[api]

First of all, manned fighter planes are dinosaurs. No human being can possibly react as quickly as a drone.

Secondly, there are existing designs that I'm sure could be refreshed for a lot less than $1.5 trillion dollars. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with them -- reboot them with new electronics, better materials, etc. They'd still be far better than what anyone but maybe the Russians or the Chinese have -- and they're probably also moving to drones quickly.

[alkonaut]

Manned planes will fly for several decades still, and even upcoming generations will most likely be optionslly manned rather than unmanned. The line will blur between manned and unmanned however. Today's "drones" have more pilots than the manned craft! Often 4-5 for even a short mission. There is no autonomous flying. Quickly reacting autonomous fighters is still sci-fi.

The problem with the F-35 project is mostly that it somehow was decided to replace the Harrier. Replacing the F-15/16/18 isn't a problems. Replacing the harrier with the same craft is an engineering nightmare.

Upgrading old platforms is done continuously, up to a point where an upgrade would be so expensive/radical that a new design is better. Sticking more electronics in an old plane isn't easy, the power and cooling requirements can require big redesigns, for example.

The planes it replaces are certainly near the end of their lifespans and have been upgraded a lot over several decades. What they should have done is not make just one plane. A replacement for the F-15/16/18 would have been much easier.

[engi_nerd]

> Replacing the harrier with the same craft is an engineering nightmare.

This is another misconception. The F-35 emerged from a DARPA study in the 80s to create a stealthy STOVL aircraft. The F-35 as designed started with the F-35B. The other two variants were created through modifications to this design.

[alkonaut]

The outcome is the same: replacing the 16/16/18 with a craft that is also the future stovl craft, is an engineering nightmare.

[engi_nerd]

All aircraft are engineering nightmares from the perspective of the engineers who work on them. It's a very stressful and difficult field.

That's not to really argue for or against your point, but more of a personal observation.

[engi_nerd]

Drones can be jammed and even stolen (Iran did this a few years ago). And those existing designs have had refreshes and continual improvements. Look at a Block 60 F-16 and compare it to the first F-16s. But those designs have little room for growth.

Boeing has even tried to create a stealthy version of the F-15, but has found no buyers, because even that aircrafts capabilities do not compare favorably to the avionics present in the F-35.

[ZanyProgrammer]

No country is even remotely close to totally supplanting its air force with drones entirely. You speak as of these things are happening at a greater pace than they are.

[corndoge]

>No human being can possibly react as quickly as a drone

Who do you think is flying the drones?

[threeseed]

Algorithms.

You do know they exist for flying drones and likely for detecting, intercepting and destroying other objects in the sky ?

[alkonaut]

You do realize that an F-16 mission is flown by 1 pilot, and a drone mission is flown by 3-5 staff? It's not just manned flight it's 3-5x more manned than conventional craft, just from the ground.

[throwaway2048]

The USA does not fly combat drones that do "detecting, intercepting and destroying".

[robotresearcher]

> No human being can possibly react as quickly as a drone.

Current US drones are flown by human pilots.