Comments by "Steve Watson" (@stevewatson6839) on "Sandboxx" channel.

You should always honour the threat; what better answer to Russian bullshit than your own bullshit? 🤪
1
Cutting edge avionics and data fusion? Not 'stealth' as in negligible radar return. I'd take two Silent Eagles with two engines, two pairs of eyes, and half the crew workload over one F35. Quantity has a quality all of its' own. I'd argue most, if not all, nations are not serious about war or national defence and more invested in willy-waving.
1
Unfortunately the US airfarces have form for cooking the books to make their 'planes look good in exercises and the data derived. I'd want to see analysis from parties with no skin in the game yay or nay. My bet if such isn't done? A decade from now it'll come out that the "Pentagon Paradox" still applies and the F35 is in large part a gold plated boon-dongle like most, if not all, its' predecessors in the fourth generation.
1
@mississaugaicedogs They are both multi-role: The F16 is a dog-fighter at heart that is largely used as a mud-mover; the F35 is a mudmover at heart that can fight its' way in and out if it has to. Neither exist in a vacumn and neither can fight on their own without the rest of the airforce and its supporting elements and infrastructure. We now know the Russian "threat" is a fantasy both Russia and the US/NATO bigged up and lied about; how much of a "threat" is that other bogeyman, the PRC? That has a large bearing on whether the F35 is worth the extravagence. History shows the US assessment of its' rivals and "enemies" is usually bollocks and lies over-egging the cake time and time again. Leopards can't change their spots and scorpions will always sting. It is always best to disbelieve proven liars and known bullshitters.
1
@AEON. Yeah, yeah, you can fly aircraft underground, 🙄. What do all these sites have eh? Wall -to-wall eyes-on, from serious folk to swivel-eyed tin-foil hatters. I think these things would be outed very soon after they got off the ground.
1