Message from @Grenade123
Discord ID: 494364543611568128
it is different in the ways they cared about
i will re-ask my question, you ever done design work? of the engineering or technical kind?
What would qualify as a yes in that case?
I'm a software developer by trade
so no
I've not designed a production military aircraft
they you should know sometimes legacy code gets to a point where it needs to be re-done from the ground up from time to time. The more future proofed the original code the easier it is, but you can only do so much to plan for changes 30 years out.
No, I don't really agree with that statement.
Generally speaking, in systems of a certain size, it is rarely necessary to toss and replace everything.
Even if making a major change, like completely switching programming language or environment.
or most important purpose
making the next iteration as similar as possible to the previous generates a considerable amount of value in itself, if you are willing to do the grunt work.
yes u can make things more efficient
my point here is that the external aerodynamic properties of certain types of desirable military aircraft have not changed, per type, substantially since the '80s
You might get better engines, find out that thrust vectoring affects the desired wing structure
maybe two subassemblies are merged for better rigidity or serviceability
but that's not the same as "starting from the ground up"
which, in my view, is rarely your best option, if the system you want is substantially similar to the one you have.
they key phrase being "if the system you want is substantially similar to the one you have"
which is, in this case, true
they've attempted to merge the roles into one parent design of the airframe
you have failed
because you now have three aircraft which share what...10% of parts?
its like running retardedly. if u get 10 mph at running retardedly imagine the speed you'll get if u start back down and do the right form for running.
they share a lot of the instruments and software surely
but those were never that difficult to share between craft anyway
a VTOL F35 will be able to share exactly _none_ of the external surfaces
_none_ of the power components
None of the subassemblies are the same.
i was not aware the f35 design was publicly available
They have concepts
a vtol HAS to have ports in places there are none on the other two
it has to have ducts, vents, actuators
yes, and a keyless ignition care has a spot for the key ignition
are they going to make all three have the same bloody ducts the vtol has?
just like a steering less car has a spot for the steering wheel
is that going to be a void?
what will replace it structurally?
on the outside why not? put in a plate that bolts in place like every other panel.