[Tanada]

Yeah you're quite right outcast searcher. Damn good set of priorities shown by the U.S.A. when you have plenty of money for war machines, but can't afford investment in (insert important thing here)

In addition to sucking up the money that would go into alternatives, like fixing plumbing and potholes, for every white elephant(1) F-35 you could buy (2) F-22 or (4) F-16/F-18. In any protracted war that lasts more than a few weeks an aircraft with low production numbers but high utility will get used intensively and wear out that much quicker. If you have 100 F-35 they are in the air all the time compared to 400 F-18 that spread the burden over more air frames causing less wear on each and lower maintenance costs even if those F-18's cost as much on an individual basis to work on, which they do not.

This is the same problem I had with the NASA Space Shuttle in the 1980-2000 time period, it was designed to satisfy both NASA and USAF Space Command and ended up being over complex, and too expensive to fly often compared to the alternatives that were available in the 1970-2000 period when it was designed and did most of its missions.

When you put all your eggs in one basket that basket becomes very important and taking care of that one basket eliminates the ability to develop alternatives that would spread the risk around a bit.

[Cog]

Back in the first Gulf war one of the Western generals made a rather dramatic statement, that we could have defeated the Iraqi Army using their Russian supplied weapons. Now there is some bravado in that statement but there is also an element of truth.

A superbly trained military doesn't have to have the latest gadget to defeat you. Logistics, training, and the ability to focus combat power in one place and at one time can overcome technological disadvantages. Probably no one, with the exception of the Israeli's, understand this concept as well as the US military.

As others have commented, the more likely use of US combat power is going to be against third world countries. You don't need an F-35 to bomb a mud hut as long as your opponent doesn't have a superior anti-aircraft capability.