I don't see the point of spending billions of dollars of the people's money to design and develope a new stealth platform, only to outfit it with an external weapons delivery system, which...
...negates the platform's stealth ability.
Its redundant, and stupid. I say utilize our other non-stealth platforms to carry external ordinance loads, and not ruin a billion-dollar stealth jet.
Because even Helen Keller can figure that one out.
3
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
3 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.
What we have here it's a hundred and twenty million dollar piece of junk.
Xtra
Level 8
Feb 13, 2020
2
Million, or billion, with a 'B'????
Xtra:
@EAL_Flt1979 With overruns probably extending into a couple of trillion, I would tend to agree with you.
Being a multipurpose platform I can see where the F35 might not necessarily need to utilize its stealth capability for certain missions.
I'm pretty sure the folks who built the F35 have worked out with the end users all the different kinds of missions this plane might be used for.
I don't know much about such things but I would agree that the airplane in the above photo fully loaded with externally mounted ordinance is probably not very "stealthy" but it seems to me that in such configuration "stealthyness" isn't high priority for the planes mission.
I would also guess that the plane in this pic is merely demonstrating the extreme payload capacity and capabilities of the F35. - like saying look how much ordinance this platform can effectively carry and still perform effectively and survive its sorties...
see what I mean?
iThink
Level 9
Feb 13, 2020
2
Yes. We'll put.
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.