Make you a bet....
Hat Tip Op-ForOp-For has a post up linking to a post at a blog called John Q. Public. The JQP post regurgitates elements of the POGO-annual-diatribe-against-something (won't link to POGO here--maybe later if I deconstruct Mandy's rather wan opening act in POGO's center ring (replacing now retired Winslow Wheeeler).
I posted a comment in response at OpFor, and wanted to post the essence of it at JQP, but JQP has that d*mn DISQUS on 'full invasive' and not anonymous enough for my taste, so I'm doing it here for posterity:
Note the usual suspects that have been against just about every weapon system since about 1970 listed in JQP's blogroll, What this particular post does is echo the annual (March) CDI/POGO diatribe against whatever weapon system they are most against this year. Now, I normally advocate arguing the data and not the source, except POGO has never (to the best of my knowledge) ever argued facts without prevarication, or presented a 'fact' that was ever without a perversion of truth applied. This time is no different. But in this case however, the most irksome part of the JQP post is the anonymous author's references to an anonymous F-35 'pilot', whose ALLEGED comments reek of somebody lying someplace. Since it is anonymity upon anonymity, it could be the pilot in question is lying and/or a weak sister. It could be the author is making up pilot quotes out of whole cloth, or adapting past JSF 'news' and 'rants' to fit what the author believes or wants the readers to believe, or it could be any combination of all the above. I have a good friend whose Sister is now retired from Journalism and who has related that in her experience most of the time 'unnamed sources' are journalists making sh*t up. I could pick apart every one of the alleged quotes and posit likely true origins for most of them before their perversion, but that could put us into a gray area where I don't care to go . So lets make a wager on something the so-called pilot claimed knowledge about: The F-35 doing poorly in 'recent' High AOA/BFM "tests".
I will bet dollars to donuts that IF the program chooses to respond to such hooey, that we will discover the first two BFM "tests" were in the middle of January, the first two flights were on two consecutive days, the missions were flown by two different pilots, and both of them had nothing but glowing reviews about the jet's performance. If I find eventually a public source to validate this 'guess' I will be happy to also share who I 'guessed' were the pilots, which flight they flew, and which plane(s?) was/were flown.And perhaps even quote the pilots.We shall see what develops....
Update: JQP is a blog published by a Mr. Tony Carr. I thought it was a group blog with an unsigned author.
Update II (18 Mar 15, 2134 hrs): I had posted a response to 'Xandercrews' at F-16.net (who had asked a rhetorical question in jest), where I also expanded somewhat on what I've already noted. When I came back here, I found comment from JQP's own Tony Carr responding to my first observations. My response to Xandercrews, seems apropos and so in part is repeated here:
Naw. I looked him up at lunch today. He's attending law school now. Ret. (early?) LtCol C-17 driver. Commissioned after I retired, and retired after less than 20 unless he had prior enlisted time. I would probably be most interested in almost anything he had to say on Air Mobility/Air transport topics, but on Acquisition? Fighter tech? Rank amateur.
Trust me, he has to have had something on the ball at least at once upon a time to have made it through his Freshman year at ERAU: the distractions in Daytona Beach tend to weed out the less disciplined students pretty quick. So I've filed him under "intellect held captive by ideology and inexperience".
If his pilot friend is real [we'll now assume he is], he's just another disgruntled meat-servo, perhaps having a tough time transitioning to the F-35 so... 'It's the plane!'. Little 'tells' like....
...Surprised he wasn't b*tchin about the number of controls on the HOTAS. In any case, the claim about BFM maneuvering was total BS and I'm willing to wait until the program talks about it.
I would find reliance on any one operator's opinion on PVI laughable either way-- given the number of pilots that were involved in the design, development and maturation of the 'office'. There was extensive testing of the Pilot Vehicle Interfaces (perhaps hundreds of pilots' inputs; from 'mock up' to labs to simulators to flight test) and the overwhelming positive public attributable statements from the drivers taken as a whole.
Of course, for some people it is simply much easier to apply the standard Fallacious Circumstantial Ad Hominem and cry 'disaster!' and 'cover up!' to suit their predisposed views or mood. But you'll never get to the root of their 'argument' you'll never find one that isn't just a tarted-up opinion built upon some distortion of reality. Hey! I'm now mildly curious if his 'pilot friend' was one of those "get gunned every time" guys from a couple of years ago. It would explain much.To save time and avoid useless back and forths with the "foot-soldiers" and "loyal babblers" through the rest of the Congressional silly season, it looks like I'm just going to have to do a Know Your Reformer update on this 'Mandy Smithberger' person AND 'Fisk' her little rant that is now echoing (as designed) and kicking up this crap all over the usual corners of the web. Heck, I may do so if only to emphasize how the Faux Reform Meme Machine will attempt to keep marching on, now that the "Old Guard" are falling away and the 'echo-reformers' are taking over.
Teaser: If I do it, the post will have the best pic of Winslow Wheeler in his most natural (transactional analysis sense) state EVER captured.
Hi. Tony Carr here. Thanks for reading the article. I find your issues with it interesting, most of all your choice to handle your fundamental misapprehension of "anonymity upon anonymity" as an "update" rather than a wholesale reframing of your central point, which seems to be that my journalistic integrity is especially suspect because of compound anonymity.
ReplyDeleteHere's the thing, boss: I don't tell lies. I slap my name on everything I write and I stand by every word. I'm a retired airman, a law student, a business owner, a consultant, and a father of two kids who read things on the internet. I'd never risk my honor or reputation by "making sh*t up" as you suggest, and I take exception to you making the charge anonymously. Many who disagree with my opinions have questioned my credibility. None have been proven justified in doing so. Most at least have the decency to attach their names to such ad hominem jabs. You went another way.
As to your contention about the F-35, we'll see what comes out of it. Have you read the DOT&E report? You should. It contravenes what you're saying.
As much as I'd love to get a pilot on the record (because contrary to your speculation, the quotes in the article come from a currently-assigned F-35 pilot who was reacting to the POGO article), you can't get an F-35 pilot on the record saying anything even mildly negative. Can't imagine why.
Thanks for engaging. I like a good banter. Would it be nice if you shared your thoughts where the blog is published? Undoubtedly. But I appreciate your reading it nonetheless.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEdit: by "on the record" I meant without anonymity. The comments in the article were for the record, but they were conditional.
ReplyDeleteWell Hello,
ReplyDeleteI wanted to post this at your place but I do not support or trust DISQUS, and believe it is most certainly designed to give pre-emptive control over certain conversations and prevent others from ever happening. Don't mind posting as a guest if the option is there, but it wasn't.
I'll take your word for it about your veracity, so that eliminates it as a factor from the litany of possible explanations. That leaves the 'pilot' as the 'problem'.
My josh wager in my post stands about my 'guess'. I'm content to let the real history that I know to unfold (if it ever does) rather than buy into the POGO Faux Reform party line.
I actually was just talking about this at F-16.net, and will amend my post to add some of what I posted there.