|
Moridin920 posted:as an aside, this is a doctrinal thing that did us super well in WW2 - officers were encouraged to pursue the mission as best they saw fit and were given slightly broader mission goals whereas other nations' officers had very specific instructions and would have to get orders from commanders in the event of a tactical shift which enabled us to react to changing battlefield situations better yeah, the US has always let commanders make decisions tactically focusing on the ability of one piece of hardware really does a disservice to the actual way in which they are used, because even if the aircraft itself is lacking, it will almost never be in a situation where it is outnumbered or facing an enemy that has C&C centers that aren't already a smoking crater
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 02:11 |
|
|
I agree for the most part. Mostly I just get irritated when F-35 comes up in the news (like say Donald tweeting about it) and then defense industry people all pile in to give statements and quickly defend their parasitism by claiming it is some superpower stealth plane like Wonder Woman herself designed it.Concordat posted:Awhile ago I smashed some numbers and determined, after accounting for inflation, the JSF program has cost more than the Interstate Highway System, International Space Station, Space Shuttle Program, and Apollo program combined. And all those things combined only get to about half the cost of the JSF program. Like that's just goddamn criminal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
killing the MIC for being shitheels is cool and good
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:then why did you quote a post talking exclusively about the cost of the program because they'd answered my question about its cost and i thought it was funny
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:"Multirole" means that they suck at all roles equally
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
rudatron posted:gently caress svtol/vtol, that poo poo does not matter It's better than the traditional planes in Saints Row 3. But SR4's superpowers made vehicles irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
gently caress all yall the marine corps will loving continue after the gadd drat repubic turns into an empire and wie start taking fuckin planets not just god drat continental power gently caress
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
marines are meant for the meat grinder 
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:http://www.businessinsider.com/why-f-35-worth-every-penny-heritage-foundation-2016-8/#-4 there's also this https://theaviationist.com/2013/02/11/typhoon-aerial-combat/ just remember stumbling on it while looking around for pilot accounts briefly, including the ones you linked i mean, hard to tell at this stage if it's legitimate or just a dick measuring contest VikingSkull posted:"Multirole" means that they were designed as a strike aircraft, which means they are capable of A2A or ground attack, but yeah you won't see me argue the procurement and cost overrun issues, that's a clusterfuck. but it's not supposed to replace the f-22
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Typhoon guy specifically says that the 35 isn't good at air dominance I agree that's what the Raptor does lotta people don't understand mission roles itt
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:yeah, the US has always let commanders make decisions tactically i think the major problem is that the f-35 has eclipsed a handful of other planes that if updated or a new one designed to take their place, so we have a multirole fighter that doesn't do well except in like one role it's like trading in a small swiss army knife for an entire toolbox
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:Typhoon guy specifically says that the 35 isn't good at air dominance VikingSkull posted:At the end of the day it's a modified interceptor, which is the role the F-22 holds now and would be a better comparison. e: oh, were you referring to the f-15 as "it" so it should be f-15 vs f-22? that makes more sense then but the point is then, as you noted it has an A2A variation/loadout, what's the point if it's going to blow chunks versus modern A2A fighters that don't have the same compromises? like sure it'll do great against decades old planes, but i wouldn't expect that's what the point of the program was Karl Sharks has issued a correction as of 00:00 on Dec 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
The F-15E is a modified interceptor, not the F-35 The F-35 is a strike fighter, hence the SF in JSF
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:lotta people don't understand mission roles itt smh right? i mean im a usaf test pilot but i manage to juggle shitposting on c-spam and crashing test planes in between posts and i gotta say...
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Here's the cliff notes of how the F-35 is used: B-2/B-21 penetrates, burns down radar and C&C installations F-22 flies in, ties up enemy interceptors and directs targeting F-35 follows in, hits airfields, POL, etc etc People keep talking about F-35 dogfighting prowess as a way to criticize the airframe, which is valid, but also discounts US operational doctrine
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:Here's the cliff notes of how the F-35 is used: these aren't being produced anymore tho (though the house is looking into maybe restarting that) we have 195 of them in service still, while 1700-2000 planned f-35s like i'm not claiming to be a military expert, not even an internet one, but i'm learning so this is interesting to me so excuse me if i say dumb poo poo or ask dumb questions, i'm not so set on one particular thought like just to be clear, i'm sure the f-35 is better than our older planes at most everything, because it should be by default but all this comparison of it versus 30 year old airframes is missing the important part, that if it's supposed to be the latest and greatest, we aren't too concerned with it beating 30 year old planes, but instead how it fairs against the latest and greatest from russia/china
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Karl Sharks posted:these aren't being produced anymore tho (though the house is looking into maybe restarting that) The thing is, we're like 99% not going to be fighting a direct war against Russia and/or China, and if we are we got bigger issues. The real reason we need these planes is one fighter pilot lost is a national tragedy (i.e. it costs politicians in a political manner) so to better stunt on 3rd world shitholes we need 5th gen fighters. It's less about the proliferation of Russian or Chinese fighters (neither can properly construct engines that compare with the US anyway) and more about the proliferation of Russian built air defense networks. The F-35 will absolutely moonwalk on a MiG-21, which is probably going to be the style of aircraft it actually faces in a dogfight. As far as only having less than 200 Raptors, again, procurement in the US is highly politicized and a dumpster fire. People are seriously looking at restarting the Raptor line now, and I'm not convinced they won't do just that. e- also the US is already planning a 6th generation fighter before Russia and China even have their 5th gen in the air regularly. The Raptor has already flown combat missions over Syria.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:The thing is, we're like 99% not going to be fighting a direct war against Russia and/or China, and if we are we got bigger issues. The real reason we need these planes is one fighter pilot lost is a national tragedy (i.e. it costs politicians in a political manner) so to better stunt on 3rd world shitholes we need 5th gen fighters. It's less about the proliferation of Russian or Chinese fighters (neither can properly construct engines that compare with the US anyway) and more about the proliferation of Russian built air defense networks. The F-35 will absolutely moonwalk on a MiG-21, which is probably going to be the style of aircraft it actually faces in a dogfight. both of those seems really optimistic and if that's all, then gently caress we wasted even more money than i thought quote:As far as only having less than 200 Raptors, again, procurement in the US is highly politicized and a dumpster fire. People are seriously looking at restarting the Raptor line now, and I'm not convinced they won't do just that. yeah i tried to edit back in that i did see the house doing a study on restarting the production line why is it a dumpster fire though? someone else mentioned that, but never expanded and i'm curious i mean, why do we have so many f-35s queued up but have to do a study to even get the f-22 started back up?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
It makes sense politically to spread production across many Congressional districts to get as many politicians on board with a horribly bloated program. It's hard to rein in out of control spending when like 35 states have politicians supporting it, ya know?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:It makes sense politically to spread production across many Congressional districts to get as many politicians on board with a horribly bloated program. i know, my state gets about 100m in economic benefit from it but the f-22 was spread out over 44 states, so why is it so easy for the f-35 compared to f-22 if they both take advantage of the same tactic to get random state reps on board?
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
Karl Sharks posted:i know, my state gets about 100m in economic benefit from it It was political quote:Gates, with the backing of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., led the Obama administration’s effort to stop funding the F-22 in fiscal year 2010. The last aircraft ultimately was delivered in 2012. In speeches and congressional hearings during his tenure, Gates consistently bashed the F-22 — estimated to cost nearly $200 million apiece — as a symbol of extravagant spending on weapons that were conceived to combat the Soviet enemy but were no longer relevant in the fights against Islamic extremists or guerilla warriors like Hezbollah. He pointed out that China would not be able to field an advanced fighter jet until 2025 and by then, the United States would have hundreds of next-generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighters in the inventory. Gates also blamed expensive weapons such as the F-22 for draining resources from wartime priorities, such as unmanned drones and armored trucks. http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/lists/posts/post.aspx?ID=1371
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Karl Sharks posted:i know, my state gets about 100m in economic benefit from it the f-22 is good, while the f-35, is bad. any rationalization you find can amount only to plaster over the truth in this, the worst of all possible worlds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:It was political okay thanks for this! quote:A decorated fighter pilot and an ardent advocate of high-performance aircraft, Moseley fought to keep the F-22 program alive but could not overcome the political headwinds. The Air Force in the mid-1990s envisioned it would buy more than 700 airplanes from manufacturer Lockheed Martin Corp., but rising costs compelled the Pentagon in 2001 to reduce orders to 295. By fiscal year 2006, the budget proposed by the George W. Bush administration funded just 187. Congressional supporters kept the project going until 2009. lmao the loving irony in this? cutting one expensive program because another expensive program is taking up all the cash and idk why, as you mentioned, if one of the political reasons for the f-35 is to prevent pilot deaths why, knowing drone technology is there and would get better and better, they wouldn't push for that instead seems like a half drone/half jet focused on bombing would be best with an escort of f-22 like air superiority fighters, once they've cleared the way or just tag along? e: should've read all the way before asking lol quote:Another contentious issue that deepened the rift between Gates and the Air Force was what the secretary characterized as “foot dragging” in buying and deploying UAVs to war zones. He was convinced that Air Force leaders were intentionally slowing down drone procurements to ensure that there was sufficient funding for their prized fighter jets. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
They could probably forge ahead with UAV's of increased capability, but it's really hard to make the case for truly autonomous murderbots. UAV is a misnomer, because they all generally have someone, somewhere, pulling the trigger. It's much harder to create a drone that has reactions needed to face down another aircraft.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:They could probably forge ahead with UAV's of increased capability, but it's really hard to make the case for truly autonomous murderbots. but my point is, the advertised advantage, and point of, f-35s is to never be seen by another aircraft, or be seen right being death like i totally see how dumb it would be right now to try to replace the f-22 role with something that doesn't have a human pilot in it able to react in real time, but if the f-35 is primarily a strike plane not intended to encounter another aircraft in its missions, seems like an awfully massive price tag for what it is and yeah didn't mean totally autonomous, but imo seems like ideally you'd have a smaller f-35 that's controlled rather than flown buuut that might've been too far ahead for this generation
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
what i'm really saying is, you need
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
The price part, though, is the procurement issue. Our politicians let the defense contractors dictate pricing. That's what needs to be fixed, every piece of new tech will have issues that need to be worked out. The very same complaints levied against the F-35 were thrown at the F-22 a decade ago, and now people want the F-22 back because it works and the actual flyaway costs were finally recognized as being less than the first operational jet. Economies of scale, etc The end of run F-35's will be much cheaper than the ones being built now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:39
|
|
|
if i had speech recognition software id be a ble ot stto to shought shout shout this post at you since i don't i have to loving type it neoli bersals you are like captian 2020 hindsighting the gently caress poo poo up like godd ddman some pentagon uckcs cusk cusck pentacucks had to lok in the critical bgall crystal ball and try their berst to figure tout how to win wars 20-30 yhears ahead of time and hel its the biggesat tttttttttttttt procurement oprojec pROEJCT IN HISTORY AND NOOOOOOO ITS NAOT GONA BE PERFECT
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
when eggnog and geopolitical strategery clash
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
Jose posted:what sort of good things for the american people could this money have been better spent on? like are there actual numbers like nobody goes hungry for a year or whatever if you want people to not go hungry, you have to deal with food distribution and control, not production & purchase. the issue isn't that there's enough food to go around, or that it's too expensive; the problem is that local power structures (warlords, dictators, gangs, etc) find it extremely useful for the people they dislike to go hungry. fixing that isn't just a matter of throwing money at the problem. there are still plenty of better things the money could be spent on than newer and shinier and more pilot-killing jets, just saying that 'curing world hunger' isn't exactly a matter of spending
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:48
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:if i had speech recognition software id be a ble ot stto to shought shout shout this post at you since i don't i have to loving type it i would've said it was a dumb idea to make a plane for all 3 branches with 2 different roles back then too and you had predator drones back when the JSF program started up, so they knew it was coming lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
I wish the internet was around in the 50's and 60's when we were developing, using, and then scrapping hundreds of aircraft in less than a decade as new tech came around. Those threads would have been amazing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:if you want people to not go hungry, you have to deal with food distribution and control, not production & purchase. the issue isn't that there's enough food to go around, or that it's too expensive; the problem is that local power structures (warlords, dictators, gangs, etc) find it extremely useful for the people they dislike to go hungry. fixing that isn't just a matter of throwing money at the problem. i think he meant within the US like with the iraq war bill, there were articles saying how many people it could've sent to college, number of children fed for a year through food stamps, etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:The price part, though, is the procurement issue. Our politicians let the defense contractors dictate pricing. That's what needs to be fixed, every piece of new tech will have issues that need to be worked out. did procurement cause the years of delay though? i mean you can't have delay without extra costs f-22 tbf did apparently have 52 months worth of delays
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
UAVs are only effective in a permissive electronic/signals environment, which is not a good assumption to make. I don't think anyone is willing to make a combat platform entirely in control of a local AI either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
brilliant weapons are AI kamikazes
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
There's a big difference between programming a flight sim opponent and telling a bomb to make fin adjustments when it strays from a laser pointer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Concordat posted:UAVs are only effective in a permissive electronic/signals environment, which is not a good assumption to make. is that purely a cloud/smog/whatever thing? like could you have a sort of mothership/forward operating plane like a c130 that was above any drones that boosted the signal compared to how it's done now? (i don't know exactly how it's done now, though i did briefly, after some article on drones in some magazine, think it'd be cool to be a drone pilot lmao)
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
Karl Sharks posted:did procurement cause the years of delay though? In a way, it did, because defense contractors can just keep going back to the well with the old "uh, this is gonna cost more" routine. If things got set in stone from the get go and delays and issues came out of the contractors pocket, I bet a lot of problems would magically solve themselves. Karl Sharks posted:is that purely a cloud/smog/whatever thing? Electronic signals can be jammed or spoofed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 02:11 |
|
|
LRASM, Brimstone have target selection AI, like milimetric radar / electrooptical, IR target thinkin software etc not talkin about like Harpoons trying to figure out whats a decoy and whats not, LRASM actually thinks about poo poo
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2016 01:05
|
|