Buy updated F16/F18, buy some more F22, spend the rest on bribing those third world parasites to handle our problems for us so we don't get shot at. You'd not worry about keeping America safe if you had a 10 million man army to clear the ground.

You need 1-air superiority, 2-air interdiction/patrol, 3-close air support, 4-vtol. You can't mix 3 and 4 because close air support requires armour, and that's too heavy for vtol.

The cheapest solution might be to redo the F18 to have stealth.

If the F22 is so great, why do we need the F35? Why not just buy 50 F35's and let the F16/F18 aircraft fill in the gaps?

Also doesn't work when the enemy is faster than you. They reach your base and bomb the runways before you get reloaded.

So it has a 50 cal machinegun. They upped to 20 mm because the little stuff was bad at shooting down aircraft. Many modern fighters even go for 30 mm.

Not if you use directional uplink to your satellite, then all the enemy sees is an encrypted sat downlink with a 50 mile footprint.

The F35 can't do ground attack (A10), it has no armour. It's not really good for long range patrols because it's got a short range. It's not a good strike fighter because it's got such a tiny weapons load. It's no good at dogfighting because it's underpowered and has small wings.

The stealth on an F35 only works for certain frequencies of radar. When (not if) everyone switches to variable frequency radar that advantage will be gone (no more stealth). At that point the US will be stuck with a massively expensive low performance short range combat aircraft, and no money to rectify the problem.

The turn speed of the F35 is not limited to what the pilot can survive. It's limited because the aircraft is overweight. That is also the reason it has shorter range (smaller fuel tanks) and lower payload (less bombs and missiles).

Simple solution to range anxiety: put the power grid into the road so your car runs off the power grid while you are on the highway. That means long distance driving doesn't use your batteries at all. Yes this would be expensive, but the power billing would pay for it and the drop in oil consumption would be in the national interest.

Having the patent outlive the usefullness of the material makes no sense- just like having a copyright that outlives the desirability of the music makes no sense. As for silly patent rules that let profiteers patent anything they discover- those who want the patent system reworked don't have the time and money to fix the problems, while those who do have the time and money are benefiting from the problems.

This is a technology issue, not a politics one. We can switch to IR or UV and have the light fixtures in our house/office handle the data transfer, with filters on the windows to prevent cross talk. Or we can use phased array antennas to give directional low power radio comms. of course none of that is backwards compatible.

Why would they have neon lights near a radio telescope? Those things generate wide band EM from the plasma.

I think this is an excellent chance to study mental disorders. We should set up a village that is completely devoid of all EM radiation (no radio/cell/wifi/electricity) and encourage these "sensitives" to move there for the "pure" enviornment.