bguy_1986 Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 This is what I find funny - those on the right going on about 'welfare queens' and 'takers' yet not a single politician in the US is willing to stand up and hold these contractors to account for their failure to deliver on time and on budget. If those on the right want to talk about fiscal responsibility then they should first start on doing something about these run away go no where defence contracts that are little more than public works projects under the guise of national defence. Leave left and right out of this. There are a few takers (I'm sure on both ends of the isle) that would take this on. Too many are padding their pockets on both sides of the isle. I know of some in the tea party that would love to stop the waste! The problem is uneducated voters and corruption. Too many people want to talk about race or what celebrities are doing on the news than what our money is being wasted on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
svmpatel Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Drones would be theoretically vulnerable to electronics interference, hijacking, etc. That said, we aren't really hurting for air superiority weapons and drones can accomplish many missions at much lower cost in dollars and human lives. Have you seen 24:Live Another Day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Have you seen 24:Live Another Day? Using fiction as a military reference is fraught with risk. TV != reality. Ryoken and xendrome 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Y'know... I worked on military jet weapons systems back in the late 80's... I'm pretty sure I could write them some software to fire their guns WAY sooner than 2019, and for a fraction of the cost! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breach Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Doesn't matter whether the gun is a priority - from a PR perspective this is a disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breach Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Y'know... I worked on military jet weapons systems back in the late 80's... I'm pretty sure I could write them some software to fire their guns WAY sooner than 2019, and for a fraction of the cost! I believe you - thing is there's no way in heck any real-world company can tender against the few chosen procurement suppliers who get these huge contracts. At the end of the day value for money always becomes more money... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabe84 Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 It's worth noting that several countries in that list are reviewing their order for them, due to the MASSIVE cost over-runs and delays. It's already on hold in Canada. I'm a Canadian, I believe we need to get ourselves a Strong national Defense. I don't like the idea of having to rely on the US or anyone else if ###### happens. With that said, I think the F35 is a waste of money. Cost/Benefit, and looking at what we actually do with our airforce, We should have just ordered a new flight of Super Hornets. I'm Italian, here we had a pretty aggressive outrage regarding the F-35. Italy was/is involved in the Eurofighter Typhoon project and that jet is not only better than the F-35, it's less expensive, would bring more jobs and Italy would have had a role in R&D, thus bringing know-how instead of just assembling wings, no one really got why we were not buying more Eurofighters instead of F-35s, and naturally no one bothered to explain it, over the years I've read numerous articles documenting the shortcomings of the F-35. There's widespread suspicion that Lockheed Martin might have bribed someone very high in politics and/or the military, which would not surprise me at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobSlob Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I can guarantee it's not the "pull trigger gun fires" but the interfacing with the various sensors to produce things like the gun funnel in the helmet and such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddman Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I can guarantee it's not the "pull trigger gun fires" but the interfacing with the various sensors to produce things like the gun funnel in the helmet and such. That's funny. You posted while I was typing pretty much the same thing. I don't know all there is about fighter guns and I don't know the details of F-35's gun situation (doubt anyone in the public does), but as Bob mentioned, it's not a "just pull the trigger" software. Fighters have sophisticated pieces of software that collect data from aircraft's various sensors, mainly radar, calculate the trajectory and basically tell the pilot when and where to shoot; and on top of that automatically stabilize the plane while the gun is being fired. Also, the gun was never really a top priority on F-35, AFAIK, as only F-35A carries it internally. Their main focus seems to be on systems that are shared among all three variants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breach Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I'm Italian, here we had a pretty aggressive outrage regarding the F-35. Italy was/is involved in the Eurofighter Typhoon project and that jet is not only better than the F-35, it's less expensive, would bring more jobs and Italy would have had a role in R&D, thus bringing know-how instead of just assembling wings, no one really got why we were not buying more Eurofighters instead of F-35s, and naturally no one bothered to explain it, over the years I've read numerous articles documenting the shortcomings of the F-35. There's widespread suspicion that Lockheed Martin might have bribed someone very high in politics and/or the military, which would not surprise me at all. Because Italy was a Level 2 partner with on-site staff in D.C. from the Italian Air Force for a number of years actively monitoring the project by the way ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabe84 Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Because Italy was a Level 2 partner with on-site staff in D.C. from the Italian Air Force for a number of years actively monitoring the project by the way ;-) We've already spent more than 6 billions for this project (700 millions for the project, 2 billions to equip the military base where the F-35s are assembled and 3.5 billions to modify the Cavour aircraft carrier - well... actually we have projected to invest 3.5 billions for that ship but we still don't know when it will be ready, perhaps by 2016), we originally agreed to buy 131 jets, then 90, in reality we've signed a contract to buy 3 jets, and we might sign another one for other 3, that's so like us! However what you said is what the minister said, basically we poured way too much money into this so we may just have to buy some jets after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naap51stang Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I've been a supporter of the military, since a kid in the early 60's, but, the @*(^)@!*!$&^% government & contractors are screwing up everything that helps keep our country safe. In the mid 60's, the "Kennedy Whiz Kids" (Robert McNamara) figured it would be a good idea to have ONE jet for the Air Force, Marines, Navy, which became the F4 Phantom. Problem is, they made it WITHOUT A GUN because of a idea that missiles would fill the bill. Once the enemy figured out there was NO GUN, they just made sure to engage the Phantom inside the envelope of the Phantom, which rendered them useless. Also, the Navy version had to be modified, because of the landing & launch environment. Eisenhower said...beware of the military industrial complex, in the late 50's. I think he was right! We have the A-10 Thunderbolt II (Warthog), the F-15 Eagle, designed in the 60's, flown since the 70's and neither one has been exhausted on what they are capable of doing! Heck, the military big wigs wanted to scrap the A-10, right before the 91 gulf war. Had they done that, who knows what would of happened, it would have been a tank vs tank battle, but the A-10 took out tanks and one even shot down a helicopter over Kuwait! The military needs the tools it needs, to be effective, but not a bunch of tinker toy whiz-bang hi-tech garbage, just to make the defense contractors, and obviously politicians in their home districts (kickbacks) RICH. We spend between 17-18% of the federal budget on the military (welfare & social security take up roughly 46-48%). If it were me, I would fire every politician, their staffs, ban all the lobbyist, repeal the 17th amendment, hire a bunch of retired SUCCESSFUL business owners (not the wall street ones, just good old fashion started with nothing and made it types). This is suppose to be the country of the people being the ones of the politicians. Sadly, it hasn't been that way in over a century. Now, those elected don't work for us, they work for whoever gives them the most money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
123456789A Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Why don't they just strap a Kinect on the bottom of the plane as a guidance system and have it shoot lasers instead of a lame gun? Osiris and +Raze 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Raze Subscriber² Posted March 18, 2015 Subscriber² Share Posted March 18, 2015 Why don't they just strap a Kinect on the bottom of the plane as a guidance system and have it shoot lasers instead of a lame gun? Would it work if you stood still though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryoken Posted March 18, 2015 Author Share Posted March 18, 2015 We have the A-10 Thunderbolt II (Warthog), the F-15 Eagle, designed in the 60's, flown since the 70's and neither one has been exhausted on what they are capable of doing! Heck, the military big wigs wanted to scrap the A-10, right before the 91 gulf war. Had they done that, who knows what would of happened, it would have been a tank vs tank battle, but the A-10 took out tanks and one even shot down a helicopter over Kuwait! I'm just going to point everyone over here --> https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1249976-now-the-us-air-force-wants-you-to-believe-the-a-10-is-too-old-to-fight <-- to another thread I started specifically on the A-10 Subject.. The comments I posted here (same topic as above, towards the end of Page 2) where an Air Force General called anyone in the military giving Congress Support for keeping the A-10 was committing TREASON just shows how out of touch the people at the top of the Air Force really are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisj1968 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 It has NOTHING to do with the money and everything to do with someone screwing up. I was living in DC back in the day and they were arguing about what engine to put in the F35. The price of the original engine was astronomical too. Everyone is to blame who is involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 F-35 and F-22 a are 5th generation fighters. The USAF is already budgeting and working on a 6th generation fighter thats said to be hypersonic capable. Directed energy weapons are also on the table, and work is proceeding on a compact phased array tactical laser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shiranui Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 If this thing cannot fly to Ganymede and back, then it is a waste of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloatingFatMan Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I can guarantee it's not the "pull trigger gun fires" but the interfacing with the various sensors to produce things like the gun funnel in the helmet and such. Funnily enough, I'm probably better aware of what the software would need to do than you, seeing as, y'know, I've done work in the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobSlob Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Funnily enough, I'm probably better aware of what the software would need to do than you, seeing as, y'know, I've done work in the field. Cause engineers often know what operators need *rolls eyes*. If you want to get into a pissing contest, then lets go. My photo isn't a stock one, btw. articuno1au 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Zagadka Subscriber² Posted March 18, 2015 Subscriber² Share Posted March 18, 2015 Note to Putin: Invade before 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo1911 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Someone picked Java as the framework. Most of the developers have been diverted to adding similar features to Farmville 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Hey its not the contractors fault that the client (DOD) didn't specify the guns needed to fire. This is why we have requirement and spec docs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts