Haha I grew up on an alfalfa farm.

Ok. F-16 and F-2.

What thermonuclear war? It’s perfectly fine as a conventional weapon. Of course it could a phenomenal first strike tool. That doesn’t mean that’s all it can do. Or even that that’s its primary mission.

Yes. The ability to carry one of those internally was a prerequisite. In the past we’ve had to dump them out of the back of transport aircraft.

I highly doubt that’s where it’s at. You’re probably going to see something like what the F-117 uses. Potentially with some minor degree of thrust vectoring.

Because we’re still nowhere even close to where we need to be for an aircraft like this to be unmanned.

B-21 The Ghostly Haunted House ride at Disney Land

Hahah what? $1 billion?

It happens.

Sprey

B-52 can now carry those munitions in it’s bomb bay. It’s currently in the process of being upgraded (if it’s not already done).

You’re confused about a ton of things. Either that or you’re listening to the wrong people.

Middle bale: A couple cuttings old. High grass and weed content $3/each

Northrop

Pfft. What would you know? It’s not like you like you deal with them on a daily basis professionally.

Yawn. Careful you don’t cut yourself on all that edge.

He and I have never discussed this topic. I challenge his points and he just ignores it. Same goes for a myriad of other commenters that have brought up the same concerns with his “analysis” of things. Although he has plenty of time to individually thank anyone that takes his ridiculously inexperienced and naive views…

They could turn them off, but only for short periods.

If you’re a smoker, why wouldn’t you? It doesn’t pose any danger.

That’s not all of it. Don’t bite when Tyler says it’s survivable. It is NOT! What it boils down to for many is this: Why should we keep deploying an aircraft that has a far higher incident rate than it’s fast jet cousins? Even if it’s only a 70% solution to the A-10s (even though it’s better than 70% we can pretend)…