deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 22, 2015 5:28:58 GMT -5
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,693 
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
Member is Online
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Jul 22, 2015 7:59:27 GMT -5
I thought all the crap/software, etc on planes was coming from China  ?? |
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 27, 2024 10:43:55 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2015 14:10:22 GMT -5
My involvement with fighter planes and their support systems ended with the F-22 about 15 years ago. I have no actual first hand knowledge of the claims made here about the F-35 other than Aljazeera will often make claims or cover negative stories about US weapon systems without trying too hard to come up with any counter balance information. IMHO of course. One must understand that the actual capabilities of these planes are classified and are mere speculation when the information is gotten from a media source.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,099 
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 22, 2015 14:46:58 GMT -5
throw more money at it. it will get better.  |
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Jul 23, 2015 14:30:14 GMT -5
The F22 is an air superiority fighter, the F35 is a multirole strike fighter so it makes sense that you would send up your best fighter jet to intercept incoming aircraft.
Like almost all American weapon systems, they are overly costly
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 23, 2015 15:11:32 GMT -5
The F22 is an air superiority fighter, the F35 is a multirole strike fighter so it makes sense that you would send up your best fighter jet to intercept incoming aircraft. Like almost all American weapon systems, they are overly costly They stopped production of the F-22..too expensive....would not ok them for resale to others even our top allies such as Israel....believe we have something like 122 in our arsenal..won't be any more I believe..you just don't restart a production line like that.. supposedly the F-35 will be in the thousands by end of production...seems as expensive if not more ..that one is ok for over seas sale ...very expensive for our allies but supposedly Israel is already on board...don't know who else..still not sure the difference between the two..need a airplane expert here to explain..Agree on the costs of...wouldn't want to be a pilot of either of them who lost one of them and survived..don't believe a "oops..sorry about that.." explanation would go over too well at $150 million each ...latest Aircraft carrier believes I read is going to cost $15 billion...each..not sure if that includes the aircraft for the ship or just the ship itself..Some talk too if these Air Craft Carrier supporters...{Admirals..} are like the Battleship folks back in the day who held on to those as supporters when they too became outdated as the prime sea weapons...Supposedly Chinese have developed a missle launched from trucks that can reach out and be very effective against them that would keep te Carriers so far from their land that the aircraft with out refueling would not be effective any more...some feel less expensive smaller vessels..drones etc more effective..less vulnerable.. |
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 24, 2015 4:32:08 GMT -5
They stopped production of the F-22..too expensive....would not ok them for resale to others even our top allies such as Israel....believe we have something like 122 in our arsenal..won't be any more I believe..you just don't restart a production line like that.. supposedly the F-35 will be in the thousands by end of production...seems as expensive if not more ..that one is ok for over seas sale ...very expensive for our allies but supposedly Israel is already on board...don't know who else..still not sure the difference between the two..need a airplane expert here to explain..Agree on the costs of...wouldn't want to be a pilot of either of them who lost one of them and survived..don't believe a "oops..sorry about that.." explanation would go over too well at $150 million each ...latest Aircraft carrier believes I read is going to cost $15 billion...each..not sure if that includes the aircraft for the ship or just the ship itself..Some talk too if these Air Craft Carrier supporters...{Admirals..} are like the Battleship folks back in the day who held on to those as supporters when they too became outdated as the prime sea weapons...Supposedly Chinese have developed a missle launched from trucks that can reach out and be very effective against them that would keep te Carriers so far from their land that the aircraft with out refueling would not be effective any more...some feel less expensive smaller vessels..drones etc more effective..less vulnerable.. What I'm hearing on a personal level is that the AF wants a plane that can beat an integrated air defense...I'll let you figure out who that would mean as enemy. It's going to cost a lot. Is this plane too much? Maybe so, it's not my call to make and I'm going to stay neutral on the discussion. That's what the service wants though, looking at the most viable threat in the future, is one that can beat sophisticated air defenses. Thanks for coming in here Ratch..I was hoping you would give some insight since I believe your the only active serving member of the AF posting here...realize this type decision is a bit above your pay grade..  ..yet am sure there has been some water ool gabbing and discussion by service folks ..at least the branch service...I know the Russians have a new , is it 5th generation plane...however it doesn't mean they are building them..also cost problems...though if they can get some one ..say China..to want to buy in...might be a different story...I still have a problem understanding the costs of these systems...unsustainable in my opinion..butt hen again..what do I know...[ F-35..three versions..AF, Marines and Navy..with the marine one the most expensive I believe...over $150 million each...LOL....better not come home with the fender dented ... |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jul 24, 2015 5:59:36 GMT -5
Since the Cold War is over and supposedly a World War is or would be just about impossible except of course some out there claims, what would be the need for an aircraft so advanced that would obliterate the enemy before breakfast?
I mean, let's look at it: Russia is gone, what they have or would have can be deterred with our missile defense system, China depends economically on us and EU, all countries in EU are our allies, who's left?
North Korea? Give them food and they'll stay put!
All this F35 thing is just a political game, used as a reelection vehicle.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 27, 2024 10:43:55 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 12:18:07 GMT -5
Since the Cold War is over and supposedly a World War is or would be just about impossible except of course some out there claims, what would be the need for an aircraft so advanced that would obliterate the enemy before breakfast? I mean, let's look at it: Russia is gone, what they have or would have can be deterred with our missile defense system, China depends economically on us and EU, all countries in EU are our allies, who's left? North Korea? Give them food and they'll stay put! All this F35 thing is just a political game, used as a reelection vehicle. If you're a Rogue dictator or or similar, you will find these fighter aircraft are more than just "reelection vehicles". |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jul 25, 2015 0:34:47 GMT -5
It is my understanding that the F22s were just as good as anything for any action necessary.
and all that for a fraction of the cost.
Why try fixing something that is not broke?
Is it so we can maintain our status as the nation that spends the most on defense?
You wanna spend on defense? Fine, pay the soldiers better, after so many years of service give them all they need so they don't have to worry about a thing. After all they risk their life's so we can live a peaceful one.
And don't even get me started on what happens with the families of the soldiers that die in a war. Children to be raised, educated etc. Do we call a $50000 life insurance coverage for a lost life for the sake of this nation?
A soldier makes on average 35-40k a year. A congressman on the other hand makes over 100k and his life is at no time in danger. Not to mention all the perks that a politician gets.
What do those wounded get? Long waiting times for services that should be provided to them with no delay and shitty prosthetic when neede?
That's where we should put our defense money not in toys produced by big corporations who's CEO and share holders take home the bank. And the toys don't even work!
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 25, 2015 0:52:06 GMT -5
It is my understanding that the F22s were just as good as anything for any action necessary. and all that for a fraction of the cost. Why try fixing something that is not broke? Is it so we can maintain our status as the nation that spends the most on defense? You wanna spend on defense? Fine, pay the soldiers better, after so many years of service give them all they need so they don't have to worry about a thing. After all they risk their life's so we can live a peaceful one. And don't even get me started on what happens with the families of the soldiers that die in a war. Children to be raised, educated etc. Do we call a $50000 life insurance coverage for a lost life for the sake of this nation? A soldier makes on average 35-40k a year. A congressman on the other hand makes over 100k and his life is at no time in danger. Not to mention all the perks that a politician gets. What do those wounded get? Long waiting times for services that should be provided to them with no delay and shitty prosthetic when neede? That's where we should put our defense money not in toys produced by big corporations who's CEO and share holders take home the bank. And the toys don't even work! Actually the cost on the F-22 was so high, supposedly the reason it was stopped production...So advanced it was forbidden to be sold to others which keeps the cost of a system down...I believe over $150 mill each which seems to be the cost on the F-35... Article on why F-22 production was stopped and also touches on F-35 for those interested... www.sodahead.com/united-states/why-the-f22-raptor-was-cancelled/question-1424149/ |
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Jul 25, 2015 12:49:28 GMT -5
If you're a Rogue dictator or or similar, you will find these fighter aircraft are more than just "reelection vehicles". And if our F35 don't work properly, what are they good for? As of now they just seem to be a money pit since they don't work. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 27, 2024 10:43:55 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2015 13:01:18 GMT -5
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jul 31, 2015 17:45:10 GMT -5
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Jul 31, 2015 17:53:52 GMT -5
The biggest flaw of the JSF/F-35 is that someone high up got a bug in their ass that since it's all the military and they have so many similar things lets just make one thing and make small adjustments. They did this with many things besides the JSF. All of the ones I know of pretty much went the same way - over budget and dealing with cuts. It's mainly because of two main things 1) the branches aren't as alike as some people think and 2) pissing matches. The specs needed for dealing with the Navy, AF, and Army are as different as their medium of sorts (water, air, and land) - it just doesn't work when you need a plane that can withstand the pressure of carrier take-off/landings, vertical take offs, and go long distances. To say nothing of what is needed once it's in the air - dog fighting etc. As for the pissing match - you have a bunch of people that don't want to lose their money and lose their control. Every joint project was pulled under another umbrella and answered to that group, and usually one branch is put as the lead. I've seen one project waste a few hundred thousand because one branch refused to turn some stuff over for a few months hoping they'd scratch the whole thing.
I saw an article a while back that the CBO or something did a study and if they had just made three different plans like pretty much everyone told them to the planes would have been deployed already and cost less.
|
|
