Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
Cope how? I'm not a fan. The worst thing in the world for Lockheed would be if US's adversaries decided they weren't going to be designing any new weapons systems. Lockheed runs on fear of what's next.
Lockheed model of sucking up taxes without producing anything only works when the US feels they have superiority over the adversaries. Now that it's becoming clear this is not the case, there will be a push to actually have to produce things that work, and Lockheed isn't good at doing that.
Where in the world are you getting that Lockheed stuff doesn't work? SR71? F104? U2? F117? F22?
Oh man, I remember seeing this U2 in museum, it did a great job intercepting Soviet AD 😂 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_U-2_incident
You think the U2 was an intercepter?
So you're just saying that one was once shot down as to why the U2 as a whole was an ineffective program?
The fact that they have never been put into mass production is a very clear indicator that it was an ineffective program.
Neither was the SR-71. Both programs had a very limited mission, which is why neither was ever produced in quantity.
Sure both were experimental, and the experiment with U2 was to make something fly so high that it couldn't be intercepted. Turned out that the US underestimated the quality of the AD systems Soviets developed.
The purpose of the U2 was to make a plane that could never be intercepted for the rest of time? No, they saw a gap that the Soviets didn't have protection for yet, so they exploded it. One the Soviets caught up and closed the gap, they went higher and faster with the SR71, then higher and faster with satellites. It's always back and forth, and the U2 gave a valuable capability until a counter was developed.
The reality is that U2 was dead on arrival.
And yet they have still been operational for 60 years after that... Funny that the U2 lasted longer than the Soviet Union.
as a museum piece
You should probably look up what the word "operational" means.