That had a lot of Kooks and Weirdos camping outside of it Calling intoIt isn't a decoy base. It's the AF test base with hundreds of miles of open area
Coast to Coast Am.
Last edited:
That had a lot of Kooks and Weirdos camping outside of it Calling intoIt isn't a decoy base. It's the AF test base with hundreds of miles of open area
True lolThat had a lot of Kooks and Weirdos camping outside of it Calling into
Coast to Coast Am.
Sounds like the Reformers in the Pentagon. I got an earful about them watching Laserpig during a binge session.Same with every single Soviet system.
I remember back in the runup to Desert Storm there were constant articles about how the F-15 was useless, the Abrams was trash, every single bit of kit in the US inventory was garbage, etc etc etc. Those people are the same ones trashing the F-35 today.
Pretty much, yeah. I actually just found the... magazine... one of the articles was reprinted in, it was also in the NYT Magazine and Time, but the one I have is... PlayboySounds like the Reformers in the Pentagon. I got an earful about them watching Laserpig during a binge session.
If they were in charge our jets would only have guns, could only fly during daylight hours and in clear blue skies and would lack radars and other advanced electronics.
Which issue?Pretty much, yeah. I actually just found the... magazine... one of the articles was reprinted in, it was also in the NYT Magazine and Time, but the one I have is... Playboy
I, too, read them for the interviews.Pretty much, yeah. I actually just found the... magazine... one of the articles was reprinted in, it was also in the NYT Magazine and Time, but the one I have is... Playboy
<Insert peperodge farm meme.>
Lol, you might want to put whatever 'old' was between das and boot.
I don't think that the F-16, F-15, F-18 or even the F-22 had as many setbacks and cost overruns as the Pidgeon has.
Then again, those were all designed when the USA was thinking it would go to WWIII with a near peer competitor, meanehile, the F-35 was designed in peacetime, by an INTERNATIONAL committee after lots of US arms industry consolidation and the neocons gaining lots of traction.
Oh, my, a 50+ year aircraft designed back in the day when computers were less powerful than a modern day pocket calculator and when things like ejection seats and other safety mechanism were less advanced is indeed a very good comparison.F-15: 123 USAF aircraft lost with 52 fatalities, plus about another fifty export aircraft lost.
F-35: Eight aircraft lost with 1 fatality.
Yes, and that does not invalidate my point about safety tech and computers being far more primitive years ago, thus requiring more hands on testing and leading to more fatalities.Actually, Agent, she was comparing developmental aircraft, not over entire lifespan of program. AKA Apples to Apples.
Right now the F-15 is arguably the greatest combat aircraft to have ever flown, yet it had a very troubled development of its own which saw critics demanding the program's cancellation as it was clearly a failed program. Sound familiar? So, in a way, you are the one saying 'This time it's different'.
Citation needed.You've already been given the exact numbers from public records, there is nothing secret or hidden about them.
That you can't be arsed to verify public information is not my problem, it's a you problem.
The F-15 was groundbreaking and developed at a time when there was panic about the MiG-25, the F-35 on the other hand exists because you guys needed a cheaper F-22 that could do more for less and could besoldforced onto all your clients and damage the European fighter industry, and it was conceived and developed at a time when the primary threat to Murikah were a bunch of head towel and flaps-wearing Taliban and AQ and Saddam's crap military.
You do realize that the Taliban airforce could not even down early CIA spy drones, after resorting to trying to ram em and failing with old MiG-21s, right?