this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2025
44 points (94.0% liked)

Memes

46749 readers
609 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Something something don't throw rocks in glass houses...

all 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Diva@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago
[–] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Reminds me of the time a jet's computer kept crashing on landing approach to the Dead Sea because it's below sea level and the computer couldn't handle negative altitudes.

[–] ToxicWaste@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

I don't think these computers where designed in the Netherlands

[–] drkt@scribe.disroot.org 1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

is this supposed to be a dunk on the F35? Did you read the article?

[–] Flyberius@hexbear.net 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] courier8377@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Having a jet that makes headlines about how it "keeps crashing" is probably not a good thing lmao what

[–] drkt@scribe.disroot.org -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

you can actually look up how many have crashed and, you won't but if you do, please tell me how many crashed because the plane shat itself and how many crashed because of operator error

[–] courier8377@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago

If i were the preeminent military power i would simply make a jet that didn't shit itself and train the operators of a multi billion dollar equipment to not crash it

Perhaps the design is flawed if well trained operators are crashing enough to make headlines

Perhaps the operators are not qualified to be flying it

[–] ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago

I did, it names a bunch of incidents where parts shat themselves then says it's way over budget. An actual explanation is definitely missing from the article.