Millions for Defense, but Not a Penny for Product Development

An older F-16 would beat an F-35 in a dogfight? Ignoring for the moment that no modern aircraft should ever get into a dogfight, that’s pretty poor.

This is also the aircraft which does poorer close air support than the A-10, which it is also to replace.

See the trend? When you try to get one plane to do it all—oh, and take off vertically—you end up with an Edsel. Please excuse the antiquated reference, but Ford knew the Edsel was a loser before they offered them and offered them anyway.

What’s DoD’s excuse? Politics? What happened to principles? What happened to serving country, not career?

Several somebodies ought to be fired, instead they’ll be awarded, promoted and given bigger programs to screw up.

(Lest you think the author a crank, he’s a retired Air Force colonel who performed and co-wrote the maintenance portion of the initial operational test and evaluation of the F-15 Eagle in 1976. And he’s a crank. He thinks the DoD should focus more on defending the country and less on politics.)


One thought on “Millions for Defense, but Not a Penny for Product Development

  1. You may be a crank, but you’re one darn funny crank. Thanks for the update on poor aircraft design. I’ll take your word for it.

Comments are closed.