PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING.
Your subscription is important and supports our editorial integrity. Advertisers are sometimes afraid of being associated with controversial news topics, and your subscription is vital to ensuring we can continue to publish the courageous news we are known and respected for.
Get Insider Access and Expert Analysis Today
or Log In

Join our community. To comment on this article please join/login.
Here’s a sample of the comments on this post.
In my opinion the F-35 is a colossal waste of money and resources. We should cut our loses and take the tech we’ve learned and start from scratch with a new aircraft. The F-22 dominates the Air-to-Air arena so no need to invest there. Focus on a new aircraft to take the Air-to-Ground role. The powers that be have invested too much into the whole multi role, capable of anything aircraft. The F-35 tries to do too much and so it fails. This time it’s cost the life of an allied pilot.
I agree, but I also remember when the Osprey’s went down every week in Yuma or F-16s went down at Luke (at least it felt that way to my young self)…one is too many, but it is also the story of demanding a person defeat gravity. It sucks, but that’s the price…I hate it.
Alex, only two lost, but lets not forget the 160 that will never be combat effective, so for me, the tally is far higher, and now we lost an aviator. I think that there are folks responsible for the loss of such a fine aviator as Hosomi, whether it is LM, Mitsubishi, or air frame flaws that are still showing up as reduced longevity, which still ties back to LM and flawed/rushed testing. It goes back to a statement Geo made in another post, how expensive does it have to get? How many body bags stacked up before it becomes too expensive? I hope this is an aberration.
Uh oh.