waldo Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 Tornado (IDS) beget F-35 really? And about the KSA in progress GBP2.5 billion upgrade program to the Tornado (IDS)?... most recent update I find states that, ostensibly, the upgrades are completed save in progress trials for the, 'long range air-to-surface MBDA Storm Shadow (CASOM) missile'. Really? Beget F-35, really? Quote
cybercoma Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 Or: As UAV use grows, bandwidth limits become a concern French Air Chief: UAVs Taxing Available Satellite Bandwidth Source of DoD Commercial Bandwidth Funds is Drying Up But hey, thanks for coming out. Drying up. Heh. Robust. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 really? And about the KSA in progress GBP2.5 billion upgrade program to the Tornado (IDS)?... most recent update I find states that, ostensibly, the upgrades are completed save in progress trials for the, 'long range air-to-surface MBDA Storm Shadow (CASOM) missile'. Really? Beget F-35, really? Said upgrade is to keep them, like the RAF’s IDS Tornados in service until the early 2020s, in which time, both countries aircraft will be replaced by the F-35.……..both able to carry said storm shadow missile, as will both countries Eurofighter fleets. Quote
Guest Derek L Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 Drying up. Heh. Robust. Yup.......care to address it or carrying on trolling? Quote
waldo Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 Said upgrade is to keep them, like the RAF’s IDS Tornados in service until the early 2020s, in which time, both countries aircraft will be replaced by the F-35. what was that you said... Keep me updated by the by - let's say, miracle upon miracle, the F-35 survives into a "robust" production capability and becomes everything you nightly dream about, and that military strategies against platform centric don't erode the F-35 purchasing power, and that unmanned technologies/strategies don't prevail... are you saying that Israel would accept (allow!) the U.S. to sell the F-35 to Saudi Arabia? Really? Quote
waldo Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 It’s an issue with the vests, not the aircraft.I am babbling about vests...No, I’m still of the judgement of the problem, as confirmed by the USAF as being the vests………They were wearing the pants, not the entire suit that includes the upper vests so... now the pants... not the vests, hey? When do they get nekkid - when do the pants come off? Quote
Guest Derek L Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 what was that you said... by the by - let's say, miracle upon miracle, the F-35 survives into a "robust" production capability and becomes everything you nightly dream about, and that military strategies against platform centric don't erode the F-35 purchasing power, and that unmanned technologies/strategies don't prevail... are you saying that Israel would accept (allow!) the U.S. to sell the F-35 to Saudi Arabia? Really? Yes, the Saudi upgrade of the strike variant of the Tornado, of which they obtained in the early 80s, is intended to keep them in service longer…… Israel “allowed” the United States to sell the Kingdom various marks of Eagles and the E-3.…You getting into Alex Jones territory now? Quote
Guest Derek L Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 so... now the pants... not the vests, hey? When do they get nekkid - when do the pants come off? Picture of a two piece g-suit: http://www.flightgear.dk/pic/eurofight_pilots.jpg And from the MSM: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/06/f-22-fighter-pilots-told-to-ditch-pressure-vests-mystery-problem-unsolved/ Pilots for the U.S. Air Force’s F-22 Raptor fighter jets have been ordered to take off a portion of their flying suits, specifically the G-suit vest, during routine training missions as the service continues to investigate a rare but mysterious breathing problem some pilots have experienced in the $420 million-a-pop jets. Quote
GostHacked Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 The major hurdle in operating UAVs, since they aren’t really unmanned and more aptly call remote piloted vehicles……….go watch the linked conference a few pages back discussing the limitations on said technology. Give it a couple years, the tech will ramp up very quickly, Although they do need to plug their GPS systems. It is exactly this flaw that allowed Iran to hijack/hack the drone. By the time we get to the F-35 for actual use, the drones will already be flying and killing in North America. Anything piloted remotely will have the potential to be hacked and hijacked. NO need to worry about G-suits when the pilot is sitting in a chair in a base in the USA on the ground. IT won't be long until the drones are automated. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 GH: IT won't be long until the drones are automated. Three people are walking down the road. How does the Auto-UAV know which one is the target? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
waldo Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 so... now the pants... not the vests, hey? When do they get nekkid - when do the pants come off?Picture of a two piece g-suit: uhhh... you said the vests were the problem - then the order to remove vests came down and the vests came off! Problem, apparently, still unresolved. You then, uhhh... shifted, ya, shifted... to emphasize 'g-suits' and then spoke to the bottom-half still in place - the pants! Apparently, this meant something - at least to you. So, not the vests as you said initially, hey? Are you now saying... it's the pants? Quote
waldo Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 Israel “allowed” the United States to sell the Kingdom various marks of Eagles and the E-3.…You getting into Alex Jones territory now? but not the F-15-SE stealthy guy, hey? Given how much you over-hype the F-35 stealth thingee, do you really believe Israel would have no concerns over the U.S. selling a 'stealth' fighter (which ever one it might be) to KSA? Really? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 but not the F-15-SE stealthy guy, hey? Given how much you over-hype the F-35 stealth thingee, do you really believe Israel would have no concerns over the U.S. selling a 'stealth' fighter (which ever one it might be) to KSA? Really? Saudi Arabia hopes Israel will put the boots to Iran. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Guest Derek L Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 uhhh... you said the vests were the problem - then the order to remove vests came down and the vests came off! Problem, apparently, still unresolved. You then, uhhh... shifted, ya, shifted... to emphasize 'g-suits' and then spoke to the bottom-half still in place - the pants! Apparently, this meant something - at least to you. So, not the vests as you said initially, hey? Are you now saying... it's the pants? I see you’re failing to grasp the concept………Since about the late 80s pilots wore two piece G-suits, both a vest and chaps, which was a vast improvement in terms of safety over the Korean war vintage designed singular chaps pilots have been wearing for decades………Post 2003, an upgraded version of g-suits (pants & vests) were produced that were made with a newer fabric that wouldn’t emit the same glare well using night vision goggles as the older type………..Such newer vests/chaps combo has since been failing in the vest portion, thus allowing the potential for the pilots to “black out” and/or suffer the symptoms of hypoxia……Thus, the USAF has ordered the vests not to be worn, hence the pilots are wearing solely the chaps/pants portion, hence an incomplete g-suit akin in function to earlier g-suits worn since the late 40s early 50s, hence a reduction in capability/safety currently for said pilots. The two most recent incidents can thusly be attributed to incomplete g-suits. You following yet? I’ve been typing very slowly……… Quote
Guest Derek L Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 but not the F-15-SE stealthy guy, hey? Given how much you over-hype the F-35 stealth thingee, do you really believe Israel would have no concerns over the U.S. selling a 'stealth' fighter (which ever one it might be) to KSA? Really? Israel had "concerns" with the US selling them Eagles (since the 80s), yet the KSA's air force has F-15s.... Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 12, 2012 Report Posted July 12, 2012 Israel had "concerns" with the US selling them Eagles (since the 80s), yet the KSA's air force has F-15s.... Yes...a tad hypocritical this relationship with the Saudis. But, as long as the SRF's hand is on the oil tap and Iran is the l'enfant terrible, they will be getting some of the top shelf US gear. Perhaps Israel has a remote detonation option on Saudi aircraft as part of the deal. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Guest Derek L Posted July 13, 2012 Report Posted July 13, 2012 Yes...a tad hypocritical this relationship with the Saudis. But, as long as the SRF's hand is on the oil tap and Iran is the l'enfant terrible, they will be getting some of the top shelf US gear. Perhaps Israel has a remote detonation option on Saudi aircraft as part of the deal. Of the two nations, only one of them has an aerospace/defence industry that has in the past allowed technical data obtained from Western arms purchases to find itself on the Silk Road..... Quote
waldo Posted July 13, 2012 Report Posted July 13, 2012 Once they figure out how to make a secure and robust enough bandwidth…….. As UAV use grows, bandwidth limits become a concern French Air Chief: UAVs Taxing Available Satellite Bandwidth Source of DoD Commercial Bandwidth Funds is Drying Up But hey, thanks for coming out. I was going to blow this off initially with the standard pat answer to anyone that beaks off about 'bandwidth' - "buy a bigger pipe!" Before doing that I thought I'd check a bit on just how much of a smokescreen you were throwing up as you rushed mightily forward against even the suggestion of unmanned UAV touching upon the sanctity of your venerable manned F-35 platform centric myopia. Hey now, is this secure and robust enough?: - further extension on the existing Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS) satellite system - continuing to maximize commercial (as available/appropriate), while divesting in favour of a military bandwidth migration path, one aligning with WGS extension - oh look, another international partnership - Canada’s Participation in the Wideband Global Satellite (WGS) Communications System Canada has agreed to join with its military friends and allies, in the Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS) System. This international partnership is an investment in developing a global satellite communications system. By signing the WGS Memorandum of Understanding, Canada joins allies such as Australia, Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United States. In exchange for a contribution of $337.3 million, the CF will obtain approximately 20 years of access to reserved frequencies for military communications systems in theatres of operation across the globe. and, oh ya - "buy a bigger pipe!" Quote
waldo Posted July 13, 2012 Report Posted July 13, 2012 Are you now saying... it's the pants? The two most recent incidents can thusly be attributed to incomplete g-suits.You following yet? I’ve been typing very slowly……… still too fast, hey? Slow down! it would seem you've got it quite conveniently covered (your backside, that is)... vests on, it's a problem; vests off, it's a problem! as for your latest, 'expert opinion', regarding the two most recent incidents (the ones you're attributing to "incomplete g-suits" (vests off), I'm reading where the USAF is attributing those two recent incidents to, "malfunctions in the F22's life support systems - so called mechanical problems". Perhaps your slow typing distracted you from this revelation, hey? uhhh, by the by, any 'expert opinion' on the 'hypoxia like problem' encountered by that F-22 ground crew? Ground crews don't wear g-suits, right? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 13, 2012 Report Posted July 13, 2012 Of the two nations, only one of them has an aerospace/defence industry that has in the past allowed technical data obtained from Western arms purchases to find itself on the Silk Road..... Canada allows that every day. Speaking of which: I believe we have even honoured Norman Bethune in a joint ceremony with the very folks that were busy slaughtering Nationalists using Allied supplies rather than fighting the Japanese. But, heck...he was Canadain...lol. Do-wacka do-wacka do.... Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted July 13, 2012 Report Posted July 13, 2012 still too fast, hey? Slow down! it would seem you've got it quite conveniently covered (your backside, that is)... vests on, it's a problem; vests off, it's a problem! as for your latest, 'expert opinion', regarding the two most recent incidents (the ones you're attributing to "incomplete g-suits" (vests off), I'm reading where the USAF is attributing those two recent incidents to, "malfunctions in the F22's life support systems - so called mechanical problems". Perhaps your slow typing distracted you from this revelation, hey? uhhh, by the by, any 'expert opinion' on the 'hypoxia like problem' encountered by that F-22 ground crew? Ground crews don't wear g-suits, right? So when is the F-22 heading for the Boneyard? It's a POS, right? America, unlike Canada, doesn't hang onto aircraft that do not work or get old. This is all really very silly. The US will figure out the problems...problems that occur in every new system...new designs will come forward and get built. Canada will buy new aircraft eventually...unless a huge meteor strikes...or the Occupy Movement takes over Canada...which ever comes first. You'll continue to hate the military, no matter what happens. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
waldo Posted July 13, 2012 Report Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) So when is the F-22 heading for the Boneyard? It's a POS, right? America, unlike Canada, doesn't hang onto aircraft that do not work or get old. This is all really very silly. The US will figure out the problems...problems that occur in every new system...new designs will come forward and get built. buddy, twas not I who brought forward a discussion over the F-22 "hypoxia type" problems; nor I who went out of my way to attempt to find commonality with F-22 "parts/systems" in "other jets"... presuming to suggest that since the problem hasn't been observed/reported in "other jets", the related F-22 "parts/systems" can't be at fault; i.e., that problem "will never exist in the JSFail F-35". That wasn't me. However, I certainly will chime in when a particular MLW member trots out his shinola act. As for the F-22 being, as you say, "new"... a decade of development before being introduced in 2005. New? Really? Not too far from that 2 decade milestone, hey? Oh, by the by... do you think we'll ever actually see that 'big stick' unveiled - saving it for... the BigOne, hey? Canada will buy new aircraft eventually...unless a huge meteor strikes...or the Occupy Movement takes over Canada...which ever comes first. You'll continue to hate the military, no matter what happens. hate the military? I've offered absolutely no statements that would support your simpering assessment. Quite the contrary, I've suggested alternate/better ways monies should be directed. You, on the other hand, subscribe to a bottomless money pit so far as any/all military expenditure is considered - particularly the most shiny ones, hey? It's unfortunate for you that you haven't the wherewithal to actually make and argue your position; one that is beholding to your ever present imaginary Cold War "boogeyman invaders"! Instead, you prefer to continually attempt to derail this thread with your jingo-porn. carry on Edited July 13, 2012 by waldo Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 13, 2012 Report Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) The last thing I am is your buddy. It doesn't matter what you and I think, oh overly verbose one with SFBs. But, you are entertaining when you pretend you're a 'Gift to Canada'. Tell us again how you love the military... You'd have Canadians flying 20 years gone garbage built in Buttkissystan if you had your way. BTW, I've stated I, personally, don't want the F-35. But, your brain cells are incapable of recalling that. Perhaps you'll have me voting for Harper, next. (spits on ground) Edited July 13, 2012 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
waldo Posted July 13, 2012 Report Posted July 13, 2012 oh overly verbose one with SFB (spits on ground) SFB??? Stupid Facebook? Look, I've already told you there's no sense in trying to friend me... I'm not on the Facebook! Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 13, 2012 Report Posted July 13, 2012 (edited) SFB??? Stupid Facebook? Look, I've already told you there's no sense in trying to friend me... I'm not on the Facebook! That's all you have? Try again when your insults improve. But, I think others will agree with me when I say 'no aircraft is suitable for waldo'. Your contempt for Canada's military is MORE than obvious. Edited July 13, 2012 by DogOnPorch 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.