anti-military spending of any kind from where I'm sitting, you sound like GCF.
/shrugs

[Smitty-48]

Spend money: on infrastructure, soldiers/training, and produce whatever we currently can mass produce.

Developing the next superjet to be piloted by people should be an incredibly low priority.

I don't set the priorities for the United States, but full spectrum dominance in one theater war plus one theater holding action, against current and foreseeable horizon threats, is a stated priority, of which having a replacement for the F-16 and F/A-18, until such time as Commander Data is ordered to take over, is central to American military doctrine.

All of which can be accomplished with mass production of whatever we have.
If its a great war, whatever we design will be more useless than having more of a current cheaper something. Well almost everything will become useless, but having more useless rather than less, will likely be more helpful in buying the time to develop the useful things.

It is as I said, new manned superjets are a giant waste of resources.

US military doctrine is to fight and win with minimal relative attrition, the F-35 is designed to the stated requirement which prioritizes winning without suffering heavy attrition, certainly you could go to war with masses of MiG-21's instead and suffer massive attrition to win, but that would be Soviet doctrine and contrary to the stated priorities of the American public.

[StCapps]

The F-35 haters have no good arguments at all and refuse to admit they have no idea what they are talking about, even when shown repeatedly that they are talking out of their ass.

An amusing thread, next GCF will stop by to tell us all that jets are obsolete and drones will takeover the world any day now.

[Smitty-48]

The F-35 haters have no good arguments at all and refuse to admit they have no idea what they are talking about, even when shown repeatedly that they are talking out of their ass.

An amusing thread.

Basically they're exactly the same as Justin Trudeau and the Liberals here, they pander to fallacies propagated by the media and on the internet, if they go that Canadian way, it just wastes time and money, a few years later they end up right back where they started.

Remember when the Liberals said they would never buy the F-35? Yeah, wait out on that, F-35 will be the replacement, just in 2024 instead of 2016.

There is no alternative, all other options are more expensive, less capable, and made in Europe, ergo; non starters.

Same for the USA as it is for Canada, just get on with it already, the F-35 is what is on the table, there is no comparable program on the market to replace it, nobody else is even in this game.

If they want to start over, clean sheet, that will take another thirty years and be even more expensive when they get there, so that doesn't meet the stated requirements.

[Smitty-48]

The whole fallacy is based on F-35 vs. some perfect alternative solution which does not exist, which is the ultimate military procurement fallacy. Whatever is wrong with the imperfect F-35 solution, is even more the case with the realistically available alternatives.

Super Hornet? Same price, less capability, also flawed.

Eurofighter/Rafale/Gripen? More expensive, less capability, also flawed.

Super Duper Drones? Astronomically more expensive, exponential more room for flaws, and not available as a realistic alternative.

[nmoore63]

Weak.

My compromise on the silly jet would be to not decrease military expenditure at all.

Reallocate to something more useful.

[Smitty-48]

Weak.

My compromise on the silly jet would be to not decrease military expenditure at all.

Reallocate to something more useful.

Non sequitur fallacy, totally irrelevant to the point, ain't nothing more weak shit than that.

[nmoore63]

Weak.

My compromise on the silly jet would be to not decrease military expenditure at all.

Reallocate to something more useful.

Non sequitur fallacy, totally irrelevant to the point, ain't nothing more weak shit than that.

“I don’t set priorities....”

Weak is as weak does.