Observer-Reporter forum

SSSS · Posted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 3:15 pm Post subject:

true dat
_________________

Cylinsier · Master Joined: 29 Sep 2008 Posts: 13229 Location: Oh shi-

Just read the article you were talking about. This quote was also in it:

"Gates has maintained that more jobs will be created in F-35 production than will be lost in stopping the F-22. He said 11,000 jobs will be lost by halting the F-22, while it is anticipated that 82,000 jobs will be created by the F-35."

Here's hoping its the truth.
_________________
The end is nigh! OR forums die APRIL 1. Don't lose contact! Join the forums at bogsource.com now!

SSSS · Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:54 am Post subject:

Yes but WILL BE CREATED is not the same as jobs right now.
_________________

dick · Journeyman Joined: 28 Jan 2009 Posts: 3134

But do the jobs created by buiding these jet exceed the cost of building and maintaining them? The government bails on military development all the time. When a jet, bomber, tank, or any project becomes out dated, too costly, or replacable, they are disposed of.

If these soon to be unemployed people are engineering and building fighter jets for the US military, I'm sure they have aquired skills that would make them very valuable on other projects.

Brant · Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 12:27 pm Post subject:

Not to be callous, but I'm really not concerned about the jobs being lost. We should not be spending billions on a weapons program that is unwise, just in order to preserve jobs. Now, if only we could apply that standard to other government programs.
_________________

The priests of the different religious sects dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight.

- Thomas Jefferson

Cylinsier · Master Joined: 29 Sep 2008 Posts: 13229 Location: Oh shi-

The JSF (F-35) is going to be a better and more versatile fighter than the Raptor anyway.
_________________
The end is nigh! OR forums die APRIL 1. Don't lose contact! Join the forums at bogsource.com now!

ellipses · Mod Joined: 29 Sep 2008 Posts: 9218 Location: WashPa!

Cylinsier · Master Joined: 29 Sep 2008 Posts: 13229 Location: Oh shi-

I could imagine some applications. It seems far fetched because we haven't had an adversary with a significant air force since the Soviets, but that doesn't mean we won't. Potentially situations could arise where an area comes under attack and finesse is required in either taking it or protecting it. In a case where bombing won't do and you have an enemy air force to deal with, you're going to want to have craft that can fight back.

But that's the nice thing about the Lighting II. It serves all those purposes; bombing, recon and air-to-air. So its useful now AND it can stand up in a dogfight. Makes a lot more sense that building planes just for air superiority when we haven't needed those in years.
_________________
The end is nigh! OR forums die APRIL 1. Don't lose contact! Join the forums at bogsource.com now!

dick · Journeyman Joined: 28 Jan 2009 Posts: 3134

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle

Right on. I'm sure many of you saw the 60 minutes (or some news magazine show) story on the drones. A fighter pilot goes to work in the morning just like you or me. Instead he goes to some compound in Nevada and sits in his "cockpit" which looks like a video game. Its real. He is controlling an unmanned aerial vehicle and shooting real targets in Afganistan. He is killing people and blowing up targets, then goes home to his wife and kids. What a life! Mentally, that has to drive a person crazy. Its a f*cking Terminator movie! Only real.

Cylinsier · Master Joined: 29 Sep 2008 Posts: 13229 Location: Oh shi-

Aw geez, Obama himself has axed another military program. This one looked real promising too:

http://www.cnn.com/video/obama_axes_pentagon_plan_to_build
_________________
The end is nigh! OR forums die APRIL 1. Don't lose contact! Join the forums at bogsource.com now!

SSSS · Posted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:02 pm Post subject:

Y'all might want to look around-the Soviets are AGAIN a threat.
_________________

Cylinsier · Master Joined: 29 Sep 2008 Posts: 13229 Location: Oh shi-

SSSS, what did you think about the F-22 being chosen over the YF-23 for production?
_________________
The end is nigh! OR forums die APRIL 1. Don't lose contact! Join the forums at bogsource.com now!

Cylinsier · Master Joined: 29 Sep 2008 Posts: 13229 Location: Oh shi-

Interestingly, the Senate is voting right now on an amendment that would, among other things, bar funds for alternative engines for the JSF unless certain conditions are met (I'm not too clear on it as I came in half way). I caught that McCain is voting against it. So is Franken and Dodd. Not other interesting names have jumped out at me yet.
_________________
The end is nigh! OR forums die APRIL 1. Don't lose contact! Join the forums at bogsource.com now!

SSSS · Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 3:29 pm Post subject:

I do not knoeenough about the two to draw a fair comparisson
_________________

Cylinsier · Master Joined: 29 Sep 2008 Posts: 13229 Location: Oh shi-

You should google it because its pretty interesting. It seems the decision to back the F-22 was highly political. The YF-23 was the superior plane in almost every way. It had the exact same armament but a higher top speed, longer flight time, larger fuel tank (but would have had the better flight time even if it didn't), better agility, higher stealth rating, and in my opinion was way more kick ass looking. However, it was estimated to be a little more expensive to build and maintain, and apparently Lockheed was able to pull some strings behind the scene to yoink the contract despite their marginally inferior performance.
_________________
The end is nigh! OR forums die APRIL 1. Don't lose contact! Join the forums at bogsource.com now!