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

F-35 is built for the wrong war

warontherocks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 719 posts

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#181

Post by dinfinity »

2trill2spill wrote: post #177
dinfinity wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have no idea but the article didn't really make any convincing arguments about it. It did. It pointed out that the bases from which the F-35s would have to operate in a war with China would be very vulnerable: "The concentration of high-value equipment and personnel at each operating location makes the F-35’s basing problem qualitatively different from that of simpler aircraft. The loss is not just one jet but th…

> "At over eighty million dollars per airframe, with Lockheed Martin delivering fewer than two hundred aircraft per year across all variants and all customers worldwide, there is no surge capacity waiting to be activated and no precedent for accelerating a program of this complexity on wartime timelines. When one side can produce weapons by the hundreds and thousands — missiles, loitering munitions, and one-way attac…

> the f35 can be built at scale

Really? Can you indicate how many can be produced yearly?

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#182

Post by Rover222 »

dmix wrote: post #166
jjk166 wrote: post #158

> Meanwhile, modern conflict, from Ukraine’s drone war to naval engagements in the Red Sea to Iran’s own mass missile and drone salvos, increasingly favors systems that can be produced at scale and replaced when lost. The F-35 is a masterpiece. But a force designed around a masterpiece is not designed for long, protracted wars, and U.S. adversaries know this. The problem is that the F-35 was intended to be the low co…

The same issues with fighter jets procurement infect everything these days. Public transit, space, government software, etc.

[flagged]

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#183

Post by torlok »

01100011 wrote: post #162
dinfinity wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am sure people will take issue with this comment but look at the relative restraint of Russia in Ukraine [...] vs, say, WWII. They have been bombing civilian infrastructure, abducting children, torturing and executing civilians and POWs, executing deserters or wannabe deserters the entire fucking Ukraine war. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_in_the_Russo-Ukrain... Restraint, my unbleached asshole.

No one is fire-bombing cities yet, despite Ukraine pulling a WWII Japan and distributing weapons production amongst residences.

Russia is keeping their expensive equipment in the back since years now because they're afraid to lose it. They would be fire bombing cities if they could. Russia already used white phosphorous in this war. The only reason they're not killing more civilians with missiles and drones is because they can't build more of them.

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#184

Post by catlover76 »

[deleted] wrote: post #173
eek2121 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell that to the folks on the front lines, along with folks on both sides, military or not, who have had to deal with it. Russia would never nuke Ukraine to begin with. They know that by doing so, most of the world would unite against them, and many, including Putin, would be on the chopping block.

[deleted]

[dead]

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#185

Post by carefree-bob »

analog8374 wrote: post #94

we could do a moonbase for 2 trillion

But why? I'm not against the idea in principle, but there has to be a motivation beyond "It's possible". Even the search for knowledge, which is a good reason to invest in R&D, but how much would we learn on the moon for that 2 trillion that we couldn't learn more cheaply through other means?

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#186

Post by catlover76 »

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #163
jfengel wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A general war against China is impossible. But a "limited" war fought over Taiwan isn't beyond the realm of possibility. Which does take it into a kind of Schroedinger's realm. The US takes it seriously, so it develops technology for it, and China doesn't invade. But would China have invaded if the US hadn't prepared for that war? Quite possibly, but you can never know.

In the quite likely scenario that Iran goes on any longer, the US will become so war exhausted that we will be unable to provide any support for Taiwan.

[dead]

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#187

Post by jonnybgood »

vanviegen wrote: post #89

It concerns me how casual the article and some of the comments here discuss an actual war against China, as if that were a reasonable scenario. Of course I understand wanting to be prepared even for grim scenarios such as these. Military strategists should of course continually be refining such plans. But casual discussions like this, without even so much as a disclaimer about it being a hypothetical and extremely un…

> It concerns me how casual the article and some of the comments here discuss an actual war against China, as if that were a reasonable scenario.

It’ll be more concerning if wasn’t discussed in such a way. War is rarely reasonable. China doesn’t find it unreasonable to go to war over Taiwan. And for what? National pride and unity? It’s completely unreasonable, but everything they’re developing militarily is exactly for that. We must approach the subject clearly and explore every possibility as a real one. These discussions are about ending wars as quickly and decisively as possible while causing the minimal amount death.

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#188

Post by peterfirefly »

rawgabbit wrote: post #154
phainopepla2 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Satellites can definitely do things, but they're not magical and people can track where they're looking and just... sail in a different direction I know nothing about this really, so forgive my ignorance. Assuming a carrier is found and tracked by a satellite in the ocean, how could it possibly escape the satellite's detection before being targeted by a drone or some other type of munition? If the ship starts saili…

I believe satellites are usually in an orbit. They can’t follow an carrier for example. The satellites may be in a constellation that can track the carrier. That is why anti-satellites weapons have been developed. E.g., a jet fighter flies straight up and then fires a long range missile. https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Transportation/Ty... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon

Do you think a carrier can very far in the couple of hours it takes for a satellite to orbit around the Earth?

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#189

Post by rootusrootus »

Rover222 wrote: post #182
dmix wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same issues with fighter jets procurement infect everything these days. Public transit, space, government software, etc.

[flagged]

A lot of people believe the gov't can do a good job when it is not being actively subverted by people who ideologically want it to fail, and grifters. The only thing that has proven more expensive than having the gov't do something is having them partner with private industry to do it.

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#190

Post by micromacrofoot »

bawolff wrote: post #66

In the intro: > Meanwhile, modern conflict, from Ukraine’s drone war to naval engagements in the Red Sea to Iran’s own mass missile and drone salvos, increasingly favors systems that can be produced at scale and replaced when lost. In the conclusion: > The lesson of the Iran campaign is that the F-35 performed superbly in exactly the kind of fight it was built for. The lesson for force designers is that the next war…

The F-22 or F-15 would have also performed superbly in Iran, they don't have modern anti-air capabilities.
Post reply on HN