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

91–100 of 267 posts

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

#91

Post by stretchcat »

pjc50 wrote: post #71
WJW wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Used to be done with uniforms. Hence the Pope's guards with Michelangelo uniforms, and the Nazis with Hugo Boss.

I could be wrong, but IIRC Hugo Boss was one of the companies that made Nazi uniforms, but did not design those uniforms.

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

#92

Post by Animats »

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…

That was an issue with US guided missile cruisers when vertical launch came in. The launchers just show as little hatches in the deck. There's usually a modest gun turret, the only visible weapon. There are some Close In Weapons System units, but they just look like machine guns.

The USSR built ships with much more visible armament on deck, facing outward. Partly because it looked fierce, and partly because they didn't quite trust their missiles not to launch straight up and come back down on the ship.

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

#93

Post by anonisko »

Judgmentality wrote: post #76
anonisko wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not complete bullshit. Against other sophisticated actors, yeah, it's bullshit. But posturing and intimidation is important to keep less sophisticated actors in check.

Who are the less sophisticated actors willing to attack a military based solely on appearance of 'not looking intimidating?' We're talking about a fighter jet, not a security guard.

I'd see it as more about PR.

If poor desperate people regularly see these kinds of badass weapons that a foreign power has, it's just going to be that much harder to recruit for organizations that violently resist oppression, because the individuals you need are fearful and demoralized.

Then you need crazy things like religious indoctrination that promises rewards in heaven for fighting such an unassailable power.

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

#95

Post by jolux »

strictnein wrote: post #9

The Drive back again with another one of its anti-F35 articles. It would seem that this administration is just punting to the next one, which is probably a good idea. I would take anything they post about the plane with a grain of salt. They take any setback as if it's the first time a large technical project has ever experienced issues.

The F-35 has been plagued with near-continuous setbacks for its entire life, and reporting on them is notable because it puts a spotlight on our colossal failure to execute on something we consider important (defense technology). It's not just The Drive.

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

#96

Post by ReptileMan »

mrtksn wrote: post #87
waiseristy wrote: post #8

After seeing what happened in Armenia & Azerbaijan, I'm wondering if the US's customers are pushing for these cheaper drone options instead of the F35. The F35 has been in development so long, that it's seeing its own combat role supplanted

Drones should be inherently better anyway since they don’t have to carry 80KG of meat that needs to be kept alive.

Actually around 30% of the aircraft weight is for keeping the wetware alive.

And a lot of the flight envelope limitations are just to not squish it too hard.

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

#97

Post by Judgmentality »

anonisko wrote: post #93
Judgmentality wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who are the less sophisticated actors willing to attack a military based solely on appearance of 'not looking intimidating?' We're talking about a fighter jet, not a security guard.

I'd see it as more about PR. If poor desperate people regularly see these kinds of badass weapons that a foreign power has, it's just going to be that much harder to recruit for organizations that violently resist oppression, because the individuals you need are fearful and demoralized. Then you need crazy things like religious indoctrination that promises rewards in heaven for fighting such an unassailable power.

I guess you could make the argument the PR is effective against idiots.

My point is letting the PR call the shots objectively makes us weaker (the F-35 program is a clusterfuck), so it's harming us against enemies that aren't idiots. I'm pretty sure China loves the F-35 program because they know it's an enormous weakness in the US military.

But yeah, you have a point. Idiots can be harmful too, and they should also be considered as potential threats.

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

#98

Post by cartoonfoxes »

stretchcat wrote: post #35
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.

Oh boy I couldn't disagree more, the F-22 is doubtlessly cool, but it has nothing on the YF-23. And the X-32 was positively adorable (which isn't cool I guess, but I still love it.) I think the F-35 is downright fugly though, it's too bloated and bumpy looking.

That's why the F-35's nickname is "Fat Amy".

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

#99

Post by AndyMcConachie »

bfieidhbrjr wrote: post #2

Good. The whole thing should be shut down.

You're exactly right. Not sure why you're downvoted. Not only is the F-35 a giant lemon, but US defense spending should be cut considerably.

The world is changing, air combat is changing, and the F-35 addresses none of those changes. The F-35 is nothing more than an expensive boondoggle. It's purpose, like most DoD spending, is to transfer money from public coffers into the hands of well connected private companies.

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

#100

Post by stretchcat »

asdff wrote: post #88
stretchcat wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The enemies of America are presumably meant to see American stealth aircraft in movies and TV shows, not over their capitols. However, I think these airplanes are indeed designed foremost for function. The similar appearances of the B-1 and Tu-160 suggest that when two planes are designed using similar technology with similar mission requirements, they tend to have a lot of similarities. (In the years since they were…

How many decades will it be before we see an F35 used in film?

F-35's have been depicted in numerous Hollywood movies already, though it seems not always in the most positive light. To get an actual F-35 filmed for a movie would probably require the cooperation of the US military though, so probably the next time a sufficiently aggrandizing American war movie calls for one? The US military has helped out Hollywood like this many times before, if they think the movie shows them in a good light.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2011-aug-21-la-ca-mi...

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/why-f-35-stealth-figh...

Post reply on HN