|
|
|
|
|
|
by rimunroe
278 days ago
|
|
|
> Which still isn't much, conpared to if everyone cared. This is yet another blind assertion. Please give details about how it isn't being paid attention to much. > Compare either to modern variants. Who maintains the F-35? Who profits from poor quality? You keep arguing vague things without actually giving any examples. The F-35 is a vastly more complicated aircraft than the B-52. Please give an example as to which part or parts you're referring to as being low quality in comparison. Fighters can't be used for nearly as long as a bomber like the B-52 because the threats they face evolve quickly and are much closer. You wouldn't fly an F-14 against a modern fighter because you'd be blasted out of the sky with an air-to-air missile from 50 miles away. A B-52 can attack from quite a ways away or be held off until airspace is under control. A B-2 on the other hand is supposed to be able to fly in unobserved, and thus its service lifetime will be more limited. |
|
|