The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

Re:The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter... by bee_rider on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @05:16PM (#26256839)

But also, the fact that it was impractical is itself a metaphor -- it turns out many of the things they thought would be cool and futuristic were actually impractical when you get to the details.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter... by bhupy on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @06:41PM (#26257755)

Sure, but that's besides the point. It's sort of like that meme about "The World If <my pet policy was implemented>" (example: https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/394/070/7f2...). It features over the top flying cars and infrastructure because it's trying to make a point.

When one says "we could have had flying cars, but instead we got X", that's the underlying concept. Whether or not the flying car is "practical" is kind of besides the point. Either that, or we need to find some other generally agreed upon term to represent an actually practical but futuristic invention that represents human progress (or the lack thereof).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter... by imtringued on Thursday February 25, 2021 @07:21AM (#26262082)

>"The World If <my pet policy was implemented>">"The World If <my pet policy was implemented>"

http://eduard-heindl.de/energy-storage/energy-storage-system...

Well, we would get cheap energy storage and cheap energy. No promises of a superior future, just a cheaper future.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter... by bee_rider on Thursday February 25, 2021 @11:30AM (#26264631)

I suggest "we could have had an all-nuclear grid."

[ Parent | on HN ]