Summary

Lockheed Martin UK’s chief, Paul Livingston, defended the F-35 stealth jet program after Elon Musk called it obsolete due to advances in unmanned drones.

Livingston emphasized the F-35’s unmatched capabilities, including stealth, battlefield data-sharing, and cost-efficiency by replacing multiple aircraft types.

While Musk labeled the program overly expensive and poorly designed, Livingston argued drones alone can’t match the F-35’s capabilities or defend against threats like China’s J20 jets.

Despite criticism over cost and reliability, the F-35 remains integral to NATO defenses, with widespread adoption across 19 nations, including the UK.

1 point

Elon might have an accident with his Special K.

permalink
report
reply
68 points

The guy that can’t deliver self driving cars wants to talk about self driving planes?

permalink
report
reply
14 points

The cars were going to fly short distances too.

He said he was going to use monopropellant thrusters to make his cars fly.

Hopefully I do not need to point out the many reasons this is a very bad idea, if not functionally impossible.

He also said he was working on an electric aircraft at one point.

Other companies have actually made such things… not Musk though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*

if lithium battery fires were bad, i’m sure that firefighters are thrilled to see hydrazine fires, several hundreds of kg at a time, after random crashes. lmao. what the fuck was he thinking?

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

To be fair™ planes are a bit easier. Fewer obstacles up there and typically a lot of things broadcast that they are there. They were landing the Russian space shuttle by computer in the 80s.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

No one was jamming the Russian space shuttle, or shooting missiles at it.

It’s one thing to have an autonomous landing program on an aircraft, it’s another thing entirely to have a program that can react to surface to air missiles, enemy jamming, and over the horizon air to air missiles.

Elon musk is an idiot if he thinks a drone can replace all of the capabilities of even an F22, let alone the F35, which is a multi-role aircraft capable of handling all of the above and more. The F35 can jam, do reconnaissance, network with friendly fighters to fire over the horizon missiles, and drop bombs that weigh 1000 times what a drone can carry. Was it a good use of tax dollars considering the budget overruns? Probably not. But can it be replaced by drone swarms? Hell no. The F35 is an unmatched weapons platform, that’s why nato countries have been buying them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Oh yeah Elon is a wanker for sure. I just wanted to point out that though they seem similar the problem spaces are different

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

all from the power of one potato no less!

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Every word out of elons mouth is complete and utter bs.

permalink
report
reply
207 points

Elon is such an idiot.

This is the same shit he pulled back when he pushed drones as a solution to all those kids trapped in a cave. They weren’t even remotely viable, and when human beings rescued them, he called the leader of that successful operation a “pedo” for absolutely no reason other than his own childish idiocy.

permalink
report
reply
72 points

he called the leader of that successful operation a “pedo” for absolutely no reason other than his own childish idiocy.

I think it’s darker than that. Their solution involved doping the kids so they were heavily sedated during transport. This was out of fear they would panic and threaten their own life and that of the person transporting them.

The dark part is how Musk’s mind associated sedating a child to make them more docile with sexual assault.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points
*

He tried the “have sex with me and I’ll buy you a toy, but you can’t tell anyone” routine with a worker and got caught. Now he knows those tactics don’t work as well on adults.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Wow, source please!

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

he called the leader of that successful operation a “pedo” for absolutely no reason other than his own childish idiocy.

Come on Muskrat call the CEO of Lockheed Martin a pedo

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Normally I’m opposed to the MIC drone striking US citizens, but apparently there are some exceptions

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Elon isn’t a citizen I thought. More of a foreign combatant I’d say.

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

or like when he brained up hyperloop to prevent normal high speed trains development in california, but this one is too glaringly stupid and it’s going against thing that already is proven to work, and with no equals

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

That was the first time heard about Musk other than a few articles about him. And it was the moment I knew that he was an actual dumbass.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-25 points

One is an example of a team of people doing what elon’s dumb solution shouldn’t. The F-35 isn’t a solution to anything other than funneling tax dollars to Lockheed, and he’s dumb for thinking drones will replace everything, but not much more stupid than people seriously defending and advocating for the F-35 to replace everything, let alone anything

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

The bad stories about the F-35 are greatly exaggerated. The niche it fills is lugging 18,000 pounds of ordnance into contested air without getting shot down. Something the A-10 is less and less capable of every year. In the future, the development roadmap, they want the F-35 to use it’s electronics to guide arsenal drones in that bring even more ordnance. In an air to air fight one F-35 out in front can already launch all of the AIM-174s that a Super Hornet can carry, before the F/A-18 can even see the targets. Vastly improving survivability and deadliness.

There’s several very good reasons to use these things.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

But did you know it costs money?!

/s

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

All those reasons have nothing to do with the reliability. It sounds nice (insofar as anything military can sound nice), but they still break down a lot more often than other fighter jets. Literally read this in a report from the pentagon iirc, though it was like 10 years ago and maybe they finally make it out of stuff other than tin and cardboard

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Here’s the thing; every bad thing you’ve ever heard about the F-35 comes either directly or indirectly from Pierre Sprey.

And Pierre Sprey also believed that modern aircraft shouldn’t have missiles or radar. He is not a man to be taken seriously, and neither are his criticisms of the F-35.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The criticism I’ve heard came from flag officers making statements like “It can’t run, can’t climb, and can’t fight”…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

No, most of the bad things I’ve heard about the F-35 come from stories and reports of how they break down and malfunction a lot more often than other fighter jets. Is that just made up by Sprey and the reports of it not working are just lies?

permalink
report
parent
reply
122 points
*

“Fifth columnist says top of the line weapons system that is already paid for and being fielded is actually fucking stupid and you should totally divest from it and pursue some vague futuretech solution.”

It’s all so tiresome.

permalink
report
reply
31 points

it’s all “hey don’t do the thing that works, instead give money to meeee”

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 18K

    Posts

  • 290K

    Comments