Forum: F-35 Lightning II

geogen wrote:

And a disclaimer to Shep: I'm not employed by any industry relevant to aviation or defense

Don't worry, that's been perfectly clear right from the start...

F-16.net Sponsor

Quote:

I guess my gut feeling in this specific regard is that 'Tejas-N' appears to be a legit, cost-effective program at least worth studying as a ski-jump capable econo fighter solution.

What on earth could possibly make you think that? The original Tejas is a complete trainwreck. Now you think the naval version is somehow an option?

I mean people get upset at the F-35's delays, have you even looked at the Tejas program? After decades of work and tons of help from outside experts they are still struggling to get a glorified combat capable trainer into operation.

shep1978 wrote:

geogen wrote:

And a disclaimer to Shep: I'm not employed by any industry relevant to aviation or defense

Don't worry, that's been perfectly clear right from the start...

Shep:

Yeah, YOUR repeated ad hominen attack posts just add so much these discussions. Rolling Eyes

psychmike wrote:

Shep:

Yeah, YOUR repeated ad hominen attack posts just add so much these discussions. Rolling Eyes

First off i've not been guilty of repeated ad hominen attacks. All as I have done is contest one of Geogens posts for a really obvious reason and then when he insinuated I thought he was part of a lobby group or defence group I merely pointed out that I never once have considered that to be true, for blindingly obvious reasons. Do tell how that is reapeated ad hominen attacks?

This is a discussion forum. We encourage any opinion as long as it conforms to netiquette and common sense.

Central to this is to "Avoid offensive content" and to be "..courteous: respect other people's opinions, and keep the discussion civilized."

To read more: http://www.f-16.net/guidelines.html

B. Bolsøy
Oslo

shep1978 wrote:

psychmike wrote:

Shep:

Yeah, YOUR repeated ad hominen attack posts just add so much these discussions. Rolling Eyes

First off i've not been guilty of repeated ad hominen attacks. All as I have done is contest one of Geogens posts for a really obvious reason and then when he insinuated I thought he was part of a lobby group or defence group I merely pointed out that I never once have considered that to be true, for blindingly obvious reasons. Do tell how that is reapeated ad hominen attacks?

You know, I really appreciate your contribution to the forums. I think the information you add generally raises the bar of discussion. I tend to agree with you a lot more than I disagree. But at the same time, you often appear impatient and intolerant of those you disagree with and then seen unwilling to acknowledge those backhanded (or fronthanded) insults. Whether you acknowledge it or not, saying that it is "blindingly obvious" that someone doesn't work in the aerospace industry when they are simply trying to deny bias IS insulting.

Other examples of your personal attacks include:

"I really don't mean to be rude but if you can't see it then you have, in my opinion, questionable intelligence and are clearly not up to the task of being able to debate such matters."

"Jesus Harry, if you're going to try and troll at least be subtle about it. I can honestly say this is some of the worst trolling i've ever seen, worst as in awful and not very clever or provocative at all."

"The mans a douche who thinks he's more important than he actually is."

"Jeffrey, mate. You've no idea just how stupid you're looking on this forum, it's truely remarkable, and pretty hilarious too."

This is a discussion forum. I'm all for encouraging a decent level of discourse but hurling personal insults isn't the way to encourage rigorous thought. I really hope you keep posting because I value your insight and knowledge.

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Perhaps Mixed F-35A & Bs for Italy (reduced?)