Seriously, this is only being funded because we already thre

I fucking hate retards like you, I really do. You're probably like 15 years old, so allow me to explain: this happens with EVERY. SINGLE. NEW PIECE OF EQUIPMENT.

Every single time the military starts developing something new, you always hear civvies and other assorted dipshits saying "hurrrrr what's wrong with da one we got!" or "durrrrrrr dat's too expensive! Muh taxes'll go up!"

No fucking new technology is perfect when it is introduced. The fucking P-51 Mustang had a shit ton of problems when it was introduced. Did they just scrap the whole thing and say "Ah, fuck it, it'll take too long to make it right."

No. You work on it and you fix the fucking problems with it so you can begin mass production. The F-35 of today is astronomically more improved than its predecessors. But retarded news outlets will cherry pick one weird instance where the sensors didn't work quite right, or there was an accident (remember the Osprey "hurrrr automatic Muhreen killer" meme?), or it didn't perform as well as the previous gen fighter (even though said previous gen is probably in like its 5th variant or some shit and has been refined over 40 years).

You're a fucking idiot. The F-35 is coming along just fine, when it's finished, it'll be one of the most sophisticated fighters in the air. There is simply an extent to how much retrofitting you can do on the previous generation of fighters before you just need a new damn airframe with a new sensor suite and new mechanics.

Fuck right off, retard. I don't even really give a shit about the F-35 but I'm tired of this stupid fucking meme. Half the people spouting it are just butthurt that the A-10 is facing retirement. Which it fucking should, considering it is good at doing basically one thing really well and that role is becoming more and more obsolete by the day. Or at least not necessary.

>>33071628
/thread

>>33071628
While I tend to not enjoy walls of text this is spot on. We could pull some fuckery with F18s for maybe another decade but then we are low end Europe tier for airforce if they half ass attempt development. Not to mention being outnumbered beyond technological superiority by the Chinese would be a bad place.

>>33071628
>>33071729

/threading your own reply is like getting fucked in the ass by your own dick.

>>33071502
a working F-35 is my favourite fictional weapon

>>33071628
>this happens with EVERY. SINGLE. NEW PIECE OF EQUIPMENT.

While i partially agree with you, we never say a clusterfuck being as overbudget as the F35, where you fix a problem/bug only to see 2 more arise. It's being like that since the beginning of the program 20-ish years ago!


>The F-35 is coming along just fine

I don't think that something that blown it's budget and timeframe time and time again as the f-35 program can be labelad as "fine"

>>33071807

F22's having the initial deliveries numbers met is mine.

>>33071628
budget does matter if you have to spend money on other shit

>>33071770
That sounds great actually, but ive got a really nice dick

>>33071770
I didn't /thread my own reply, faggot. I'm sorry you're so butthurt that people agree with me. OP, as always, is a faggot.

Lockheed employee here. What do you want to know?

>>33071835
When did I say budget didn't matter? I'm not saying it doesn't, but the fact of the matter is that America needs a new generation of multirole fighter. If we don't get one, China is going to outpace us and that is very, very bad. Scrapping the entire F-35 program at this point, after having invested so much time, effort, and money, just to look for a different multirole fighter, would be fucking retarded.

>>33071825

> While i partially agree with you, we never say a clusterfuck being as overbudget as the F35, where you fix a problem/bug only to see 2 more arise. It's being like that since the beginning of the program 20-ish years ago!

Read up on the F-16 program.

They were crashing 20 planes a year until they completely reworked the flight control systems and basically redid the engine. F-16 was supposed to cost 5 million a plane, it entered service at full capability (Block 15) at around 11 million per,

>>33071958
Military development and procurement in general is like that. There are just more zeros this time so its more noticeable. I wonder what the percentage over budget comparison looks like

>>33071958

Whilthe price incread by 100% it's still less than the F35 cost.

Hell! We don't even know how much that thing will cost exactly.

>>33071950
Economics 101: if an investment is lossmaking you have to bail out, no matter how much money you invested in.
If that means scrapping the F-35 program then the US needs to swallow it, rather that then a money pit.

>>33072015
>Economics 101: if an investment is lossmaking you have to bail out

Not always, sometimes the loss will be bigger if you bail out than if you continue spending.