Quote:
Originally Posted by Zulu29
Sorry the hawk is leased not loaned. In any event it's not ours permanently. The reason why I wouldn't want to buy the F-35 vs something else is because it's too damn expensive! It's been an boondoggle from the beginning, the government said part of its duties would be sovereignty patrols when it's clearly designed to sneak in and bomb things. I'm trying to look at things that are really necessary for our military and I don't think this is one of them. If our government wants the ability to bomb stuff go get cruise missiles and launch them from ships.
|
Cruise missiles do a lousy job of battlefield support and aren't great in a moving battlefield.
they are terrific for static targets like bridges, airfields and buildings.
But the concept of bomb stuff from an aircraft is that you have eyes on targic in a moving field. you can use a plan to bomb enemy emplacements and take out troop formations, or use medium range harms to take out mobile sam sites, or take out armor columns or logistics columns.
Cruise missiles don't do that they are guided to a point on a map not a target.
The F-35 can fly in low, it can evade or ignore sam sites and the plane can come in on close air support.
If I took 10 F-35's for example and went into a heavily defended area, vs 10 F-18 going into the same type of area. Chances are I would lose far more F-18's, or super hornets or Euro-fighters then I would a F-35 or other low observable platform.