Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 267 posts

Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold

#41

Post by WJW »

guscost wrote: post #11

Weird theory of mine: The DoD ultimately picks these winning planes based on which one “looks cooler” or basically has better aesthetics. I think the F-35 has better aesthetics than the Boeing X-32, just like the F-22 has better aesthetics than the YF-23. You could say I’m used to seeing the winning designs as “normal”, but I distinctly remember having this reaction before the JSF competition was over.

Damen shipyards is on record for stating that they regularly tweak warship designs to "look sleeker and meaner" because it both makes the admirals happy and also reaffirms the beliefs of the public of how warships are "supposed" to look. I'd be very surprised if military aircraft designers did not do something similar.

In any case it's also good military thinking. Sun Tzu already said that the pinnacle of warfare is to gain victory without fighting, and one of the ways to do so is to look so menacing that your opponent does not want to engage. Sleek, powerful looking military hardware has that effect much more than bloated and clunky stuff.

Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold

#42

Post by DanCarvajal »

porphyra wrote: post #18
guscost wrote: post #11

Weird theory of mine: The DoD ultimately picks these winning planes based on which one “looks cooler” or basically has better aesthetics. I think the F-35 has better aesthetics than the Boeing X-32, just like the F-22 has better aesthetics than the YF-23. You could say I’m used to seeing the winning designs as “normal”, but I distinctly remember having this reaction before the JSF competition was over.

I don't think the F-22 has better aesthetics than the YF-23. The YF-23 looks super awesome with its diamond-shaped wing. The Boeing X-32's frog-mouthed appearance is a bit ugly though.

YF-23 is 30 years old and still looks futuristic.

Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold

#43

Post by mhh__ »

bfieidhbrjr wrote: post #30
strictnein wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which plane, exactly, is superior to the F-35?

Pretty much anything from the last generation. Embarrassingly the F-16 beat it in combat, for example. For close air support the A-10 is vastly superior. The F-35 is an employment program like the TSA.

> Embarrassingly the F-16 beat it in combat, for example.

What kind of combat?

If an F-35 actually makes it to a merge somethings gone wrong, and reports vary wildly https://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-vs-f-16-15-18-lost-beat...

Ultimately a lot of F-35 hysteria seems to derive from it being the first US aircraft developed entirely post-internet where news travels quickly - i.e. If your projects early tests and teething problems were being reported on publicly by everyone you'd probably look fairly bad too.

That's not to say the F-35 is flawless in any way, but these conversations usually end up in a reductive cycle of arguments we can't know the answer too without security clearance.

Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold

#44

Post by stretchcat »

anonisko wrote: post #26
guscost wrote: post #11

Weird theory of mine: The DoD ultimately picks these winning planes based on which one “looks cooler” or basically has better aesthetics. I think the F-35 has better aesthetics than the Boeing X-32, just like the F-22 has better aesthetics than the YF-23. You could say I’m used to seeing the winning designs as “normal”, but I distinctly remember having this reaction before the JSF competition was over.

I'd be shocked if the military doesn't include aesthetics when considering which new equipment to use. You'd want to look badass and cool to the people you serve and hellish and terrifying to those you attack. The psychological impact in both directions almost certainly has important, real world consequences.

I think to an extent the public will decide ugly planes look badass if the planes are presented that way in media. The F-117 was a really bizarre plane, but became so iconic gamers today still buy computer mice that look like it.

This said, I think there are limits. I don't think the F-35 will ever achieve the same level of coolness that the F-22 has; the F-22 look very sleek while the F-35 looks like it ate too many hamburgers.

Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold

#45

Post by lsllc »

ardit33 wrote: post #16
bfieidhbrjr wrote: post #2

Good. The whole thing should be shut down.

It is not good. Like it or not, this is the only alternative NATO has for the forceable future. The British Tempest and the French/German stealth fighter won’t be operational until 2035-2040 The only alternative are modernizes 4gen fighters which are very vulnerable to modern air defenses. A ‘buggy’ F-35 might still be a better alternative. Also the British are counting for the F-35 to equip its carriers.

I was going to correct you and say maybe you meant the Typhoon, not Tempest, but indeed there is a proposed UK aircraft program called Tempest:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Tempest

Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold

#46

Post by ceejayoz »

strictnein wrote: post #32
animex wrote: post #17

I feel like there's an orchestrated PR campaign around making these F-35s sound like a success. I wonder what exists for objective reporting & analysis in this space.

I mean, there's real life, like Israel taking out advanced Chinese radars: https://defence-blog.com/news/source-israeli-f-35-destroyed-... Which China claimed could detect the F-22: https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a23846/chi...

Damascus is less than 40 miles from the Israeli border, so it's entirely possible that they detected the F-35s just fine; you can hit quite a few targets in Syria without ever actually violating Syrian airspace.

Flying from Japan to China might be a little different.

Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold

#47

Post by Judgmentality »

WJW wrote: post #41
guscost wrote: post #11

Weird theory of mine: The DoD ultimately picks these winning planes based on which one “looks cooler” or basically has better aesthetics. I think the F-35 has better aesthetics than the Boeing X-32, just like the F-22 has better aesthetics than the YF-23. You could say I’m used to seeing the winning designs as “normal”, but I distinctly remember having this reaction before the JSF competition was over.

Damen shipyards is on record for stating that they regularly tweak warship designs to "look sleeker and meaner" because it both makes the admirals happy and also reaffirms the beliefs of the public of how warships are "supposed" to look. I'd be very surprised if military aircraft designers did not do something similar. In any case it's also good military thinking. Sun Tzu already said that the pinnacle of warfare is…

> In any case it's also good military thinking.

Or more likely enemies see it as posturing and strike full force, thinking they can pierce the superficial veil of technological supremacy.

Come on, security theater is bullshit. How many people actually think the TSA does anything useful? If anything it lulls people into a false sense of safety, making us weaker.

If our enemies are so easily deterred that our appearance matters more than our capability, then they are not enemies worth taking seriously.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/the-tsa...

https://www.heritage.org/transportation/commentary/heres-how...

Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold

#48

Post by jacobwilliamroy »

bodhiandphysics wrote: post #34
belval wrote: post #21

Can someone more knowledgeable than me in this matter explain why fighter jets still require human pilots? Why aren't they completely replaced by drones?

Drones are dependent on an active satellite link to function. What happens if the enemy jams the satellite?

Peace at last.

Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold

#49

Post by manfredo »

guscost wrote: post #11

Weird theory of mine: The DoD ultimately picks these winning planes based on which one “looks cooler” or basically has better aesthetics. I think the F-35 has better aesthetics than the Boeing X-32, just like the F-22 has better aesthetics than the YF-23. You could say I’m used to seeing the winning designs as “normal”, but I distinctly remember having this reaction before the JSF competition was over.

The F-35 also has a better (lower) radar cross section than the X-32 which had exposed turbine blades. And crucially, the prototype X-32 failed to demonstrate simultaneous VTOL and supersonic flight, while the X-35 did. Seeing as this was the main characteristic the military wanted, this is a pretty significant shortcoming.

It's true that more conservative designs have historically prevailed over technically more impressive exotic designs. I think this is not about looking cooler (the YF-23 looked cooler than the F-22 IMO), and more about risk aversion when billions of dollars and people's lives are on the line. And there are still exceptions to this like the B-2. Although it drew on experience from the XB-35.

Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold

#50

Post by fishnchips »

bodhiandphysics wrote: post #34
belval wrote: post #21

Can someone more knowledgeable than me in this matter explain why fighter jets still require human pilots? Why aren't they completely replaced by drones?

Drones are dependent on an active satellite link to function. What happens if the enemy jams the satellite?

Wouldn’t jamming the satellite affect F-35, too?
Post reply on HN