The most expensive weapon system of all times

Skybird · 02-19-13, 05:41 PM

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...136312,00.html

The new dream weapon of air-based warfare? Well - mine not.

GoldenRivet · 02-19-13, 05:59 PM

push button warfare...

Ducimus · 02-19-13, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

push button warfare...

Pisces · 02-21-13, 12:57 PM

[Off-topic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Their Wingman song is cool too.

Oh yeah, the obligatory offensive language warning applies!

[/Off-topic]

Bilge_Rat · 02-21-13, 02:07 PM

1. The basic concept, having an airframe that can be used by more than one service is good. The F-4 was used by both the air force and navy.

2. Is there a need? well the F-15, F-16 and F-18 were designed 40 years ago and are nearing the end of their useful life.

3. Does it have to use the latest cutting edge technology? Based on the F-15/16/18 experience, they will probably have to last 40 years. What will be the anti-air tech in 2050? What is more expensive? building it right from the beginning or having an expensive upgrade in 2030?

4. Is there a threat? These airplanes have a long lead time, Russia and China are both designing their own next generation plane. When, not if, but when the next crisis comes around, there wont be time to develop new planes.

5. should it be scrapped? trillions of dollars down the drain. Yes, there would be an immediate savings, but you still have the problem that the current generation of planes will be obsolete in 10 years.

6. Are manned airplanes obsolete? who knows? Drones can do some interesting things, can they do everything? If you want to fly an infantry division to the next crisis point with C-17s, are you really going to trust their protection to drones? How do you prevent the enemy from jamming the transmissions between the drone and the GCI?

7. do we need so many variants? That is probably where they could have saved some bucks.

Oberon · 02-21-13, 02:26 PM

TBH, the F-22 is here to stay. It'll be in limited numbers, used only against nations with no anti-aircraft ability, and kept in cotton wool otherwise. Meanwhile the drone arm will grow and get more competent, and the conventional airforce will make up the shortfall.

In terms of an air war against the likes of China, well, I think it's very unlikely to happen, but if it does and there's a shortage of aircraft, then there's:

HundertzehnGustav · 02-21-13, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

1. The basic concept, having an airframe that can be used by more than one service is good. The F-4 was used by both the air force and navy.

2. Is there a need? well the F-15, F-16 and F-18 were designed 40 years ago and are nearing the end of their useful life.

3. Does it have to use the latest cutting edge technology? Based on the F-15/16/18 experience, they will probably have to last 40 years. What will be the anti-air tech in 2050? What is more expensive? building it right from the beginning or having an expensive upgrade in 2030?

4. Is there a threat? These airplanes have a long lead time, Russia and China are both designing their own next generation plane. When, not if, but when the next crisis comes around, there wont be time to develop new planes.

5. should it be scrapped? trillions of dollars down the drain. Yes, there would be an immediate savings, but you still have the problem that the current generation of planes will be obsolete in 10 years.

6. Are manned airplanes obsolete? who knows? Drones can do some interesting things, can they do everything? If you want to fly an infantry division to the next crisis point with C-17s, are you really going to trust their protection to drones? How do you prevent the enemy from jamming the transmissions between the drone and the GCI?

7. do we need so many variants? That is probably where they could have saved some bucks.

2 -the E and F have sopme 10-20 years left.

3- the cutting edge tecnology is stolen, and therefor no more cutting edge. PAK-FA. Chinese hardware. software leaks.

4- now you have a bunch of expensive toys, and some rustbuckets. not a single proper tool at hand.

5 - drones. cheap. effective. what needs trying is a fighter drone,.. something that has a gun and can put that gun on an enemy Fighter, transport, chopper...
but they drop eggs, and do so in an accurate manner.

6 - as far as i can see: yes.
it is only a matter of time whehn humans will thrust Cargo and Tanker and surveilance roles to manned drones of all sizes and measures.
Some roles get handed to the machines faster... some much later. Including civilian drones carrying passenges in 2060 or 2100

Not that i like any of that. if it were me, the development would have stopped at the A-4 Skyhawk or the Mig-19.
That 35 aint no good for nothing, it seems. and drones are around the corner. Naval drones even.

when toys are the killers, then the detachment from war is complete.
I hope i die soon, for these times are ugly. Careless killings ahead.

Red October1984 · 02-19-13, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

push button warfare...

I shudder at the idea...

Platapus · 02-19-13, 06:39 PM

F-35: A weapon desperately searching for an problem.

Skybird · 02-19-13, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

F-35: A weapon desperately searching for an problem.

Or it is a problem for all three branches of the military, navy, marines, air force. And every of the three branches has a different problem with it, because the design tries to do justice to all three branches' differing demands and thus cannot do anything really good.

Which makes it the meta-problem that the project is.

And with a super-expensive stealth design being compromised by needing to hang external fuel tanks and weapons onto it, I have a principle problem... In German, we have a word for things like this: we call it the eierlegende Wollmilchsau (egg-producing wool-milk-pig).

I would not be surprised to learn one day that the program was cancelled like the Comanche.

Stealhead · 02-19-13, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red October1984

I shudder at the idea...

It has already been here for over 40 years...ICMBs nuclear warfare it is push button/turn key away and we all know what it would mean for humanity.

In 15~30 minutes billions of humans would die after the pushing of some buttons and turning of keys.

It still hangs over us at this very second we are all less than an hour away from annihilation.

Now as Monty Python said....

TarJak · 02-20-13, 12:06 AM

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stori...18/3690317.htm

Interesting article on the F-35 our Four Coners program last Monday. The transcript has some scary comments and numbers in it.

eddie · 02-20-13, 01:34 AM

We stopped production of the F22 because of its cost, but we are stuck paying for this crap?

Platapus · 02-20-13, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stealhead

In 15~30 minutes billions of humans would die after the pushing of some buttons and turning of keys.

There is probably a downside to this, but I just can't think of one offhand.

Skybird · 02-20-13, 08:29 PM

the links set up by commentators should not go ba unnoticed:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...impact-381683/

Those acceleation times are a extremely bad news for a pilot who has an advanced AAM in his neck. The recommendation to reduce the Gs being pulled even more, does not make it better.

http://www.cassidian.com/en_US/web/g...ains-invisible
There is potential in that - though not to the benefit of the F-35.

And the F-22, costing so much, and having had two wars bypassing it since the kind of enemy it was designed for did not show up: the Raptors still have not proven their value in any hot engagement. Are they still grounded btw.?

http://theaviationist.com/2012/07/13...yphoon-raptor/

"We have had a Raptor salad." Nicely put

The Chinese probably already have had their bite on the F-35 anyway. Of course Lockheed claims that their espionage attack into the company'S datanetwork, confirmed to have stolen code of the control logic and other technical data, was harmless and did not do threatening damage to the plane'S survivability. - What else would you expect them to say with that much money at stake?

Meanwhile, the Americans train more drone pilots than combat pilots these days.

And there is practically not a single American hightech weapon or platform in service that does not use Chinese-made chips and high tech parts.

I think they really need to start thinking in the Pentagon.

02-19-13, 05:41 PM	#1
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,645 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	The most expensive weapon system of all times http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...136312,00.html The new dream weapon of air-based warfare? Well - mine not. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

02-19-13, 05:59 PM	#2
GoldenRivet Subsim Aviator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 8,726 Downloads: 146 Uploads: 0	push button warfare... __________________

02-21-13, 02:07 PM	#5
Bilge_Rat Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: standing watch... Posts: 3,856 Downloads: 344 Uploads: 0	1. The basic concept, having an airframe that can be used by more than one service is good. The F-4 was used by both the air force and navy. 2. Is there a need? well the F-15, F-16 and F-18 were designed 40 years ago and are nearing the end of their useful life. 3. Does it have to use the latest cutting edge technology? Based on the F-15/16/18 experience, they will probably have to last 40 years. What will be the anti-air tech in 2050? What is more expensive? building it right from the beginning or having an expensive upgrade in 2030? 4. Is there a threat? These airplanes have a long lead time, Russia and China are both designing their own next generation plane. When, not if, but when the next crisis comes around, there wont be time to develop new planes. 5. should it be scrapped? trillions of dollars down the drain. Yes, there would be an immediate savings, but you still have the problem that the current generation of planes will be obsolete in 10 years. 6. Are manned airplanes obsolete? who knows? Drones can do some interesting things, can they do everything? If you want to fly an infantry division to the next crisis point with C-17s, are you really going to trust their protection to drones? How do you prevent the enemy from jamming the transmissions between the drone and the GCI? 7. do we need so many variants? That is probably where they could have saved some bucks. __________________

02-19-13, 06:39 PM	#9
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,375 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	F-35: A weapon desperately searching for an problem. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

02-20-13, 08:29 PM	#15
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,645 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	the links set up by commentators should not go ba unnoticed: http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...impact-381683/ Those acceleation times are a extremely bad news for a pilot who has an advanced AAM in his neck. The recommendation to reduce the Gs being pulled even more, does not make it better. http://www.cassidian.com/en_US/web/g...ains-invisible There is potential in that - though not to the benefit of the F-35. And the F-22, costing so much, and having had two wars bypassing it since the kind of enemy it was designed for did not show up: the Raptors still have not proven their value in any hot engagement. Are they still grounded btw.? http://theaviationist.com/2012/07/13...yphoon-raptor/ "We have had a Raptor salad." Nicely put The Chinese probably already have had their bite on the F-35 anyway. Of course Lockheed claims that their espionage attack into the company'S datanetwork, confirmed to have stolen code of the control logic and other technical data, was harmless and did not do threatening damage to the plane'S survivability. - What else would you expect them to say with that much money at stake? Meanwhile, the Americans train more drone pilots than combat pilots these days. And there is practically not a single American hightech weapon or platform in service that does not use Chinese-made chips and high tech parts. I think they really need to start thinking in the Pentagon. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

02-21-13, 02:26 PM	#6
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	TBH, the F-22 is here to stay. It'll be in limited numbers, used only against nations with no anti-aircraft ability, and kept in cotton wool otherwise. Meanwhile the drone arm will grow and get more competent, and the conventional airforce will make up the shortfall. In terms of an air war against the likes of China, well, I think it's very unlikely to happen, but if it does and there's a shortage of aircraft, then there's:

02-20-13, 12:06 AM	#12
TarJak Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,052 Downloads: 150 Uploads: 8	http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stori...18/3690317.htm Interesting article on the F-35 our Four Coners program last Monday. The transcript has some scary comments and numbers in it.

02-20-13, 01:34 AM	#13
eddie Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,023 Downloads: 99 Uploads: 0	We stopped production of the F22 because of its cost, but we are stuck paying for this crap?