> The F-35 II was supposed to be the next air superiority aircraft.
That’s how I remember it too. Interestingly though, the current Wikipedia entry for the F-35 says it’s for “ground attack and air defense missions”, while the original version of that article called it a “fighter plane” (AKA air superiority).
I think what the F35 is really supposed to be is a gravy train for all those traitorous generals who retired to become consultants, advisors, and executives at various defense supply firms.
We offered the F-35 to a few of our “allies” overeseas and they chose to go with the F-22 because of expense. The 35 is one very big expenditure as I understand it.
But so what, really. Our “non-allies” already have the plans for the SOB and are countering it as we speak. You can be assured that before the end of the year, they will have the buzz capacity to scramble the targeting program and most likely take out the on board computer anyway which turns it into a F-15 eagle that may be a little hard to see. Nothing is completely stealth.
And the libs were saying the other governments didn’t do cyber attacks and hacking so Hilary’s computer couldn’t have been hacked. This thing isn’t even off the drawing board.
rwood
” “fighter plane” (AKA air superiority)’”
No, it was NEVER ever Air Superiority. “Fighter” is a generic term. The ‘Stealth Fighter’ never had any air to air capability what so ever. In the last 50 years ever combat jet has been called a ‘fighter’. It implies nothing about their operational role.