Better tell that to Bell Rii, considering they still market a Cobra variant. Helicopters are rather different to fixed wing and elderly designs can still be extremely relevant today with new avionics and engines. There is a reason why people still buy Chinooks, Mi17 or 412 they are still darn good at their jobs.

I agree that the UH-72 going down the tube now is bemusing to say the least.

Well at least we now know the plot of Battlefield 5

The problem here is that the likes of MSphere and others do put up supporting up to date factual data for their opinions.
The likes of hoppy and the other F35 gang members generally don’t do this, expecting marketing material and outdated data that has been shown to no longer be valid to be accepted.
Add in that the F35 gang are often quick to throw out the (veiled) abuse when yet again exposed and it is envitable that people will express distaste for their activities.

As i’ve already pointed out, even though you are struggling to understand it, the existance of an opinion does not in itself de facto mean that it should be respected.

To MSphere’s point, if you go back to the start of all the F35 animosity it is the unceasing positive opinion mascarading as fact (and i’m being very polite here) that generated the intial reaction.
If there was more acceptance that an opinion is not a fact and should not be presented as such there would be no tension.
The years have rolled by and most of the F35 gang are still presenting the same tired opinion as fact with no reference to good data which has become available showing those opinions to be incorrect.
People like to dismiss APA, yet their projections have been more in line with the reality for the program and GAO reports than those of either the program itself or it’s supporters. The simple fact that the F35 gang refuse to acknowledge that tells me they are not very interested in real facts being more interested in their own opinion. Perhaps that tells us something about the F35 gang as people.

All of which is your opinion not a fact. Actually I think opinion should be respected but it doesn’t have to be agreed with. I repeatedly say you are free not to agree with me or anybody else. I resent being called a member of the “F-35” gang, fanboy or any number of other patronising titles. It is insulting and not very constructive. Treat others how you want to be treated. I don’t agree with your interpretation of all aspects of the data and I think we should be mindful of what the test pilots are saying. That is my opinion. I have kept hands off this thread I only engaged again when you decided to take a rather nasty swipe at people who disagree with you. All I had to do was a change few words in what YOU wrote and the reaction on your part was predictable. I have actually found it rather funny how you have reacted snafu352. You don’t know me and I don’t know you we are part of the vastness of the internet. I will say to you what I said to LowObservable, is it really worth it? We are grown men presumably with careers and lives. Is this matter worth so much effort. I knew exactly what you meant in relation to the “rectum” quote albeit it isn’t used that often in UK conversation, as a statement of how you regard peoples opinions that differ from yours there was plenty to be insulted about.

I removed the comment as it was completely pointless trying to post a reasoned appeal on the subject. I still stand by the sentiment.

You and your ilk attempt to destroy all efforts at reasoned debate.

As for the forum being crap, yes it can be, especially when those who take themselves too seriously (you) or are only interested in trolling (the ozzie chap with mulitple personalities / usernames) insist that their voices are the only ones that should be heard.

The handbags i have noted are from you and your ilk when you attempt to shout down yet another dismal piece of news on the F35 by telling everybody that all is well with the program when the facts clearly show something different.

It’s great you have an opinion, every smart person, every idiot and their respective dog’s can hold an opinion; respect for those opinion’s should be more likely to be granted when the opinion is supported by verifiable fact. (Sadly it seems this is not the case!)

If there is no fact supporting an opinion then it can be treated like a rectum, i.e. everybodies got one. So what? Thus asking people to respect your opinion simply because it is your opinion is rather self important; rather too self important for my taste. Back it up with good factual data and i for one will in all likelyhood either agree with you or at least respect your position.

The whole issue with the F35 comes down to this actually.

The aircraft was promoted as the replacement for the F16; in terms of all round capability, performance and not least cost.
It has yet to demonstrate collectively those attributes.
Those who support the program have for years been delivering their positive opinion based on very little solid factual data.
When real data has become available it has shown that the positive opinion cannot be accurate as the real data does not support it. This is fact. Certain people may not like it but let me gently point those who do not at the timeframe and reduced performance metrics as supporting data for the statement.
Yet time and time again those who hold a positive opinion choose to ignore the real world data and deliver an unceasing positive appraisal which when challenged often results ultimately in rather abusive language being used by the positive gang towards those who hold a different opinion.
It seems that’s acceptable, if not standard operating procedure, if you subscribe to the “i have an opinon, thus you will respect it and the F35 is the bestest” school of thought.
As i said earlier the reality is opinions are like rectums, thus your opinion is only as good as the supporting factual data. No data, no reasoning, no respect. (Particularly when one gets all self important and upset about being challenged and makes things personal.)

Edit: What MSphere said as well.

So let me get this right, my opinions are “rectum” based your statement. Yet you accuse me of being personal and abusive?

What at least I am clear where I stand now.

Pity

As I understand it 2D long range L-band search radar hooked up to some decent computing power are surprisingly good at detecting low observable airframes. Working with more modern AESA 3D search and targeting radar they can effectively act as a trip wire and provide directional data to slew the more advanced radar onto possible targets. Certainly during the first GW the L-band Type 1022 2D search radar mounted on the T42 destroyers were able to pick up American stealth fighters at surprising range.

In many ways the most significant development in radar technology in recent years has not been AESA but the application of Moore’s law to microprocessor development. The computing power available now off the shelf and at a low price is light years ahead of what was available twenty years ago.

Ahhhh thanks for making my point.

One massive sense of humour failure. Look if you want to dish accusations of trolling expect to have the fun made out of you. I keep on telling you my support for the F-35 is my opinion, why you want data for an opinion is lost on me. You want a serious grown up discussion, then don’t post a comment on an open thread calling everybody who doesn’t agree with you trolls (the whole tone of that post was insulting and patronising yet still don’t see that do you). Your rather long reply with a picture no less to my rather ironic rewrite of that post only makes that clear.

Pot Kettle Black

Very successful and still in production.

http://www.bellhelicopter.com/Commercial/Bell412/1291148331859.html#/?tab=highlights-tab
http://www.rotorspot.nl/product/b412.php

And herein you miss the entire point about the English dictating to the Scots…

[simply by dint of there being more English MPs than Scottish, or Welsh, or NI… put together.]

If the Scottish people as a whole didn’t want it and their representatives reflected this, yet the “national” decision was to put it there; then that decision was taken through use of a non-Scottish (to be absolutely correct about it) majority in Westminster.

Have you missed the entire reason for them wanting devolution? You don’t actually think its because they just don’t like the English?!?

Actually I think you have the missed the point. That is how representative parliamentary democracy works in a nation state. Scotland is currently part of the nation of Great Briton, the views or the people in Scotland are represented in the national parliament via their MP’s. We currently have a first past the post winner takes all parliamentary system. You appear to be working from the position that somehow all people who live in Scotland are against maintaining a nuclear deterrent. When the UK adopted a nuclear deterrent the Tory party was a significant force in Scottish politics and presumably were supportive of it. They more then likely expressed that in the national parliament, there are many Scottish people right now who rely on the deterrent for jobs and more then likely support it. Unless Scotland votes for independence it has a voice in parliament just like everybody else, a parliamentary democracy means sometimes the elected government will follow a policy that is not popular in a particular region (have a chat with people from Portsmouth about that at the moment). Nevertheless you are represented! It works both ways, Scottish MP’s have been used to impose legislation on English voters that doesn’t affect them.