Posted on 08/22/2014 7:37:05 PM PDT by Whenifhow
It’s not just Obama who’s making us look weak. They know Americans don’t have the stomach for protracted conflicts. We might fight at first, but give up when we get tired.
Exactly. The Chinese are playing the standard game of airplane 'chicken' and Obama just blinked. It's the same game the Soviets and others have played for decades.
The first to blink or complain is the looser because they will just get more of the same. Veteran pilots know how to play this game and either they are not being allowed to play it properly or not being taught how to play it effectively.
With the Obama administration, my guess is that our pilots are not being allowed to play it properly since Obama probably has 'control issues'.
How do you tell the difference between a Russian built Sukhoi and a Chinese built Shenyang?
To be honest, I'm not even sure which model of Shenyang it is. A J-11, I think, but which flavor?
Gladly.
I learned to read nearly 70 years ago, and even attended a school.
During those many years of reading I actually managed to remember one or two things, one of which was a Rand Institute report on the F-35, which was the source of the "can't climb, can't turn, can't run" phrase.
One not need be an expert on a subject to quote those who actually are.
“How do you tell the difference between a Russian built Sukhoi and a Chinese built Shenyang?”
Bad phrasing on my part, I meant to imply something the Russians are still flying themselves, vice endless variations on the Fishbed. I had to check to see what exactly the PRC was doing with their “license,” and I was unpleasantly shocked.
Our sh!t better be damn good if we’re ever going to get into a scrape with them.
Glad it's just a scrimmage game.
Most in the press are motivated by a different agenda and reasons than the pilots who fly it or the engineers who designed and built it, and they frequently do not have the knowledge or experience to speak with much authority.
I'm not saying your conclusion is right or wrong, just that the range of sources for your conclusion could be improved and that your conclusion might change as a result.
So you don’t know anything about fighter aviation.
Come back after you had at least one hour in a fighter, preferably at 9Gs.
NO military person will dare speak ill of it, nor will anyone remotely connected with the manufacturing chain. Ditto for just about everyone in congress, as LM has insured that pieces and parts are made in nearly every congressional district.
However, one need only look at the ORIGINAL stated costs, performance goals, and schedules to see it simply is a pig in a poke.
NO multi-mission aircraft can ever be as good as a single mission a/c at a particular job.
Well, oldbill, I'd match my aviation knowledge up against anyone on this forum, and would come up short possibly once or twice, if that.
And you wouldn't be one of them.
As a general rule, I tend to agree. Kelly Johnson supposedly was of that same mindset and I'm just going to smile and nod to whatever he says.
Regardless, the A-10 is one of the best single purpose machines in the business and politicians have tried to kill the program from the beginning.
However, one need only look at the ORIGINAL stated costs, performance goals, and schedules to see it simply is a pig in a poke.
This is where I need more info, but with regard to cost? No one spends other people's money like a GuvCo official funding a program, any program, so money isn't a good measure of the airplane to me, just a way to make the program look bad.
The way the program has been/is (mis)managed, the number of contractors involved, both here and around the world, and any number of setbacks from technical issues to espionage, not to mention changes and revisions along the way, all factor into the cost but aren't the fault of the design.
But they are a great way to politically sabotage a program and one side has long been very unfriendly to the military. You obviously know this, but others seem oblivious to it.
I'm more interested in the F-35's performance and whether or not it meets design and mission goals. What do they want to do with it?
If the pilots are saying it's a pig, then it's a pig. If it truly is a pig, it wouldn't be impossible to get some quotes saying so.
If it's over budget and behind schedule, then my bet is it's yet another pork problem caused by overfed GuvCo swine who've been at the trough too long, the kind GuvCo has forever been known for.
To me, the F-35 looks more like a bomb truck, like a modern F-105, not a fighter. It could also be a modern Harrier, but the Harrier isn't a fighter either.
Otoh, I see a big engine with wings and things attached to it. That's usually a good combination. Looking down at it from above, it makes me think of an F-104 without tip tanks and its pedigree.
I think I'll wait to hear what the pilots think about it before I say it can't climb, turn or whatever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.