CreateDebate


Debate Info

1
2
Yes, it is a good aircraft No, it is not very effective
Debate Score:3
Arguments:4
Total Votes:3
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes, it is a good aircraft (1)
 
 No, it is not very effective (2)

Debate Creator

lukeh(21) pic



Was the F35 program a wise decision

The f35 has advanced stealth and sensor technology but has bad phsical performance and is expensive.  Is it worth the cost?

Yes, it is a good aircraft

Side Score: 1
VS.

No, it is not very effective

Side Score: 2
1 point

So here's the thing. I don't know as much about it as you so I did some quick internet searches. Indeed there are articles ragging on how expensive this thing is and that it should be scrapped. But then I also came across this one...

http://www.businessinsider.com/why-f-35-worth-every-penny-heritage-foundation-2016-8/#the-f-35a-has-superior-threat-detection-1

And I'm not at all saying that one article makes up for all the counter ones. Indeed the US is a military industrial complex and surely there are news sources (perhaps the one I gave) which serve to promote and sell.

But I'm struck by the pilots talking about the special heads up technology that allows them to see through the frame of their plane for better awareness and targeting and everything a pilot needs to see and do. And I'm thinking as I read that then probably there are techs built into this plane which are intended for much broader applications, like space travel, navy, even in controlling of drones. So what I'm saying is this might not really be about the actual plane. when I look at that plane's body it's just a sexed up hybrid of the Hornet and Eagle and maybe even some Soviet versions I think I've seen. It isn't that the plane, as an individual war tool, is all that revolutionary. Instead it's the tech breakthroughs this program funded, which may be.

Side: Yes, it is a good aircraft

Absolutely fucking not. 5 trillion was it? Down the toilet on a plane that doesnt fly and is only MARGINALLY more advanced than the planes we already have. nevermind theres no currently threat that warrants such advanced tech. Were fighting dudes with AKs, cell phones, and toyota pickup trucks. Not the goddamn KGB.

Side: No, it is not very effective
1 point

It was about 1.5 trillion dollars which is absolutely insane. We literally could have bought 750,000 f16s or the price of the f35 program.

Side: No, it is not very effective
rAdHominem(6) Clarified
1 point

I only wish to clarify on one point. The F-35 WOULD have been far cheaper if left to the Air Force and Army requirements. One of the things that truly caused issues was the USMC's desire to have an upgrade to the Harrier and its vertical takeoff ability. It was a brilliant concept, having one platform with multiple variations to choose from. Not only for the US, but this was eventually supposed to be a large NATO project as well; to bring more balance to joint coalition operations, to offer upgraded equipment to allies, and to solve some of the radar signature issues of the past. During Operation Desert Storm, French Aircraft (Mirage F1) had issues with being targeted by coalition members because Iraq was using the same air craft.

Side: Yes, it is a good aircraft