Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: oldbill

I think you missed my point. Peters may be an uninformed fool who may want our pilots flying tin cans yet that does not answer my questions. If air superiority via better aircraft boils down to who has the best longest looking targeting radar systems with commensurate air-to-air missiles on board AND our stealth aircraft still require suppression of air defenses to operate, then why spend all that money on them? Sounds to me like the technology is vulnerable and may not be worth the expense. We need to remain ahead technologically yet weapons procurement sometimes appear to be corporate job programs/cash cows, particularly in the military aircraft business. Things to ponder.

Regards.


16 posted on 02/16/2013 5:04:32 AM PST by Sine_Pari
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: Sine_Pari

Dear Without Equal

“If air superiority via better aircraft boils down to who has the best longest looking targeting radar systems with commensurate air-to-air missiles on board AND our stealth aircraft still require suppression of air defenses to operate, then why spend all that money on”

I don’t have the slightest idea of what you are talking about with this mutually contradictory sentence.

The warrior wants the longest range sensor capability possible (radar, but also infrared, data link and other feeds) and yet he wants the other guy to be blind or at least foggy to your presence, whether in the air or on the ground (stealth). The perfect air combat is when the other guy died never knowing he was targeted.

Enough from people in the media and the democrat party about technology and costs and things they don’t have a clue about - like combat aviation.

And enough about corporate jobs programs and cash cows in the military aircraft business. You don’t have a clue about the risk a company faces when they undertake these programs. In many cases, they are betting the farm, and when they lose, they are out of business. How many aircraft do you see today being built by Grumman, or North American, or Vought, or Convair, or General Dynamics?

That $600 toilet seat? It was a special seat with cover for a portable toilet that had to seal in all the fluids and corrosive human wastes when that airplane it was installed in went zero-G or cranked into a 60 degree bank. The $200 hammer? It’s because the contractor is forced to buy a specialized brass head to prevent sparks off a GSA schedule from an approved contractor, with a minimum order of a dozen or a gross. The $2000 three-inch bolt? It holds all the load of the wing when the aircraft is pulling 9-Gs so it needs to be specially alloyed with ultrasound and xray analysis and hours of lab tests for age, corrosion, and fatigue. Wanna bet your life on the 50 cent equivalent at Home Depot?

Too many people, including a lot here on FR, are quite ignorant as to what defense spending and combat aviation imposes and requires. They rant about the costs of F-22s and F-35s which are sorely in need when the balloon goes up. Of course, their kids won’t be the ones flying them - they’ll be at the mall with their IPhones.

And your Chinese stealth aircraft? They are but two prototypes, and no one yet knows their stealth qualities. But they will be building them in large numbers, and they will be up against a mere handful of F-22s, because America needed the money for Solyndra and AIG and healthcare for illegal aliens.

I’ve alreadey pondered.


18 posted on 02/16/2013 10:53:55 AM PST by oldbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson