Would this be called a ‘Boondoggle’?
I do believe that is the correct term
I’d say standard operating procedure for the current bureaucratic regime.
2 trillion dollars for a plane that can’t fly in rain.
You’d think that the F-35 Lightning II, being a Lightning-type Pokémon, could survive lighting attacks.
Yeah, but it’s flying / electric, so it still takes full damage from both water and electric moves. And if the weather is sleet, it’s basically game over.
“But we can’t possibly implement universal healthcare, how would we pay for it?”
what do you mean it can’t fly in rain?
Something to do with being unable to make the fuel tanks inert. If you Google it there’s quite a lot about it. I’m no expert so I can’t tell you what that really means
I did google it, that’s why I was confused; https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/04/02/f-35a-lightning-cleared-to-fly-in-lightning-for-first-time-in-4-years/
It’s about lightning, not rain, and only affects the A variant which is, at least in the US’ case, a bit over half of all variants.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/erictegler/2022/11/23/air-force-f-35-lightning-iis-still-cant-fly-within-25-miles-of-lightning/?sh=7659da1e663e dated 2022, but covers the issue in detail.
2 trillion dollars for a plane that can’t fly in rain.
What kind of sorcery is this, we ask again?
The engineers must have been high on something strong,
To create a flying machine so horribly wrong!
You know how we all found out that Boeing had dry rotted from the inside because the 737 Max started falling apart? Whose to say that Lockheed hasn’t gone through exactly the same shit, but we just barely get glimpses of it through the smoke of classified documents.
I would bet this is precisely the case because exact same selection pressures apply.
