https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

The Air Force grudgingly admits that, well, maybe this older plane might work

At least for a little while. Until the bugs are shaken out of their bright shiny new plane. Which they haven't been yet, but will be, soon, I'm sure. And even thought that new plane probably won't serve the role as well as this older plane. But that's okay, because the new plane is new, so it's better. Or it will be. Once it works.

So, yeah, that old plane they wanted to retire years ago, so that they could start training maintenance crews on the new plane, that hasn't actually been deployed yet, because it doesn't work? They appear to need to keep it around. Even if, y'know, that kind of mission isn't very exciting or sexy. Which is why the old plane really needs to go, and the new plane do its job. Sort of. But probably not as well. But newer. But not yet.




License renewed? Air Force says it needs A-10 a bit longer, thanks | Ars Technica
Deployments to help fight IS, slow delivery of F-35 put bigger demands on plane.

View on Google+

55 view(s)  

11 thoughts on “The Air Force grudgingly admits that, well, maybe this older plane might work”

  1. +Dan Eastwood Yup. But always before they had the next thing ready to take its place, because otherwise there was no way to go to Congress and say, "Well, you have to give us another $47 trillion for the F35 because we no longer have any other planes we can use."

    Standard DoD/Defense Contractor logic.

  2. +Dan Eastwood I can appreciate the idea of efficiency in division of efforts, such as to keep fixed-wing aircraft within the Air Force's domain. But the USAF's treatment of Army support roles and equipment demonstrates the major flaw in that idea.

  3. Given the progress of drone combat aircraft, I suspect the F-35 may soon be antiquated anyway. Piloted aircraft are limited to about 6-g maneuvers, while drone are only limits by structural strength.

  4. +keith olszewski Well, they can make money, but it's in the mundane realm of parts and replacements. R&D and big new orders is where it's at.

    Similarly, I suspect few DoD brass think that having their name associated with a successful extension of the Weapon System X project from 2012-2020 is much to hang their hat on, while being the proud father of Weapon System Y is much more prestigious (and potentially more lucrative).

    See also: why governments spend money on building new bridges but not on maintaining old ones.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *