
thebigfish wrote:Air Chief Marshal Binskin: In fact, you may as well pull out the knife and the pistol that the pilot is carrying and go to that because it is not designed to get into that sort of fight.
That comment there, which I know he meant as something else entirely, will be potentially used as ammunintion that the F35 is not good in a "dogfight". along with the 6 v 4 seconds. sigh!
Thats true, but its a damned if you do, damned if you don't I'd rather them say stuff like that than be accused of a cover up...
Here is what sucks about the great JSF debate, is that anything that is not 100 percent complimentary 100 percent of the time is somehow an indictment. so if some admiral actually implies its not all incredible at all times, that some kind of secret code that it sucks. or if he is always 100 percent at all times that means he is covering things up. Its a no win.
I actually know of a company (non aviation) that is suing someone because their evaluation/study featured the caveat that there was a possibility of physically injury. Other than that the entire thing was flattering, but they were attacked as if they had set out to destroy the company. You can insert all your Airpower Aus, style nasty comments about their "flawed assessments" etc.
I really don't know what the hooplah is. It would be like if someone asked me if a long gun sniper got into a knife fight what would happen. "I guess the better knife guy wins, but that's one crappy sniper"
