Meanwhile you’re pointing to a plane that first flew over 40 years ago to make a point.

It totally isn’t. There hasn’t been a gun kill for nearly thirty years (and that wasn’t a dogfight; it was an A-10 versus a helicopter!); every single aircraft kill since then has been with missiles, and almost all with medium-range missiles (AIM-120s basically). 

I like how you’re talking about a war that ended nearly 45 years ago to prove dogfighting is still valid. The tech they had on their weapons was a first of its kind. Massive advancements have been made in air-to-air combat since. There hasn’t been any dogfighting with the US Air Force since vietnam.

They want to be in the European Union more than almost anything. That’s really the only thing keeping them nominally in our orbit anyway at this point.

What point are you countering? You posted a nice aerobatics demonstration. The article was about Navy IOC and purchases from Turkey and Singapore.

Counter counter point.

That’s the problem, the game has changed. It’s no longer thousands of Russian tanks advancing across Europe with thousands of Russian aircraft running cover, but handfuls of terrorists with bomb vests in hotels and theaters and others with computers spamming elections.

Isn’t a lot of this criticism that remote weapons make planes like this obsolete? Is any human in any aircraft going to out-perform a cheap-barrage of remote weapons? What’s the point of it. 

Personally I think that 30% of any modern jets mass is there to keep the delicate meat puppet driving the thing alive. Take the meat puppet out and place it in a shipping container somewhere are you have a fighter that is lighter, cheaper, faster, waaaay more expendable, and can do 20G maneuvers all day long. 

That looks cool, but is it a maneuver you would ever want to do in combat? 

Well I’d have been surprised if it’s not capable. We’ll probably only publicly get a true idea of it’s full capabilities in 20 years time or more. There were times during the development that I was convinced much of the negativity is intentional designed misinformation. Still $1.4tn and the time it took. We’re not…

Fuck Turkey in the ear. They aren’t an ally.

Chrysler will see your truck-van and raise you one.

I feel like if I were holding the paper ad, I would be looking for where to unfold it.

I want to see the Chevy “real people” ad for this monstrosity.

Wow. I was ready to like it after looking at that initial ad. But my god. The actual truck is so, so, so ugly. It looks like They just crashed a Chevy into a commercial truck and just went “eh... that’ll do.”

The drawing leaves you to assume that the sides are flush the length of the cab. The photos reveal the inward slope to the roof of the GMC portion - that just does NOT work with the slab sided Isuzu front.

Way worse. 

I dig it. I don’t know why.

But it looks way worse in photos than it did in the drawing

“There’s no valid financial reason for the vast majority of Republican voters to vote Republican.”