DogOnPorch Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 A couple of things...first, ICBM launches can be detected by satellite from outer space. Second, nobody needs $150M/unit recon planes. That's what drones are so good for. Seeing that the Americans can do both of the above already, why did they develop this C&C system? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Moonbox Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 Seeing that the Americans can do both of the above already, why did they develop this C&C system? because they wanted to fit too many things into one plane. Unfortunately, it's turned out to be way more expensive than it was supposed to be. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
DogOnPorch Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 because they wanted to fit too many things into one plane. Unfortunately, it's turned out to be way more expensive than it was supposed to be. This system will eventually be linked to individual soldiers on the ground. Not just an F-35. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Moonbox Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 Whoopy. It's still going to cost $150-200M, or more, per plane. People have started calling the F-35 a flying piano, which is pretty funny. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
DogOnPorch Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 Whoopy. It's still going to cost $150-200M, or more, per plane. People have started calling the F-35 a flying piano, which is pretty funny. You're right. Expensive. Trouble is, in the air combat biz, 2nd best doesn't get silver. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 Whoopy. It's still going to cost $150-200M, or more, per plane. People have started calling the F-35 a flying piano, which is pretty funny. So what? Some people know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. The Americans are going to do what they have always done, and that means more investment in "battlespace dominance". Remember that little dance in Libya last year? Guess who destroyed most of the air defense network with...ummm...errr..."unique capabilities"? Allies who get it are buying the same technology to keep up...or get left behind. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Moonbox Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 You're right. Expensive. Trouble is, in the air combat biz, 2nd best doesn't get silver. The Americans are already so far ahead of the game it's not even funny and will continue to be for some time, with or without the F-35. So what? Some people know the cost of everything and the value of nothing. The Americans are going to do what they have always done, and that means more investment in "battlespace dominance". Remember that little dance in Libya last year? Guess who destroyed most of the air defense network with...ummm...errr..."unique capabilities"? So what? Libya was running a large, but dilapitated AA network that hadn't been upgraded for 20-25 years. That's the wack-a-mole I was talking about. Allies who get it are buying the same technology to keep up...or get left behind. Yeah we already went over that. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
waldo Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 are you challenging the quoted extract from the U.S. GAO report? from the most recent, just weeks old, U.S. Government Accountability Office report: JSF’s mission systems: provide combat effectiveness through next generation sensors with fused information from on-board and off-board systems (i.e. Electronic Warfare, Communication Navigation Identification, Electro-Optical Target System, Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System, Radar, and Data Links).JSF’s mission systems and logistics systems are critical to realizing the operational and support capabilities expected by the warfighter, but the hardware and software for these systems are immature and unproven at this time. For example, only 4 percent of mission systems requirements planned in system development and demonstration have been verified. Significant learning and development remains before the program can demonstrate mature mission systems software and hardware, not expected until block 3.0 is delivered in 2015. The program has experienced significant challenges developing and integrating mission systems software. Mission systems hardware has also experienced several technical challenges, including problems with the radar, integrated processor, communication and navigation equipment, and electronic warfare capabilities. Are you challenging the specific quote from the Pentagon? Also, notice your quoted text doesn’t mention weapons in any regard………Waldo, you’re moving to olp1fan territory and I shall suspect that you’ll be collecting tolls under a bridge shortly. whatever you dream your referenced announcement says... it butts up against the GAO report. As I said, do you think they just make 'stuff up' in those reports? You do know the U.S. GAO works cooperatively/'hand-in-hand' with the JSFail program managers in drafting the reports, right? You do know that, right? as the latest, just weeks old, GAO report states, the testing of integrated mission systems (including those you beaked off about... DAS, radar, data links, etc.), isn't scheduled until 'block 3.0 is delivered in 2015'. Have you heard of.......... software, hey? You do know what......... software is, right? You do know what........ integration means, right? In any case, I expect that 2015 projection timing is highly suspect given the decade+ track record of Lockheed Martin. since you're into your standard high-gear bluster, let's have you offer your interpretation of the GAO report quote presented. Sure you can! Quote
Guest Derek L Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 A couple of things...first, ICBM launches can be detected by satellite from outer space. Second, nobody needs $150M/unit recon planes. That's what drones are so good for. Thanks tips…..And the new STSS is made by none other than Northrop Grumman……..Wanna take a stab at who is also developing the next generation of air & missile defence radar for the navy and partnered with Lockheed to develop the X-47B? (Which is also undergoing flight testing concurrently with the F-35) It’s almost like all these systems and sub systems are intertwined……….. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 [/size]whatever you dream your referenced announcement says... it butts up against the GAO report. As I said, do you think they just make 'stuff up' in those reports? You do know the U.S. GAO works cooperatively/'hand-in-hand' with the JSFail program managers in drafting the reports, right? You do know that, right? as the latest, just weeks old, GAO report states, the testing of integrated mission systems (including those you beaked off about... DAS, radar, data links, etc.), isn't scheduled until 'block 3.0 is delivered in 2015'. Have you heard of.......... software, hey? You do know what......... software is, right? You do know what........ integration means, right? In any case, I expect that 2015 projection timing is highly suspect given the decade+ track record of Lockheed Martin. since you're into your standard high-gear bluster, let's have you offer your interpretation of the GAO report quote presented. Sure you can! What did your report say on weapons testing? Also, care to refute the DoD press release on weapons testing? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 It’s almost like all these systems and sub systems are intertwined……….. That's exactly what it is. Eventually connected to everything. But, folks have trouble understanding being 'in command' as opposed to 'out of command'...the advantages...disadvantages. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Guest Derek L Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 The Americans are already so far ahead of the game it's not even funny and will continue to be for some time, with or without the F-35. It’s evolution and the requirement to stay several generations ahead of the Soviets Russian and Chinese. So what? Libya was running a large, but dilapitated AA network that hadn't been upgraded for 20-25 years. That's the wack-a-mole I was talking about. The rump of NATO (sans the United States) wouldn’t have achieved the same level of success over Libya without initial US involvement….. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 So what? Libya was running a large, but dilapitated AA network that hadn't been upgraded for 20-25 years. That's the wack-a-mole I was talking about. Ding...ding...ding...ding! Thank you for proving our point. So how long does Canada want to wait...30 years? Yeah we already went over that. What the Americans spend or don't spend really isn't your worry, until you wish they had. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 What did your report say on weapons testing? Also, care to refute the DoD press release on weapons testing? oh my! You really should, 'know when to hold em, know when to fold em'! it was you... you... that made the correlation in back-to-back posts - here, read them (your correlation), and scurry away now: Back to the F-35, about a month ago we were talking about the F-35’s Distributed Aperture System combined with the Active Electronically Scanned Array radar and the added capabilities this would afford not only the individual F-35, but the network-centric warfare capabilities it will deliver to battlefield commanders in real-time……….Combined with the Multifunction Advanced Data Link, this capability will enable a F-35 to not only track an ICBM launch, but share tracking data in real-time with an AEGIS Destroyer/Cruiser to launch ICBM interceptors (SM-6s) but also forward target locations to cruise missile armed subs, a B-2 filled with JDAMs or a 155mm Howitzer loaded with an Excalibur………. Good timing too, what with live weapons testing starting later this summer so... again... you are presuming on capabilities that aren't even projected to be available/tested until, as stated within the U.S. GAO report => "'block 3.0 is delivered in 2015'." As I (also) suggested, a most optimistic projection given the decade+ of failed Lockheed Martin promises/results... notwithstanding the GAO report, itself, holds up the following caveats to that most optimistic projection: "Significant learning and development remains before the program can demonstrate mature mission systems software and hardware, not expected until block 3.0 is delivered in 2015" keep on trying MLW member, 'Derek L'... keep on trying! Quote
Moonbox Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 Ding...ding...ding...ding! Thank you for proving our point. So how long does Canada want to wait...30 years? Proving your point how? Libya's AA network would have been garbage 25 years ago and easily dismantled by the Americans even back then. Combining faulty and bargain Soviet tech with incompetent leadership and poorly trained operators is a proven recipe for failure. Add to this that Libya's armed forces were long the laughing stock of Africa (not the world - Africa...let that sink in), where rebels driving technicals were evenly matched against Libyan tanks, you start to get a picture of their efficacy. Adding 30 years of obsolesence to an already useless armed forces just took them from 2% effective to 1.5% effective. What the Americans spend or don't spend really isn't your worry, until you wish they had. Except Amerrrica doesn't exist in a vacuum, like a lot of you seem to think. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 (edited) Proving your point how? Libya's AA network would have been garbage 25 years ago and easily dismantled by the Americans even back then. Nope...not nearly as "easily"....no GPS guided munitions...no Tactical Tomahawks....no JDAMS...etc., etc. Would have been hard core Wild Weasel missions with far more losses. Gulf War I technology was mostly dumb iron bombs, and that was only 21 years ago. Go back and read the details of Operation El Dorado Canyon (Libya), which was about 25 years ago. Combining faulty and bargain Soviet tech with incompetent leadership and poorly trained operators is a proven recipe for failure. Keep singing our song....bargains are rarely such....Canada has proven that many times. Except Amerrrica doesn't exist in a vacuum, like a lot of you seem to think. Then why does it have so many toys to play with compared to Canada? Edited June 27, 2012 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest Derek L Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 oh my! You really should, 'know when to hold em, know when to fold em'! it was you... you... that made the correlation in back-to-back posts - here, read them (your correlation), and scurry away now: so... again... you are presuming on capabilities that aren't even projected to be available/tested until, as stated within the U.S. GAO report => "'block 3.0 is delivered in 2015'." As I (also) suggested, a most optimistic projection given the decade+ of failed Lockheed Martin promises/results... notwithstanding the GAO report, itself, holds up the following caveats to that most optimistic projection: "Significant learning and development remains before the program can demonstrate mature mission systems software and hardware, not expected until block 3.0 is delivered in 2015" keep on trying MLW member, 'Derek L'... keep on trying! I beg to differ, I stated weapons testing will start later this summer…….You denied that it would happen….You then went on about full system integration to cover your tracks….Care to go back to what I actually said? The first quoted passage did not mention any dates for full integration, but the end result….The second quoted passage made the correlation between the successful testing results of the F-35’s radar & distributed aperture system, thus allowing weapons testing to be carried out as scheduled this summer (as documented by the DoD press release) You care to refute the DAS/AESA testing results and/or the scheduling of weapons testing this summer, or continue to troll? Quote
waldo Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 (edited) I beg to differ, I stated weapons testing will start later this summer…….You denied that it would happen….You then went on about full system integration to cover your tracks….Care to go back to what I actually said? no - unfortunately for you, this 'Derek L' revisionism attempt fails in the face of your own words stacked up against reality, as conveyed within the most recent, weeks old, U.S. GAO report. You puffed up over a fully separate, non-integrated (to F-35) reference to, "DAS, radar, data links, etc.". You then trotted out a direct correlation between that and, 'the beginning of weapons system testing this summer', stating, most explicitly, "Good timing too, what with live weapons testing starting later this summer". Do you deny this - YES or NO? I've re-quoted your own words once... would you like them again? You care to refute the DAS/AESA testing results and/or the scheduling of weapons testing this summer, or continue to troll? there is no correlation between your referenced DAS/AESA testing results and the F-35... there is no integrated functionality equivalent currently within the F-35... and as you've been repeatedly advised, per the latest, only weeks old, U.S. GAO report, that integrated functionality within the F-35 is not projected to be there until, as stated, "until block 3.0 is delivered in 2015". Which, as I have repeatedly stated, is a most optimistic unwarranted projection based on the decade+ failed track record of Lockheed Martin. we could stop your nonsense in its tracks if you would simply step-up and answer the repeated challenges made to you in regards the quoted extract from the most recent, weeks old, U.S. GAO report. Again, step up and advise what you believe the following extract means... what does it, the following, say in your 'Derek L' revisionist world, hey? from the most recent, just weeks old, U.S. Government Accountability Office report: JSF’s mission systems : provide combat effectiveness through next generation sensors with fused information from on-board and off-board systems (i.e. Electronic Warfare, Communication Navigation Identification, Electro-Optical Target System, Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System, Radar, and Data Links). JSF’s mission systems and logistics systems are critical to realizing the operational and support capabilities expected by the warfighter, but the hardware and software for these systems are immature and unproven at this time. For example, only 4 percent of mission systems requirements planned in system development and demonstration have been verified. Significant learning and development remains before the program can demonstrate mature mission systems software and hardware, not expected until block 3.0 is delivered in 2015. The program has experienced significant challenges developing and integrating mission systems software. Mission systems hardware has also experienced several technical challenges, including problems with the radar, integrated processor, communication and navigation equipment, and electronic warfare capabilities. edit to add: hey now... I note your latest reference is to the 'B' variant... wassup? Would you like me to pull out the numerous whines of yours whenever anything but the 'A' variant was being mentioned? All of a sudden... as it apparently now suits you... you have no qualms in speaking to a variant other than the 'A'. Keep up your fine hypocritical best, hey? Edited June 27, 2012 by waldo Quote
DogOnPorch Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 The Americans are already so far ahead of the game it's not even funny and will continue to be for some time, with or without the F-35. Not so far ahead. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Guest Derek L Posted June 27, 2012 Report Posted June 27, 2012 no - unfortunately for you, this 'Derek L' revisionism attempt fails in the face of your own words stacked up against reality, as conveyed within the most recent, weeks old, U.S. GAO report. You puffed up over a fully separate, non-integrated (to F-35) reference to, "DAS, radar, data links, etc.". You then trotted out a direct correlation between that and, 'the beginning of weapons system testing this summer', stating, most explicitly, "Good timing too, what with live weapons testing starting later this summer". Do you deny this - YES or NO? I've re-quoted your own words once... would you like them again? there is no correlation between your referenced DAS/AESA testing results and the F-35... there is no integrated functionality equivalent currently within the F-35... and as you've been repeatedly advised, per the latest, only weeks old, U.S. GAO report, that integrated functionality within the F-35 is not projected to be there until, as stated, "until block 3.0 is delivered in 2015". Which, as I have repeatedly stated, is a most optimistic unwarranted projection based on the decade+ failed track record of Lockheed Martin. we could stop your nonsense in its tracks if you would simply step-up and answer the repeated challenges made to you in regards the quoted extract from the most recent, weeks old, U.S. GAO report. Again, step up and advise what you believe the following extract means... what does it, the following, say in your 'Derek L' revisionist world, hey? edit to add: hey now... I note your latest reference is to the 'B' variant... wassup? Would you like me to pull out the numerous whines of yours whenever anything but the 'A' variant was being mentioned? All of a sudden... as it apparently now suits you... you have no qualms in speaking to a variant other than the 'A'. Keep up your fine hypocritical best, hey? So that’s a no on refuting weapons testing this summer eh? Or showing where I stated full system integration was completed? Look olp1fan Waldo, you clearly can’t do either, fore if you could, you would have done so already……. Quote
waldo Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 So that’s a no on refuting weapons testing this summer eh? Or showing where I stated full system integration was completed? Look olp1fan Waldo, you clearly can’t do either, fore if you could, you would have done so already you made the correlation, the following full system correlation... a correlation that... isn't! An integrated full system correlation that doesn't exist, that won't exist until, optimistically, per the latest, just weeks old, U.S. GAO report, "block 3.0 is delivered in 2015". Sorry to have rained on your puffed up, "Good timing too", best, hey? Back to the F-35, about a month ago we were talking about the F-35’s Distributed Aperture System combined with the Active Electronically Scanned Array radar and the added capabilities this would afford not only the individual F-35, but the network-centric warfare capabilities it will deliver to battlefield commanders in real-time……….Combined with the Multifunction Advanced Data Link, this capability will enable a F-35 to not only track an ICBM launch, but share tracking data in real-time with an AEGIS Destroyer/Cruiser to launch ICBM interceptors (SM-6s) but also forward target locations to cruise missile armed subs, a B-2 filled with JDAMs or a 155mm Howitzer loaded with an Excalibur………. Northrop released test footage today from a couple of months back of the F-35’s radar tracking 5 theatre ballistic missiles: Good timing too , what with live weapons testing starting later this summer don't be afraid of the U.S. GAO quote extract presented, 'Derek L'... accept it, relish it, embrace it! Recognize it for what it ultimately states/shows - that the waldo has, once again, put you into a babbling whirling dervish; an amazing feat considering your pants are at your ankles! since you're into your standard high-gear bluster, let's have you offer your interpretation of the GAO report quote presented. Sure you can! we could stop your nonsense in its tracks if you would simply step-up and answer the repeated challenges made to you in regards the quoted extract from the most recent, weeks old, U.S. GAO report. Again, step up and advise what you believe the following extract means... what does it, the following, say in your 'Derek L' revisionist world, hey? just answer the challenge repeatedly put to you... just answer it! Just explain what the following U.S. GAO report quote extract means in your 'Derek L' revisionist world, hey? JSF’s mission systems : provide combat effectiveness through next generation sensors with fused information from on-board and off-board systems (i.e. Electronic Warfare, Communication Navigation Identification, Electro-Optical Target System, Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System, Radar, and Data Links). JSF’s mission systems and logistics systems are critical to realizing the operational and support capabilities expected by the warfighter, but the hardware and software for these systems are immature and unproven at this time. For example, only 4 percent of mission systems requirements planned in system development and demonstration have been verified. Significant learning and development remains before the program can demonstrate mature mission systems software and hardware, not expected until block 3.0 is delivered in 2015. The program has experienced significant challenges developing and integrating mission systems software. Mission systems hardware has also experienced several technical challenges, including problems with the radar, integrated processor, communication and navigation equipment, and electronic warfare capabilities. now, as is your way, you totally blew off a couple of my earlier posts that went into significant summary detail on the actual state of JSFail testing... not your manufactured, 'Derek L fluff & stuff™'. Here's a most relevant related extract from one of those earlier JSFail (lack of) testing posts of mine... most apropos when dealing with, 'Derek L fluff & stuff™'... wouldn't you say? - Initial development flight tests of a fully integrated, capable JSF aircraft to demonstrate full mission systems capabilities, weapons delivery, and autonomic logistics is not expected until 2015 at the earliest. This will be critical for verifying that the JSF aircraft will work as intended and for demonstrating that the design is not likely to need costly changes. - Initial dedicated operational testing of a fully integrated and capable JSF is scheduled to begin in 2017. Quote
waldo Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 now... if you don't know about the impending U.S. budget sequestration... and what it particularly might mean for U.S. defense spending, see here: well, hey now posturing Lockheed Martin, just what do you have to say? Oh my, is LockMart really prepared to enter into the U.S. election cycle. But, but... what might sequestration mean to the JSFail F-35!!! Lockheed threatens big layoffs amid U.S. Defense cuts: According to a report Monday, Lockheed Martin – manufacturer of the F-35 fighter jet – is threatening it might consider large layoffs this fall. Greg Walters, Lockheed’s president of legislative affairs, told POLITICO his company could notify the “vast majority” of its 123,000 employees that they could be laid off. Walters’s comments are some of the most specific threats yet from an industry that’s trying to head off the $500 billion in automatic cuts in defense spending set to begin taking effect Jan. 2. Called sequestration, the cuts are being phased in over 10 years, with about $55 billion slated for 2013. Unless Congress reaches a deal to stave off the cuts, “we will find it necessary to issue these [layoff] notices probably to the vast majority of our employee base,” Walters told POLITICO. […] The layoffs, of course, won’t all happen on Jan. 2, as it would likely take months for sequestration to begin affecting contractors’ bottom lines. But the timing of the cuts — along with the requirement of 60-day notice — provides an opportunity for the defense industry to ratchet up the pressure on President Barack Obama and congressional leaders to tackle the issue before November. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 NEWS FLASH US Air Force disbands due to pressure by waldo. "We've decided to play golf instead", claims Air Force spokesperson. "You're on your own." Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Moonbox Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) now... if you don't know about the impending U.S. budget sequestration... and what it particularly might mean for U.S. defense spending, waldo you and I are very rarely on the same side of an argument, but I'll give you some friendly advice for this thread regardless. They're not reading your references or cites, and they're certainly not interested in a reasonable argument. The F-35 is a debacle, it's clear to anyone who cares to look at how much the program is costing and how delayed it already is, and it's almost certain it will be delayed further. When most of the responses you're getting are stupid (not even funny) things like this: NEWS FLASH US Air Force disbands due to pressure by waldo. "We've decided to play golf instead", claims Air Force spokesperson. "You're on your own." you're better off not bothering to respond. Edited June 28, 2012 by Moonbox Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
DogOnPorch Posted June 28, 2012 Report Posted June 28, 2012 Actually, we've figured out long ago that Canada is going to buy these thing waldo or not. But, meh...it's fun to argue, n'est pas? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.