US Navy Admiral Questions Expensive Stealth Platforms

Trepidity writes "United States Navy Admiral and Chief of Naval Operations Jonathan Greenert stirred a controversy by questioning much of the thinking underlying current U.S. defense technology. He argues that stealth technology is unlikely to retain its usefulness much into the future, and so focus should switch towards standoff weapons. In addition, he criticizes the focus on expensive all-in-one platforms such as the F-35 fighter, arguing for a payload-centric, flexible approach he compares to trucks rather than luxury cars."

Re:Cut military spending.

[JimCanuck]

Well in that case ... Go Canada!

Re:Nonsense... it is 100% effective

[Iamthecheese]

So imagine you're a racing company. A big one. You have fingers in every pie from demolition derbies to dirt bikes to those 2,000 horsepower sprint races. You've got stock cars, Formula 1 monsters, and banged up heavily reinforced pickups. You may save money by making a stock car that can compete in F1 but in the end you risk losing because your car couldn't cut it in the right field. Now the F-22 is like a formula one car. Fast, very expensive, highly specialized. In its domain it's the best in the world. But you would lose a 500 lap nascar race in one. So you don't build as many and you use them only where they belong.

Re:NObama 2012

[Black Parrot]

Go Romney! The candidate with the shorter last name deserves to win!

Actually the candidate with the biggest dick deserves to win. (Though I'm not offering to check.)

Of course, politicians don't listen carefully, so they think the rule is that the one who *is* the biggest dick deserves to win.

Re:Cut military spending.

[catmistake]

We need software, not bombs.

FTFY

make install, not war

Re:Diplomacy does not always work

[Hillgiant]

You can't be too rich, too thin, or have a too big stick.

I get enough of this junk in my email inbox. I don't want to see it on /.