Talk:Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II

message: The following request was placed on my Talk page today:
:Hello, could you add the Czech Republic to the f-35 users in the f-35 article. The Czech government approved the purchase of 24 f-35s a few days ago. 193.165.236.247 (talk) 12:24, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: As long as we can find a reliable source, sure. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 15:45, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

text: The Czech Republic has to sign an order contract or comparable agreement for aircraft to be considered an operator, not merely selecting it. -Fnlayson (talk) 17:23, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Czech Republic 

message: Aren't most planes weatherproof? As a layman, the inclusion of "all-weather" in the lede is puzzling, especially as there's no other mention of "weather" in the article and no link for context. I gather from a search of the Talk archives that the plane has been accused of being vulnerable to lightning (ironic or what?), and this could be in response to that accusation? AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 09:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not what the term means. It does not have anything to do with weatherproofing. "All-weather" is a historical concept from the age of jet fighters prior to the Fourth-generation fighter, and refers to whether they have avionics capabilities to fly and perform their missions in a foul-weather environment (meaning, non-visual meteorological conditions). As functionally all modern combat aircraft in service these days have at least basic all-weather capability by virtue of their radar and instrument flight avionics, the term is essentially archaic and no longer used. The F-35's alleged lightning vulnerability is unrelated. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 17:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: If the term is obsolete and confusing, how about deleting it? AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 09:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

text: As with any fast jet military aircraft, there will be agreed requirements for limits on operational use in various meteorological conditions, e.g. extension of canopy or safe pilot ejection in windspeeds of up to 80 knots, from left side, right side, forward and aft. There may well be some extreme weather conditions in which the aircraft will not be qualified to operate safely. Similarly, there may be limits on pilot habitability in various high temperatures, e.g. "pilot shall be able to operate the aircraft on ground in ambient temperatures of up to 50 degrees Celsius, for up to 30 minutes", etc.  So the term "all weather" is a bit meaningless, even for modern fighter jets. 205.239.40.3 (talk) 10:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's obsolete, confusing, and meaningless, let's delete it. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 11:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 15:34, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  All-weather? 

message: This is the most expensive/costliest weapons program in world history - E.g. The most expensive US defense project ever, The world’s costliest weapons program. I think that should be a clear statement in the lede (if not first paragraph, with the amount).  It is in the body of the article, but it is probably one of the most notable fact about the topic. Aszx5000 (talk) 22:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lede should be more explicit about the historic nature of the cost/expense