Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 21:42:43 -0400
From: Bob Taylor <news@windstream.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Subject: Re: Pentagon's vaunted F-35 earns lousy review from test pilot in
secret report
References: <efndpalsmljlcn5igv8amg4fcvu7v1aabu@4ax.com> <avbfpategckldjl5j9km7ruu1q6kd0cn19@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <avbfpategckldjl5j9km7ruu1q6kd0cn19@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <831c9$55988b8d$438da659$11419@ALLTEL.NET>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenetserver.com
Organization: UseNetServer.com
Lines: 27
X-Trace: 831c955988b8de62803fc11419
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3114146539
X-Received-Bytes: 1929
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.pictures.aviation:1999
Bob (not my real pseudonym) wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Jul 2015 19:11:29 +0000, Charles Lindbergh
> <spirit@stlouis.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Not a big surprise.... but still disappointing.
>>
>> Pentagon's vaunted F-35 earns lousy review from test pilot in secret report
>>
>> http://fxn.ws/1FYt9Nd
>>
>> original story here:
>>
>> https://medium.com/war-is-boring/when-is-the-f-35-not-a-dogfighter-when-it-s-convenient-2fb1f233f42
>
> clearly of a bygone era,' Air Force Lt. Col. Pete Zuppas, then in
> charge of the 35th Operations Group in Japan, wrote in an official
> 2007 op-ed."
>
> They said that about the F-4 Phantom - until Viet Nam came along. At
> least the F-35 has a gun...
>
> What we need are more A-10s - cheap, indestructible, beautifully ugly,
> and capable of ruining Achmed's day with both engines tied behind its
> back.
Wonder how many A-10s we could buy for one F-35?
|
|