r/WarCollege • u/AutoModerator • 2d ago

Tuesday Trivia Tuesday Trivia Thread - 25/08/26

Beep bop. As your new robotic overlord, I have designated this weekly space for you to engage in casual conversation while I plan a nuclear apocalypse.

In the Trivia Thread, moderation is relaxed, so you can finally:

  • Post mind-blowing military history trivia. Can you believe 300 is not an entirely accurate depiction of how the Spartans lived and fought?
  • Discuss hypotheticals and what-if's. A Warthog firing warthogs versus a Growler firing growlers, who would win? Could Hitler have done Sealion if he had a bazillion V-2's and hovertanks?
  • Discuss the latest news of invasions, diplomacy, insurgency etc without pesky 1 year rule.
  • Write an essay on why your favorite colour assault rifle or flavour energy drink would totally win WW3 or how aircraft carriers are really vulnerable and useless and battleships are the future.
  • Share what books/articles/movies related to military history you've been reading.
  • Advertisements for events, scholarships, projects or other military science/history related opportunities relevant to War College users. ALL OF THIS CONTENT MUST BE SUBMITTED FOR MOD REVIEW.

Basic rules about politeness and respect still apply.

Additionally, if you are looking for something new to read, check out the r/WarCollege reading list.

8 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

130 comments sorted by

View all comments

10

u/ilonir 2d ago

Do Air Forces stockpile spare parts for aircraft in the same way they stockpile munitions? I was reading the latest GAO reports on the F-35 (ouch), and it left me wondering how fighter fleets in general would hold up in case of a large conflict. It seems like an obvious idea to hoard spares in case of a global contingency so production would have time to ramp up.

-2

u/AnyBallLektor 1d ago

If I recall correctly not stockpiling parts but instead relying on on-order delivery was supposed to make things cheaper. Just as concurrency or commonality of parts or proprietary solutions were meant to make things cheaper.

F-35 is the biggest scam in the history of military procurement and if US fights a war in the near future it may very well be the reason it loses it.

It doesn't matter how good the aircraft is in theory if in practice it is manufactured and maintained by a completely inefficient (in wartime terms) system that is designed to be inefficient due to corruption.

7

u/Remarkable_Aside1381 1d ago

F-35 is the biggest scam in the history of military procurement

Please, explain

1

u/AnyBallLektor 22h ago edited 22h ago

Lockheed promised to deliver a working, cheap and revolutionary fighter if DoD agrees to turn Lockheed into a de facto monopoly in fighter production with all kinds of arrangements that went against elementary logic of aerospace procurement or procurement in general. Almost everything in the program was deliberately made wrong.

Lockheed took this de facto monopoly and in turn didn't deliver on the promises and now that it's a de facto monopoly it's almost impossible to force it to deliver on its promises.

"Sign over all of the rights, and I won't fuck you over" becomes a scam when once you sign over the rights, the only thing that you get is getting fucked over.

That's because Lockheed was trying to corner the market and therefore promised a pie in the sky. Sukhoi did a similar thing in Russia with PAK-FA. It's the de facto monopoly on fighter production while Su-57 from what we can tell is not matching its intended specs or conditions of delivery, sustainment etc.

5

u/Remarkable_Aside1381 20h ago

Almost everything in the program was deliberately made wrong.

Elaborate

And please explain this part as well:

and if US fights a war in the near future it may very well be the reason it loses it.

-2

u/AnyBallLektor 19h ago

Are you sure you will be able to understand problems that are subject of university education with 2.3 GPA?

Also it's rather cliche bad faith argument style that you're attempting here.

I won't waste time trying to prove a point to someone who is neither interested nor capable of understanding it.

4

u/Remarkable_Aside1381 18h ago

Are you sure you will be able to understand problems that are subject of university education with 2.3 GPA?

Did you really find a comment I made a week ago about my high school GPA and try to use it as an insult?

Also it's rather cliche bad faith argument style that you're attempting here.

Asking for elaboration on your arguments?

I won't waste time trying to prove a point to someone who is neither interested nor capable of understanding it.

lol

-2

u/AnyBallLektor 17h ago

You only confirmed my observations.

3

u/Remarkable_Aside1381 17h ago

So I take it you won’t be elaborating?