[engi_nerd]

The size of the control surfaces was NOT changed after the report that you linked to. Where do you even get this misinformation?

You yourself linked the article that I'm referring to, and you mentioned it originally.

And I am informed on the F-35 and don't think it's wonderful, but I don't think it's a horrible piece of garbage, either.

[Someone1234]

> You yourself linked the article that I'm referring to, and you mentioned it originally.

I haven't linked to any article like what you're referring to, nor did I reference it. I linked to the pilot's original mission report, I also referenced the same report. You seem to be attacking some editorial, and since you haven't linked it, nobody knows which one.

> And I am informed on the F-35 and don't think it's wonderful, but I don't think it's a horrible piece of garbage, either.

Nobody was claiming it was a "horrible piece of garbage."

[engi_nerd]

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/read-for-yourself-the-f-35-...

You linked to this yourself.

[Someone1234]

Exactly. Which is nothing but the pilot's report un-editorialized. You've been attacking some strawman editorial all throughout this thread that nobody linked or referenced here.

[engi_nerd]

I've been replying to you, not attacking some strawman editorial, as you put it.

David Axe, the guy you linked to, has a long history of misunderstanding the F-35, like also, this piece.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-pilot-admits-the-f-35-...

You described that this was "covered up". You would have only gotten that idea if you read the piece I just linked to.

[Someone1234]

Glad you finally linked it, that only took almost ten posts.

But no, I've never read that.

[engi_nerd]

So why do you think this was covered up?