Sweetman found something new to cry about

[SpudmanWP]

going to have no respect

That ship has already sailed.

[arcturus]

going to have no respect

That ship has already sailed.

I firmly agree.

[Corsair1963]

I stand corrected...

[KamenRiderBlade]

Was there ever a time people respected him?

Maybe I'm not old enough to remember it if there was one.

[arcturus]

Was there ever a time people respected him?

Maybe I'm not old enough to remember it if there was one.

If such a time every existed, it was surely before his quest to uncover Aurora.

[geogen]

Very sad to see all the cheap shots here. Especially the very cheap one by the initial comment's author.

If one actually reads Bill's article to conclusion and reads with both eyes open, perhaps one can see his context was mainly about protecting technical security of various next-gen Programs if they are viable and worthy; but merely allowing more critical assessment and review of secretive acquisition processes to ensure they are heading in a sustainable and viable direction.

In short, given that the current acquisition process is arguably still broken and dysfunctional (with no apparent comprehensive restructuring and reform unfortunately, still to date, in an increasing environment of austere budgets going forward), it's a perfectly legit critique to warn about 'Moral Hazard' potential for such mass-scale programs.

Bill is absolutely correct in criticism about the perception of a 'just Trust me' paradigm; as most likely not being in the best interests of national defense, i.e., in today's arguably insufficient (still yet to be fixed/lack of strategic oversight, etc) Program acquisition process. Just my views.

[arcturus]

Very sad to see all the cheap shots here.

Does the community opinion here of Bill outweigh the many cheap shots he has taken at multiple programs over the years? I feel 'very sad to see all the cheap shots' every time I read an article from Bill covering any aspect of the F-35 program.

[spazsinbad]

Especially the BS cheap shots directed towards the USMC and especially the future aviation component. Why? Have the USMC stolen his lunch and his lunch money one too many times?

[mixelflick]

As a youth, I bought his books and thought a lot of him. Today, he's not even trying to hide he has an agenda. Rather than slinging mud, has Billy ever offered a solution vs. whining about the Lightening?

[Prinz_Eugn]

Was there ever a time people respected him?

Maybe I'm not old enough to remember it if there was one.

Yeah, I have a couple books by him that are interesting as histories, but he has very limited technical knowledge which shows... I uploaded scans years ago of a book by him written about stealth aircraft in the mid-80's, it's about halfway down on this link: viewtopic.php?p=189284

Similar secrecy schtick then, too.

[XanderCrews]

Very sad to see all the cheap shots here. Especially the very cheap one by the initial comment's author.

You can save the white knight act, thanks.

Bill has earned every cheap shot he gets, so please don't make him the victim. This is a guy who cries for honest debate and when engaged, has those that question (especially when they start winning) him removed from the medium of public discourse, or starts playing grammar nazi, and arguing semantics with them. Which is even more nasty when you consider that not everyone's first language is English, so if some forienger happens to make a salient point bill would rather lecture him about "Your" vs "You're". He never admits he is wrong, never takes responsibility which is ironic considering his schtick on LM

Bill is reaping what he has sown. I have personally witnessed Bill Sweetman, "outing" people by using their full names on Internet Forums to pressure them into stopping posting and challenging him. (while of course refusing to use his full name-- a lesson learned after Facebooks posts under his name got him suspended) Along with deliberately working to get people banned who support those he has outed. Many people have been outright banned, while he gleefully partakes in a double standard because he is personal friends with the moderators. Mysteriously, right before Australia placed their 70+ aircraft order for the JSF, JSF threads on certain forums Bill frequents heavily were put on lock.

so geogen, maybe you should study up on who you are defending before you jump to their defense.

Turnabout is fair play.

If one actually reads Bill's article to conclusion and reads with both eyes open, perhaps one can see his context was mainly about protecting technical security of various next-gen Programs if they are viable and worthy; but merely allowing more critical assessment and review of secretive acquisition processes to ensure they are heading in a sustainable and viable direction.

And let me guess, Bill is the guy most qualified to do/report on that?

In short, given that the current acquisition process is arguably still broken and dysfunctional (with no apparent comprehensive restructuring and reform unfortunately, still to date, in an increasing environment of austere budgets going forward), it's a perfectly legit critique to warn about 'Moral Hazard' potential for such mass-scale programs.

Bill is absolutely correct in criticism about the perception of a 'just Trust me' paradigm; as most likely not being in the best interests of national defense, i.e., in today's arguably insufficient (still yet to be fixed/lack of strategic oversight, etc) Program acquisition process. Just my views.

I have no clue why Bill would go after the symptoms (Sexy expensive aviation programs) , while claiming to cure the disease (Politics, the aquisition process, government oversight, government accountability. etc) ...

The acquisition process, is not the aircraft itself. The acquisition process does not just apply to airplanes either. So bizarre that this crusader for government accountability doesn't concern himself with other aspects of the DoD...

...oh no wait! he is an aviation writer who is using the idea of government accountability as an excuse to complain he isn't getting access to the shiny secret aeromachines, and probably never will after his behavior. At one point Bill decided he wanted to depart from writing about aviation and instead become a "public watchdog" which is fine, but public watch dogging isn't aviation, and we have lots of other sources for such but not nearly as many for aviation news. F-35 has been made into a political toxic cesspool of argument in Aviation week, rather than an impressive achievement in the history of aviation. If you don't comprehend what I am getting at, Look at how he reports on GRipen NG (all about achievements, and capability, and balance, cost -- and remember a full prototype hasn't even flown yet) and compare it to how he reports on the F-35. See if you notice any differences, there geogen. read with "both eyes open" and look for "context" Look how he treats SAAB compared to LM. Notice he would rather quote nutters in Australia in his articles, rather than the people actually building the airplane.

In short, when I want acquisition news I will turn to other sources. When I want aviation news, that is supposed to be provided by aviation week, and people like bill. Guys who are nuts about airplanes, eat, sleep ,and breathe aviation and care about getting the story right for other airplane nuts. The tend to focus on the positive. If it was the same environment now that it was back then, we would get to hear about what a waste the X-1 is because it has to be dropped from a mother plane, and that Yeager is a hack, oh and I guess man broke the sound barrie-- but the X-1 still isn't a good use of money when we could be pursuing a better a Spitfire.

At one point Bill went full cynic, and I don't get aviation news from him anymore. He was so nasty that he was suspended from his own publication, that many articles that feature F-35 either don't use his name, or so use it but have 2 or 3 authors to lend some credibility so people actually bother to read it. Little clues like that are what tell me Aviation week has also noticed his antics, and probably aren't that thrilled with the loss in credibility. But they like the clicks I guess, so he keeps his job.

Lastly, if Bill had any balls at all when Aviation week suspended him, he should have given them the finger and started his own blog or pub --Instead he cowed down like a little lap dog to them and then went on passively aggressively criticizing others using an internet handle to complain on internet forums instead.

You see in the real world, Bill is being blackballed. His name is mud, and he is no longer an "insider" even his own publication realizes this. So he is fast becoming an "internet experten" which are a dime a dozen. Someone with no knowledge whining about something on the internet? How cutting edge!! Can he be an entitled middle aged white male too? we don't have enough of those complaining on the internet! how about being bitter and from the UK, lamenting about the days of old? Perfect!!

Bill could have chosen to be a professional writer for a respected aviation publication, but he declined, threw a temper fit, and has been doing ---however you describe it-- on the internet ever since. He thinks he is the most clever guy in the room, no matter the room, and I can practically hear him giggling as he types about "The Navy's, Army's Air Force" and congratulating himself "So clever bill!! So cheeky!!" And yet he can't seem to explain the aviation Relationship between the USMC and USN airwings and how the USMC operates airplanes at all-- and its his job to explain aviation or even how the Royal Navy requires things like STOVL aircraft (he "blames" F-35 on the USMC wholly, ignoring other nations' requirements). Every chance bill has had to take the high road, he has managed to lower himself further into the gutter instead. And he has been dragging aviation week down with him.

Why report on American Naval Aviation when you can be a cheeky internet troll instead? Too bad too, Naval Aviation at the dawn of the 5th generation is a pretty awesome story, shame he can't be bothered to write about it.

[mixelflick]

Where would he be if AW dropped him?

I think he'd be lost in a deep, deep way...

[XanderCrews]

People are noticing:

I have been following this blog for at least 10 years now, if memory serves, and used to submit comments fairly regularly until I saw it taken over by Sweetman's utterly irrational diatribes against the F-35 program fueled by the major and perhaps understandable ax to grind he has with LM after being suspended due to his negative F-35 coverage. Hard to believe I defended him back then, as I now wish he would have remained permanently suspended. Worse than Sweetman are all his zealous acolytes such that this blog resembles nothing so much now as a gathering of crazed teabaggers, with Sarah Sweetman preaching to the proverbial choir and echo chamber. Meanwhile, over at F-16.net you have the other extreme, where F-35 fanboys swear that the only reason the F-35 is way delayed and over budget is because the government cut its budget or because Obama is a Muslim and a socialist and not because the JSF program was terribly mismanaged since its birth and was only rescued from potential catastrophe by Bill Gates cracking skulls years after its endemic problems should have been noticed and corrected.
Point is, tit really is a shame that there is no informed, genuinely unbiased source of information one can turn to for journalistic F-35 coverage. The "regular" press doesn't know enough about aviation or defense issues to write accurately or knowledgeably about them, forcing one to resort to the specialist press like AvWeek on the one hand and fanboys who live in their parents' basement on the other (here's looking at you, all the ELPs and sferrins of this world). So on the one hand, Sweetman and his ilk insist that the F-35 is the worst engineering catastrophe since the Ford Pinto, while the fanboys think nothing short of the Millennium Falcon could possibly defeat it.
And yet - and I can back this up with my posting history - I was among those most critical of the program in its early days when it was becoming increasingly clear that it was far more troubled than either the government of the contractor acknowledged (I was lambasted by the fanboys when AA-1 was nearly lost due to an electrical system failure and I had the temerity to suggest it was far worse than the USAF and LM let on at the time, a contention that was proven correct when Beasely let on some years later than they did, in fact, nearly lose the aircraft). By the same token, I also went on the record many years ago saying that, given enough time and money, they would eventually get the F-35 right and that it would be a very capable machine. And I was right about that, too (whereas some others like ELP and that Goon fellow and I believe BS as well were saying that the JSF program would be lucky to build 100 examples).
What I mean to point out by stating all of this is that an uninterested observer who doesn´t have a dog in the fight and has even somewhat of a clue could have predicted all of the same things I did while refraining from writing asinine hit pieces like that above or fanboy drivel such as that found at F-16.net. So, AvWeek, is it too much to ask from a journalistic periodical to put, you know, actual journalists on the F-35 beat instead of sensationalist commentators such as Sweetman who continuously spew resentful and vengeful venom toward a program that is clearly NOT the worst thing to have happened to the armed forces since Sergeant York (the M247, not the war hero)? Whatever reputation AvWeek once had as a reputable source of aviation-related news is being single-handedly destroyed by this Sweetman fellow who, a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away used to be something of a journalist before succumbing to the dark side..


Another comment from Colin Clarke a fellow aviation journo, who he accuses of being a USAF puppet:

A note to Bill. First, thank you for the acknowledgement and the publicity for our site. Sadly, I must disabuse you of the basic premise on which your story rests -- that my stories were some sort of "PR offensive" on the part of the Air Force. (Does someone with such vast experience really believe the Air Force public affairs is really that adept?) I spent more than six months pressing the Air Force to get Gen. Hostage (or someone with similar stature and access) to speak on the record about the F-35's capabilities. The interview finally happened 25 April at Langley AFB. It took a while to do the transcript thing and even longer to piece all the bits together for the two stories and then to write them. I wish I could offer substantiation for your theory, Bill. Alas, I cannot.

From Amy Butler, another ave weak reporter:

I understand how that could seem to be true ... but not when these same reporters, myself included, are covering the program day-to-day. An, uptick in information going out for the show is a PR campaign -- but not any more of a PR blitz than any other program -- F/A-18, Gripen. My point was to counter Bill's dismissive assessment that the Breaking Defense story was part of a coordinated PR blitz related to the show as his opener says he "figured" it is. I "figure" it is more of a response to typical queries that get worked. The PR "blitz" is more related to the F-35B ... and its arrival. Blitz or no blitz ... there was an assumption made about the genesis of the story that is unsupported. And, I think the value of the work is that we now have Hostage on record and can pursue his thoughts to further enhance the dialogue not the program. My interest is simply in the value of journalism here ... without it how could folks have the opportunity to pick apart Hostage's or any other senior official's claims?

http://aviationweek.com/blog/f-35-stealthier-f-22

Amy basically says "he is making it up" in that bold part there. "an assumption" that was "unsupported" Wow. You know they have words for that stuff, words he has no problem using on the F-35 program.

Lastly, bill is leading the charge now against the F-22, once again its all a giant USAF PR prop:

http://aviationweek.com/blog/so-what-to ... rget-photo

Shouldn't it be the job of the Aviation Journalist to get to the bottom of the unique aspects of why the USAF would use the world's greatest fighter for certain missions over Syria, rather than whining that a drone could do it? could he use open sources, and his contacts in the military to INVESTIGATE, and then REPORT? Wouldn't that be vastly more interesting and informative, and leave the political "PR conspiracy" to the internet nutters? Shouldn't it be bills job to present us with as many accurate facts, and then leave the opinionated theories to others? Would it be possible that if Sweetman learned enough about the F-22 missions and calmly explained the warplanners' logic that many of the conspiracy theories would disappear? You know like shining a light in the dark to uncover what is there instead of guessing?


And just one more note, I have been hearing on the internet for over 8 years now how vastly more awesome the F-22 is than the F-35, and that it should be purchased in greater numbers by the US, and purchased by foreign governments completely while the F-35 is shown a shallow grave. Now the F-22 does its first combat missions (Ironically, the F-35's future stealthy strike mission) and everyone is calling it wasteful, overkill, and a PR move, and unnecessary?


I think its clear these people are just determined to be unhappy with something at this point, because the same folks calling for the F-22 are now slagging it. and all the internet generals, admirals, and keyboard commandos, and Kommenteraite are just determined that they an do way better than all those trained professionals. Avaiation week is aiming for the lowest common denominator and boy they sure have found it. Are all of sweetman's stories meant to elicit an emotional response for the blog-trolls at this point? Is it him just creating the 2 minutes of hate? Has Bill gone so around the bend that even when the USAF is actually IN COMBAT that its all just "PR fluff"? Is it all just a creation for the USAF to justify its budget at this point? or is bill just pissy that these machines he says are useless are being used, and successfully I might add?

So, I wonder why was the F-22 used? Any number of assets can drop a 1,000 lb. Jdam, especially when the door that would need kicking down is wide open or, at the very least, slightly ajar. Did the aircraft’s sensors have some sort of classified effect? Was there an EW capability that, perhaps, we’ll find out about in months? Did someone in the chain of command just decide it was time to get the damn thing into the fight?

http://aviationweek.com/blog/was-lackluster-f-22-debut

Golly Gee Amy, I wonder if there is some sort of online aviation publication that could answer these questions? ... Do you have any people who might be able to find out in your employ? How about that Bill Sweetman fellow, maybe he could find out?

Oh well, guess I'm off to other places on the internet to find out... Hey look in the comments!!:

http://airheadsfly.com/2014/09/23/rapto ... onal-test/

I guess that was good for something Amy.-- it linked me to a blog that seems interesting in airplanes!! WOW!! What a novel idea! top of the page "We love aviation, and so do you!" How did they know!? what a crazy concept? going to aviation week because of an interest in aviation? no of course, not. not these days no.

Now even if that blog is not completely accurate, they are at least offering educated guesses, and plausible answers as to why the F-22 is being used in Syria, and wouldn't you know it? its not just PR!! Amazing

[spazsinbad]

Thanks XandDer Du and thanks AMy BUTler:

"...there was an assumption made about the genesis of the story that is unsupported...."

[arcturus]

Where would he be if AW dropped him?

I think he'd be lost in a deep, deep way...

That answer, at least in my eyes, is obvious. Medium is where he would go. Perhaps he would become a part of the War is Boring gang.