F-35 is a JUNK, but you Bitch about Obamacare

[AZGrizFan]

Samep people who say "50-year old technology is good enough for our boys" scratch their heads and stare in disbelief when the planes start falling out of the sky.

Who can do this?

Look in a mirror.

[mrklean]

Who can do this?

Look in a mirror.

I'm a Paratrooper. I jump out of Airplanes. I dont fly them

[CAA Flagship]

Look in a mirror.

I'm a Paratrooper. I jump out of Airplanes. I dont fly them

Apparently, I'm just a "trooper".
I agreed to take in my MIL. In return, my wife called me a "trooper".

[Ibanez]

Look in a mirror.

I'm a Paratrooper. I jump out of Airplanes. I dont fly them

Did you jump out wearing your Air Force Ones? I can get to stompin' in my air force ones.

[mrklean]

I'm a Paratrooper. I jump out of Airplanes. I dont fly them

Did you jump out wearing your Air Force Ones? I can get to stompin' in my air force ones.

Yes with white women on both arms.

[Col Hogan]

THIS ^^^^^

This F-16 and F-15 are good jets, but you can only do so much with 1960's technology...

Up-grade the hard-ware/software.

Did you think about what you were about to type before you did it...or is it stream of consciousness, because if it was, you were unconscious when you typed...

Why do you think the F-35 is so expensive...ITS BECAUSE OF THE UPGRADED HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE...

The F-16 and F-16 (the plane itself) is still 1960s technology...YOU CAN'T UPGRADE THAT PART!!!

As has already been clearly posted, you can't change the radar cross-section of an F-15 of F-16...you can't make it turn any faster without the pilot blacking out because of the design...

Go back to being a passenger on a plane...you obviously know little about the modern fighter...

And no, I'm not defending the gross cost over-runs on the F-35...but your recommendation is just not the best way to spend our limited resources...

[Grizalltheway]

Up-grade the hard-ware/software.

Did you think about what you were about to type before you did it...or is it stream of consciousness, because if it was, you were unconscious when you typed...

Why do you think the F-35 is so expensive...ITS BECAUSE OF THE UPGRADED HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE...

The F-16 and F-16 (the plane itself) is still 1960s technology...YOU CAN'T UPGRADE THAT PART!!!

As has already been clearly posted, you can't change the radar cross-section of an F-15 of F-16...you can't make it turn any faster without the pilot blacking out because of the design...

Go back to being a passenger on a plane...you obviously know little about the modern fighter...

And no, I'm not defending the gross cost over-runs on the F-35...but your recommendation is just not the best way to spend our limited resources...

Limited resources?? We outspend the rest of the world combined by a large, LARGE margin.

[mrklean]

Up-grade the hard-ware/software.

Did you think about what you were about to type before you did it...or is it stream of consciousness, because if it was, you were unconscious when you typed...

Why do you think the F-35 is so expensive...ITS BECAUSE OF THE UPGRADED HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE...

The F-16 and F-16 (the plane itself) is still 1960s technology...YOU CAN'T UPGRADE THAT PART!!!

As has already been clearly posted, you can't change the radar cross-section of an F-15 of F-16...you can't make it turn any faster without the pilot blacking out because of the design...

Go back to being a passenger on a plane...you obviously know little about the modern fighter...

And no, I'm not defending the gross cost over-runs on the F-35...but your recommendation is just not the best way to spend our limited resources...

I expect this from the Air Force. You guys get everything you ask for from the DOD. But anyway, Name me one fighter that can best our front line Fighters??

[Col Hogan]

Did you think about what you were about to type before you did it...or is it stream of consciousness, because if it was, you were unconscious when you typed...

Why do you think the F-35 is so expensive...ITS BECAUSE OF THE UPGRADED HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE...

The F-16 and F-16 (the plane itself) is still 1960s technology...YOU CAN'T UPGRADE THAT PART!!!

As has already been clearly posted, you can't change the radar cross-section of an F-15 of F-16...you can't make it turn any faster without the pilot blacking out because of the design...

Go back to being a passenger on a plane...you obviously know little about the modern fighter...

And no, I'm not defending the gross cost over-runs on the F-35...but your recommendation is just not the best way to spend our limited resources...

I expect this from the Air Force. You guys get everything you ask for from the DOD. But anyway, Name me one fighter that can best our front line Fighters??

No one can beat our front line fighter (F-22), but Congress cut off the buy at just over 200...so we have to count on 4th generation fighters like the F-16, F-15 and F-18...

There are a number of Russian, Chinese, French, Danish and Japanese fighters that are marginally less/equal/marginally better than those three fighters...

[AZGrizFan]

Did you think about what you were about to type before you did it...or is it stream of consciousness, because if it was, you were unconscious when you typed...

Why do you think the F-35 is so expensive...ITS BECAUSE OF THE UPGRADED HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE...

The F-16 and F-16 (the plane itself) is still 1960s technology...YOU CAN'T UPGRADE THAT PART!!!

As has already been clearly posted, you can't change the radar cross-section of an F-15 of F-16...you can't make it turn any faster without the pilot blacking out because of the design...

Go back to being a passenger on a plane...you obviously know little about the modern fighter...

And no, I'm not defending the gross cost over-runs on the F-35...but your recommendation is just not the best way to spend our limited resources...

Limited resources?? We outspend the rest of the world combined by a large, LARGE margin.

That's because all our military parts/equipment are made by Americans earning $30-$50+++/ hour, not by some guy in a garage in China making $1/day.

[Cap'n Cat]

Limited resources?? We outspend the rest of the world combined by a large, LARGE margin.

That's because all our military parts/equipment are made by Americans earning $30-$50+++/ hour, not by some guy in a garage in China making $1/day.

No exaggeration there.

Bud Light and tits. Bud Light and tits. Bud Light and tits.......

[AZGrizFan]

That's because all our military parts/equipment are made by Americans earning $30-$50+++/ hour, not by some guy in a garage in China making $1/day.

No exaggeration there.

Bud Light and tits. Bud Light and tits. Bud Light and tits.......

You're correct, it's not an exaggeration.

[mrklean]

Limited resources?? We outspend the rest of the world combined by a large, LARGE margin.

That's because all our military parts/equipment are made by Americans earning $30-$50+++/ hour, not by some guy in a garage in China making $1/day.

Those days are long gone

[AZGrizFan]

That's because all our military parts/equipment are made by Americans earning $30-$50+++/ hour, not by some guy in a garage in China making $1/day.

Those days are long gone

Not in the military-industrial complex.

[FCS PATRIOTS]

Washington (AFP) - The US military's bureaucratic watchdog on Monday accused companies building the F-35 fighter of shoddy management that could jeopardize the reliability, performance and cost of the aircraft.

The Pentagon inspector general cited 363 problems in the design and manufacture of the costly Joint Strike Fighter, the hi-tech warplane that is supposed to serve as the backbone of the future American fleet.

For the United States and eight other countries backing the project, the report raises fresh questions about the technology and ultimate price tag of the F-35, which has struggled with production delays and cost overruns.

The office that oversees the fighter project, the plane's primary manufacturer Lockheed Martin and five subcontractors failed to carry out rigorous "quality assurance" practices, the report said.

The failures "could adversely affect aircraft performance, reliability, maintainability,and ultimately program cost," according to the inspector general office's report.

A number of the shortcomings -- including how software is managed -- could possibly put safety at risk, it warned.

"Without adequate product evaluation of mission system software, Lockheed Martin cannot ensure aircraft safety requirements are met," it said.

Designed to replace fighters in the US Air Force, Navy and Marines and supported by a consortium of eight countries, the program is already the most expensive in US military history with a price tag of $395.7 billion.

Recent independent reviews have found the program has managed to rein in costs but the inspector general's findings suggested flawed production and design work could break the plane's budget in the future.

Officials have acknowledged the original concept for the F-35 was overly optimistic, as it called for starting production long before thorough flight tests were completed.

The idea, which the Pentagon calls "concurrency," was based on the flawed assumption that technical hurdles had been worked out in computer modeling.

Monday's report appeared to confirm warnings about "concurrency" and said the Pentagon and Lockheed have often failed to review the quality of the work from subcontractors.

But the subcontractors, Northrop Grumman, BAE, L-3 Communications, United Technologies Corp and Honeywell, also came in for criticism.

The inspector general's office faulted Honeywell for how it oversees the plane's life support oxygen system.

Honeywell's training efforts for employees working on the system were inadequate and changes were made to control software without checks by engineering and management departments, according to the report.

The F-35 program office called the inspector general's report "thorough" and "useful," but played down the findings.

In a statement, the office said most of the problems cited had already been identified by managers and that the report did not present "new or critical issues that affect the health of the program."

Out of 343 corrective actions recommended in the report, 269 had been carried out while a remaining 74 were underway, according to the program office.

You see my brother this is a weapon designed for war. Of course, they are going to support this. The Affordable Care Act actually helps minorities and low income folks of all persuasions so to them, it must be stopped. More barns are needed for the wheat and wine. Allah Himself required the soul of the barn builder according to the Word. Stay strong and fight the fight.

[CID1990]

THIS ^^^^^

This F-16 and F-15 are good jets, but you can only do so much with 1960's technology...

Up-grade the hard-ware/software.

You are obviously challenged here, so I'll help you.

The F-16, F-15 and F-18 are 1960s-70s technology. Since that time, our adversaries have continually developed anti-air capabilities to counter that technology. Russian missile technology has essentially made those planes obsolete, given a symmetrical battlefield. (The Russians sell and barter this technology to anyone who will pay.)

No amount of software upgrades with make these planes more survivable, because radar technology has advanced to the point that even third world militaries have enough of a standoff capability to negate them. The F-15 is an air superiority platform with enemy aircraft in mind. In the 1970s, aircraft were the only way to counter the F-15. Today, there are a number of Russian client states that have the ability to deny their airspace without launching a single plane.

Other countries have 3rd generation aircraft and no amount of upgrading will bring the F-15 or it's contemporaries up to that level.

BTW I agree that the JSF is a buzzard, if for no other reason than in has only one powerplant. We never should have cancelled the F-22. These things aren't like F4Fs or P-51s where you can just retool a typewriter factory and start churning them out in case of a war. We can certainly restructure the way we drive development and purchasing in a way that will reduce costs, but we need a 3rd gen aircraft and the F-35 isn't the way to go about it. Cancel it and start turning out the Raptors again.

[Ibanez]

Up-grade the hard-ware/software.

You are obviously challenged here, so I'll help you.

The F-16, F-15 and F-18 are 1960s-70s technology. Since that time, our adversaries have continually developed anti-air capabilities to counter that technology. Russian missile technology has essentially made those planes obsolete, given a symmetrical battlefield. (The Russians sell and barter this technology to anyone who will pay.)

No amount of software upgrades with make these planes more survivable, because radar technology has advanced to the point that even third world militaries have enough of a standoff capability to negate them. The F-15 is an air superiority platform with enemy aircraft in mind. In the 1970s, aircraft were the only way to counter the F-15. Today, there are a number of Russian client states that have the ability to deny their airspace without launching a single plane.

Other countries have 3rd generation aircraft and no amount of upgrading will bring the F-15 or it's contemporaries up to that level.

BTW I agree that the JSF is a buzzard, if for no other reason than in has only one powerplant. We never should have cancelled the F-22. These things aren't like F4Fs or P-51s where you can just retool a typewriter factory and start churning them out in case of a war. We can certainly restructure the way we drive development and purchasing in a way that will reduce costs, but we need a 3rd gen aircraft and the F-35 isn't the way to go about it. Cancel it and start turning out the Raptors again.

We should stick with the Mustangs and update the Stuka Dive Bomber, am I right klean?


Sent from my iPhone

[mrklean]

You are obviously challenged here, so I'll help you.

The F-16, F-15 and F-18 are 1960s-70s technology. Since that time, our adversaries have continually developed anti-air capabilities to counter that technology. Russian missile technology has essentially made those planes obsolete, given a symmetrical battlefield. (The Russians sell and barter this technology to anyone who will pay.)

No amount of software upgrades with make these planes more survivable, because radar technology has advanced to the point that even third world militaries have enough of a standoff capability to negate them. The F-15 is an air superiority platform with enemy aircraft in mind. In the 1970s, aircraft were the only way to counter the F-15. Today, there are a number of Russian client states that have the ability to deny their airspace without launching a single plane.

Other countries have 3rd generation aircraft and no amount of upgrading will bring the F-15 or it's contemporaries up to that level.

BTW I agree that the JSF is a buzzard, if for no other reason than in has only one powerplant. We never should have cancelled the F-22. These things aren't like F4Fs or P-51s where you can just retool a typewriter factory and start churning them out in case of a war. We can certainly restructure the way we drive development and purchasing in a way that will reduce costs, but we need a 3rd gen aircraft and the F-35 isn't the way to go about it. Cancel it and start turning out the Raptors again.

We should stick with the Mustangs and update the Stuka Dive Bomber, am I right klean?


Sent from my iPhone

OK Mr. Smart-AZZ. Tell me a Front Line Fighter that can beat the F-15 in a Dog Fight NOW. Not in the next ten years.

[Col Hogan]

We should stick with the Mustangs and update the Stuka Dive Bomber, am I right klean?


Sent from my iPhone

OK Mr. Smart-AZZ. Tell me a Front Line Fighter that can beat the F-15 in a Dog Fight NOW. Not in the next ten years.

Indian SU-30s...French Rafale

That's two...

[AZGrizFan]

We should stick with the Mustangs and update the Stuka Dive Bomber, am I right klean?


Sent from my iPhone

OK Mr. Smart-AZZ. Tell me a Front Line Fighter that can beat the F-15 in a Dog Fight NOW. Not in the next ten years.

I bet your cell phone is a brick phone, ain't it?

[Ibanez]

We should stick with the Mustangs and update the Stuka Dive Bomber, am I right klean?


Sent from my iPhone

OK Mr. Smart-AZZ. Tell me a Front Line Fighter that can beat the F-15 in a Dog Fight NOW. Not in the next ten years.

JF-17. Maybe even the Raptor?


Sent from my iPhone

[CID1990]

We should stick with the Mustangs and update the Stuka Dive Bomber, am I right klean?


Sent from my iPhone

OK Mr. Smart-AZZ. Tell me a Front Line Fighter that can beat the F-15 in a Dog Fight NOW. Not in the next ten years.

That isn't the point, Klean. Adversaries don't HAVE to beat the F-15 head to head. They just shoot it down with surface to air missiles.

However, just for the sake of argument, the Russians and the Chinese both have fighters that are contemporaries of the F-15. And those aren't their best fighters. Plus, they are both developing aircraft along the lines of our F-22 (albeit technologically inferior) which are very stealthy and would spank the F-15 because they would see it before it sees them.

[JohnStOnge]

But in the end, its all paid with tax payer dollars. DO you know how much money the DOD has for R&D?

No. But I know that EVERYTHING the DOD spends on EVERYTHING is dwarfed by how much this country spends on entitlement programs. We are at a point in history where rational people would be saying that the idea of introducing entitlement programs was a mistake and we should be looking for ways to back out of that mentality. Instead, we are introducing new ones. We are idiots.

[blueballs]

From the military standpoint, my question would be how long will it take for drones to entirely take over the strike operations, rendering the need for those planes moot?

[YoUDeeMan]

From the military standpoint, my question would be how long will it take for drones to entirely take over the strike operations, rendering the need for those planes moot?

We have a winner!