this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2024
310 points (100.0% liked)

World News

45615 readers
4430 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Lockheed Martin UK’s chief, Paul Livingston, defended the F-35 stealth jet program after Elon Musk called it obsolete due to advances in unmanned drones.

Livingston emphasized the F-35’s unmatched capabilities, including stealth, battlefield data-sharing, and cost-efficiency by replacing multiple aircraft types.

While Musk labeled the program overly expensive and poorly designed, Livingston argued drones alone can’t match the F-35’s capabilities or defend against threats like China’s J20 jets.

Despite criticism over cost and reliability, the F-35 remains integral to NATO defenses, with widespread adoption across 19 nations, including the UK.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 220 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Elon is such an idiot.

This is the same shit he pulled back when he pushed drones as a solution to all those kids trapped in a cave. They weren't even remotely viable, and when human beings rescued them, he called the leader of that successful operation a "pedo" for absolutely no reason other than his own childish idiocy.

[–] [email protected] 71 points 3 months ago (1 children)

he called the leader of that successful operation a "pedo" for absolutely no reason other than his own childish idiocy.

I think it's darker than that. Their solution involved doping the kids so they were heavily sedated during transport. This was out of fear they would panic and threaten their own life and that of the person transporting them.

The dark part is how Musk's mind associated sedating a child to make them more docile with sexual assault.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

He tried the "have sex with me and I'll buy you a toy, but you can't tell anyone" routine with a worker and got caught. Now he knows those tactics don't work as well on adults.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Thanks!

Edit: I hope he will have to not have any normal people around him any more, as its that easy to get 250.000$ out of him. What a piece of shit.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 months ago

or like when he brained up hyperloop to prevent normal high speed trains development in california, but this one is too glaringly stupid and it's going against thing that already is proven to work, and with no equals

[–] [email protected] 24 points 3 months ago

That was the first time heard about Musk other than a few articles about him. And it was the moment I knew that he was an actual dumbass.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 months ago (1 children)

he called the leader of that successful operation a "pedo" for absolutely no reason other than his own childish idiocy.

Come on Muskrat call the CEO of Lockheed Martin a pedo

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Normally I'm opposed to the MIC drone striking US citizens, but apparently there are some exceptions

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

Elon isn't a citizen I thought. More of a foreign combatant I'd say.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

One is an example of a team of people doing what elon's dumb solution shouldn't. The F-35 isn't a solution to anything other than funneling tax dollars to Lockheed, and he's dumb for thinking drones will replace everything, but not much more stupid than people seriously defending and advocating for the F-35 to replace everything, let alone anything

[–] [email protected] 26 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The bad stories about the F-35 are greatly exaggerated. The niche it fills is lugging 18,000 pounds of ordnance into contested air without getting shot down. Something the A-10 is less and less capable of every year. In the future, the development roadmap, they want the F-35 to use it's electronics to guide arsenal drones in that bring even more ordnance. In an air to air fight one F-35 out in front can already launch all of the AIM-174s that a Super Hornet can carry, before the F/A-18 can even see the targets. Vastly improving survivability and deadliness.

There's several very good reasons to use these things.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

But did you know it costs money?!

/s

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I thought they ran on Freedom ^TM ?!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

nope, it's Element 710

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

All those reasons have nothing to do with the reliability. It sounds nice (insofar as anything military can sound nice), but they still break down a lot more often than other fighter jets. Literally read this in a report from the pentagon iirc, though it was like 10 years ago and maybe they finally make it out of stuff other than tin and cardboard

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Reliability is always being improved, they're already on version 3 of the F-35. But no, "a lot more", is a subjective term. There's actually not much info on how often other jets break down. But they're also on block 70, not block 4. And they're still developing tools that fix them faster and better. For example the F-15 got an OBD scanner like device in 2007, after being in service for decades.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

There's actually not much info on how often other jets break down.

...what?

This is...one of the single biggest metrics people talk about in evaluation of military aircraft development projects?

Why has everyone temporarily lost their critical thinking skills in this thread?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

Sure, go ahead and link me the stats for the F-15C/E, F-16E, and F/A-18 then. Specifically the mean time between critical failures? That's break downs. There's information on mission availability, which is in the 60's percent like all of the other combat jets.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Here's the thing; every bad thing you've ever heard about the F-35 comes either directly or indirectly from Pierre Sprey.

And Pierre Sprey also believed that modern aircraft shouldn't have missiles or radar. He is not a man to be taken seriously, and neither are his criticisms of the F-35.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The criticism I've heard came from flag officers making statements like "It can't run, can't climb, and can't fight"...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Yes. Indirectly or directly echoing ideas that have propogated through the military from Pierre Sprey and his allies in the "Fighter plane mafia." Its genuinely hard to express what an undue influence these people have had on military thinking over the decades. These are the same people who convinced everyone that the Bradley (y'know, the one that has been fucking up tanks in Ukraine) is a bad vehicle.

"Can't run, can't climb, can't fight" is the sort of thing you say when you're under the impression that it's still 1939 and we're still using energy maneuver theory.

Dogfighting is as meaningful to modern combat as cavalry charges. The officers echoing this bullshit are no different than the ones who claimed that machine guns were overrated. Warfare has changed. Modern fighters operate like submarines; the goal is to detect and kill the enemy before they detect and kill you. Maneuverability has nothing to do with it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

As someone who has fought war...

You're not right. You're not even wrong.

Get back to me after you've at least done PLDC or BNOC.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

I'm in Canada, we don't have those. PLQ would probably be the closest equivalent up here.

Also PLDC is called WLC now. Sorry, I know it's tough having to move with the times, but you really do have to try to keep up.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Wow I didn't expect to come back and see an F-35 fan unironically defending the Bradley xD you're a good ass troll I'll give you that, you had me going the other day for sure

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Oh, I'm sorry, clearly I just imagined all the footage coming out of Ukraine of Bradleys eating 125mm shells without even flinching, and fucking up T90 tanks.

But please, do explain how Pentagon Wars proves that its a terrible vehicle with no redeeming qualities.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No, most of the bad things I've heard about the F-35 come from stories and reports of how they break down and malfunction a lot more often than other fighter jets. Is that just made up by Sprey and the reports of it not working are just lies?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

From what I can tell it's not that the airplane is unreliable, but the logistics and training for maintenance and repair haven't been ironed out.

https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-105341

The gao cites issues with the contractor not sharing technical details, lack of availability of parts, lack of training, etc.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

That would make sense, I haven't followed the F-35 for a while so maybe it's gotten better since then. I still remember specifically reading that it malfunctions more often than it should, but I never dove deep into the subject and for all I know it could mainly be this. Ty for the link friend :3