|
steinrokkan posted:We can't sink the made up jobs that only serve to give a veneer of legitimacy to massive corruption and a historically unprecedented theft of public money! Especially if many more people could be employed by spending that money on literally anything else, like paying them to report on the progress of paint drying in empty warehouses or something. It would also create a greater net value for society. You're in the wrong forum, again.
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 15:46 |
|
|
Godholio posted:You're in the wrong forum, again. Oh, come on dude.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Godholio posted:You're in the wrong forum, again. You may not like my posts, but they create jobs for posters like you who would otherwise have nothing to complain about.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
what happens when AI automates all complaining and there are no threads left for posting men and women like us?? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Hillary Clintons Thong posted:Oh, come on dude. We're a decade past where any of that matters. Lockmart ensuring parts were made in iirc 48 different states and promising various assembly lines in partner nations was a ploy to get the ball rolling. I'm less concerned about sunk cost than I am about sunk time. F-15Cs have been literally disintegrating from age/use/abuse for years; I think the last one was built for the USAF in 1979. The assembly line will probably be open until about 2024 or so, assuming nothing derails Qatar's efforts to buy ~36 new F-15s. Without that order, the line closes in two years. The biggest threat with that closure is that the subcontracted parts suppliers will cease production as well...so we're stuck custom fabricating everything we can't pull out of the boneyard in Arizona. For a front-line fighter jet, that's not good. The F-22 was supposed to have taken over by now so we didn't have to worry about any of this, but  F-16s have been lawn-darting since the 80s, but our latest and greatest variants, mostly built in the early 1990s, are showing their age. They're becoming more troublesome to keep flying, and while I don't think we've had airframe failures like the F-15's, it's only a matter of time. And considering how fast we've been accruing hours on those airframes (hooray for war), we don't have much of that time left. Then there's the survivability issue. The Middle East may be called "the sand box" but that's a pretty accurate description of the parts we've been ravaging for the past 15 years, for the Air Force. Lots of sand, and except for accidents or equipment failures, there's little risk of injury or damage. Planning for that kind of permissive environment is inviting disaster; to base major acquisitions decisions which will determine our key weapons systems for nearly half a century on that kind of permissive environment is...gently caress, I don't even know what to call it. It's on par with expecting to survive the Cold War while maintaining B-29s and M1 Garands as our main weapons. Our legacy fighters are the results of R&D programs that began during the Vietnam War. The F-15 was heavily influenced on our early experiences with the F-4, and the F-16 was actually supposed to be a loving daytime interceptor, replacing the F-106...a peak 1950s design. But while we're stretching these antiquated systems along, Russia has fielded several new generations of SAM systems specifically designed to turn F-15s and F-16s into shrapnel. The S-300 (SA-10) has been in the field since 1979 for gently caress's sake. And it's vastly outclassed by the numerous systems that have been deployed since. But here we are, trucking along with too few F-22s to pick up the slack so F-15Cs will continue to be out in front, trying to secure and maintain air superiority and make sure that we keep the streak of "no US forces killed by enemy air strikes since 1953" alive. And we're talking about curtailing F-35 production, which has so many dominoes behind it that it's genuinely scary. The F-16 is even more of a workhorse than the F-15; it actually makes up a HUGE proportion of USAF air-to-surface capability, because they're relatively cheap and disposable compared to F-15Es and heavy bombers. But they're racking up hard hours on those airframes, thanks to being in combat operations since loving Desert Storm (they were the workhorses of Northern and Southern Watch, plus Allied Force). But it's not just the USAF...the Navy is relying on the F-35C so it can finally divest itself of legacy A/B/C/D Hornets. They're garbage. They were always a hugely compromised design; a weak radar, weak engines, hilariously short range due to fuel capacity. The Super Hornet is better in every way...but not really good in those ways, except the radar. But it still can't carry enough gas to be useful in a lot of situations (like say, OEF), and there are so many problematic systems for maintenance that they're still just barely enough. Yet that's the Navy's go-to for everything. EVERYTHING. That airframe has absorbed the missions of the A-5, A-6, F-4, F-14, and EA-6B. Lucky us. And yet somehow some of our allies are in even worse condition. Take the Royal Navy, for example. They have exactly one aircraft carrier and exactly zero fixed-wing aircraft for it. QE2 will be delivered next year, replacing HMS Ocean which is being operated like an LHD because - you know - no airplanes. The old Harriers are gone, and all the RN's eggs have been placed in the F-35 basket. Aside from F-16 and F-18 deliveries to glorified third-world allies like Pakistan, the F-35 is the only US-export option. In the meantime, France, England, Sweden, Russia, and China have plenty of options out there. Hell, Turkey's been eyeing the S-400 SAM for months. We put ourselves in the situation where the F-35 is the only viable option for the next 15-20 years, because that's how long it takes for these programs to play out. It's not a jobs program anymore, it's a national (and alliance) security issue now. /effortpost Godholio fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Dec 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
not to worry daddy putin will let us buy russian cold war junk instead once he effortlessly manoeuvres our joke politicians out of the way 
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Godholio posted:/effortpost Ok dude, I'm not arguing any of that poo poo, but if this guy wants to come in and talk poo poo on a boondoggle program in what was originally a GBS thread then who cares, that wrong forum poo poo is dumb as gently caress and makes GIP look stupid as gently caress. This isn't the MIC safe zone or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
The one I quoted legit reads like a DnD->GIP shitpost. He's made reasoned arguments before in this thread, I know he can do it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
Eh, do you man, I shouldn't be back seat moderating or whatever anyhow
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Godholio posted:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-intelligence-community-232463 Trump doesn't even bother to read his daily national security summary (because it's written by the nerds who say Russia might be bad and Trump knows perfectly well that Russia is cool and good) (also it's longer than an FHM article and therefore beyond Trump's attention capacity). I don't think he is going to listen to, or care, about the viability of the F-35 program. His agenda is to appear to be doing things. He will tweet poo poo, maybe mention something (perhaps something wildly spun or just plain false) in an interview on Fox, and then delegate the responsibility of doing anything or caring about it at all, to his cabinet. Or to put it another way, Congress is not going to cancel or defund the F-35 projects because Trump is not going to threaten to veto a budget bill solely on the basis of ongoing funding for the project, and nothing Trump tweets is going to change that. We're all going to have to adjust to the world where our ignoramus president tweets random bullshit at 3AM that everyone should just ignore as the blatantly uninformed drivel that it plainly is. Donald Trump is not the kind of man to adopt a new position overnight and then do months or years of work to transform that position into governmental action. He is just saying poo poo in order to be heard to be saying poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
Maybe he'll get someone other than lockmart to design a jet that's actually capable of flying now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-intelligence-community-232463  He is the ultimate government worker.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
Trump delegating decision making to his trainwreck of an executive branch and Congress is legitimately terrifying. Not in a "We're all hosed" sort of way, but in a "America will generate a significant gap between where it should be 10-15 years from now, and where it will be in [insert any topic]" sort of way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-intelligence-community-232463 you want to point out the "uninformed drivel" in that tweet?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
God drat it why the gently caress did we cancel the F-22 Robert Gates you stupid poo poo. Hasn't the Raptor even seen (limited) use as a bomb truck carrying the SDB, and done pretty decent at it? In any case, I feel like we'd be a lot better off with 381 or 750 Raptors. Unrelated, here's some pics claiming to be early series production / preproduction J-20s;   
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
lDDQD posted:Maybe he'll get someone other than lockmart to design a jet that's actually capable of flying now. https://twitter.com/hmmbob/status/805637604917923840 Clearly can't fly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:you want to point out the "uninformed drivel" in that tweet? Has Trump ever made an informed decision in his entire life?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:you want to point out the "uninformed drivel" in that tweet? Wait, are you referencing a Trump tweet? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
While I wouldn't be surprised if someone did exactly that, it's not unpossible the clocks just didn't match.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Either way, within a MINUTE is just incredible to me. It's just crazy how fast people can move money I guess, not bad or evil or any judgement there, just commenting on the speed of life in the 21st century
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
Hillary Clintons Thong posted:Either way, within a MINUTE is just incredible to me. Firms will pay hundreds of millions of dollars to shave a microsecond off their transaction times in high frequency trading.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
I don't doubt that for a second. It's just crazy to me that if people put that amount of effort into anything other than profit how good and cool this world could be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
Vasudus posted:Firms will pay hundreds of millions of dollars to shave a microsecond off their transaction times in high frequency trading. That's for something completely different not being able to dump shares quickly before a tweet. Also it's worth noting that congress controls the f-35 budget, he can't change it overnight and his own party will prob fight him on this
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
This is why Trump should divulge financial records. At least he had the good grace to dump his Lockheed stocks as a demonstration of his distaste of their business practices. It'd be hypocritical to do so after his publicly lambasted them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
It would be downright American to complete the r and d for the f35 and then mothball it before it has even the slightest chance of making money from other countries
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:46
|
|
|
It's Christmas time, brought to you by the MIC
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
we'll make more jobs with inventing things for the F35 to do in a future where we'll never actually shoot at someone other than illiterate dirt farmers again
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
Godholio posted:While I wouldn't be surprised if someone did exactly that, it's not unpossible the clocks just didn't match. Right, but that kind of teeter's out beyond a minute differential. I thought that at first too, but when I looked closer I realized it's like 5 minutes - most of the internet won't let ssl/https communication happen (I think) Either way, I think that the stock markets clocks and twitters clocks are probably within seconds, if not milliseconds, of each other
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
 Lockheed Martin stock is still up over 5% since Donald Trump was elected on November 8th, off from a high of +11%.https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/LMT?ql=1&p=LMT
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
Hillary 2020 posted:It's Christmas time, brought to you by the MIC Boston Dynamics noooo stoooooop 
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
I could make an incredible autonomous donkey robot that would destroy bd
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Has Trump ever made an informed decision in his entire life? Boon posted:Wait, are you referencing a Trump tweet? idk dudes "the f35 program & [its] costs are out of control" shouldn't really be a controversial statement that provokes pearl-clutching indignation. even when he says it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:idk dudes "the f35 program & [its] costs are out of control" shouldn't really be a controversial statement that provokes pearl-clutching indignation. even when he says it. b-b-b-but our global hegemony
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:idk dudes "the f35 program & [its] costs are out of control" shouldn't really be a controversial statement that provokes pearl-clutching indignation. even when he says it. I think it was the other part.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:idk dudes "the f35 program & [its] costs are out of control" shouldn't really be a controversial statement that provokes pearl-clutching indignation. even when he says it. Man, if only he'd said that years ago when something could be done abuot it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
Godholio posted:You're in the wrong forum, again. lmao sorry this GBS thread includes opinions that fall outside of the comfort zone of the military hug box you have here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:you want to point out the "uninformed drivel" in that tweet? His 3am tweets in general, not that one specifically, although I can see how I phrased it wasn't clear. For example: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/806134244384899072 and https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/805538149157969924 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/805539770864693253 and, of course, https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/803567993036754944 LOL But I do love the idea that Trump thinks he's going to successfully negotiate down the prices of military contracts. e. Oh god how could I forget https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/802972944532209664 Landslide electoral college in the twentieth percentile of all electoral college victories! (Trump is projected to take 306 electoral votes, which is just shy of 57%. There have been 56 presidential elections in U.S. history, and the winner has done better in 44 of them. That puts Trump's "landslide" in the 20th percentile.) There's also no evidence that even hundreds of voters voted illegally, much less millions. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 08:34 on Dec 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 08:27
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Man, if only he'd said that years ago when something could be done abuot it. As a fifth column false flag poster I find it important to subvert the public's trust in their government and elites especially if it doesn't lead to a beneficial change in policy, so the takeover we are planning at the Kremlin can proceed as smoothly as possible. But seriously, people need to be reminded of the lessons of the past as often as possible so their mistakes don't get repeated in the future. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 09:10 on Dec 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 09:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 15:46 |
|
|
Is the 3AM tweets just after he wakes up or before he goes to sleep?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2016 10:50
|
|