Russia gains air superiority over usa on obama's watch!!!

[Cold Fusion38]

Yes, I know that about the F22 being canceled by the military. But I was hearing rumors of the F35 also having problems being put into production. That was my only reason for concern. A gap in replacement technology.

As for the Warthog and B 52, I know they're being kept around because they're still effective. But, the airframes are hitting the wall, unless we're still building em.

Regardless, P-BO could give a shit about our national security except in how it reflects on his legacy.

Fitz the F-35 is a disaster of an aircraft and the DoD recently announced that it is slowing down the implementation of the F-35 and calling for more flight testing. The US Navy along with a few nations are having considerable problems trying to justify this aircraft and I agree with them.

The study, by the Navy’s aviation arm, says the cost to buy and operate that service’s version of the F-35 will be dramatically higher than predicted — 40 percent more than existing aircraft — and will put a serious squeeze on future budgets.

The report follows continued reports of F-35 development delays. It was also reported Jan. 6 that the 2011 Pentagon budget, set for release Feb. 1, will cut planned F-35 purchases.

The validity and accuracy of the Navy’s cost analysis is open to debate. Navy officials did not comment or elaborate on the study, but several veteran defense observers said it was a sign that many in the naval aviation ranks remain less than committed to buying the sea service’s version of the F-35.

By allowing the cost study to leak widely, "the Navy seems to be putting a log on the fire and prepping the battlefield to bail out" of the F-35 program, said Winslow Wheeler, director of the Strauss Military Reform Project and former longtime Senate defense staff member.
Navy F-35 study has fueled new speculation in the defense industry | Business | Dallas B...

In fact the F-35 was designed originally as a compliment to the F-22 not as a stand-alone system to work in all envelopes as the DoD is trying to make it work. It would be WELL worth the effort to actually let the services decide which is best for them rather than forcing this aircraft down their throats.

In July, Davis accused Boeing outright of spreading lies and half-truths about the F-35 in order to bolster the international sales campaign for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. He specifically called out Boeing for publicly predicting future cost overruns and delays for the F-35. Boeing responded: “People with greater insight [into the F-35 programme] than I are looking at the offerings available. Let people draw their own conclusions about why.”
More recently, a commentary written by Pierre Sprey, widely considered the conceptual father of the Lockheed F-16, claimed the F-35 would be an aerodynamic “dog” and outclassed in combat by the fighters it is replacing.
Davis shot back that the F-35’s turn-rate and manoeuvring is no different than the F-16, and the latter has stealth and far more advanced sensor fusion capability.
Another article appearing in the Australian press claimed the F-35 was “clubbed like a baby seal” in a classified US Air Force exercise.
Davis replied that the “basic wargame did not even involve an air-to-air scenario.” Some “excursion” scenarios did involve F-22s, but the F-35 was mentioned only tangentially.
F-35 programme officials bash critics, suspect hidden agenda-22/09/2008-Washington DC-Flightglobal.com

I guess a lot depends on what you want to believe in this, however the last time something like this was tried it was the F-111 which turned out to be a disaster for the US Navy and a good overall aircraft because it suited the mission for the USAF but not the Navy. The Navy eventually went with another aircraft called the F-14 which most know its long and storied history. In short this one size fits all solution like the F-35 is a VERY bad solution.

they tried to cram too many missions onto a single airframe
i said this way back when they first started to develop it

I said the EXACT same thing to my brother who is an areonatical engineer about the F-22. Each service has it's OWN unique needs and buiding a SINGLE airframe to accomplish them all is foolish at best.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Not long ago some asshole put up a video that showed an F-35 doing a standing loop about 100 feet above a carrier deck. Gawd I slammed that dumb ass douche bag!

 

[Toronado3800]

Yea ole Putin sure did play him like a fiddle. Just another sad example of another country getting one over on the inexperienced "Community Organizer." Man,is it me or does it seem like everything this President touches goes immediately to chit? This administration seems to be imploding at this point. Yikes!

F-35 Lightning II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think this one is the F-22 Replacement. More cost effective and all.

Like a few months back when we shifted our missile defense systems to be more responsive to attacks from the Middle East or Russia instead of just land based systems in Poland. There is a plan.

Like when Carter thought the B-1 was the dumbest thing to pump money into when we had the beginnings of the B-2 system underway. Sure the Reagan group thinkers called Carter weak on defense. Little did Reagan know we'd be flying B-52's still and B-1 Lancers were, well, a waste of money.

 

[Toronado3800]

Teach me to respond w/o reading the last page! You all already covered the F-35 stuff.

The F-35 is VTOL correct? I see virtually ZERO need for VTOL fighter jets. At least as long as we are the ONLY nation with SuperCarriers.

Super missile magnets? VTOL is a nice toy. They'll probably still use the rolling starts more to save fuel though.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Teach me to respond w/o reading the last page! You all already covered the F-35 stuff.

The F-35 is VTOL correct? I see virtually ZERO need for VTOL fighter jets. At least as long as we are the ONLY nation with SuperCarriers.

Super missile magnets? VTOL is a nice toy. They'll probably still use the rolling starts more to save fuel though.

Yeah that's why we don't send carriers out alone. I am FAR more worried about a nuclear tipped torpedo.

 

[DiveCon]

Fitz the F-35 is a disaster of an aircraft and the DoD recently announced that it is slowing down the implementation of the F-35 and calling for more flight testing. The US Navy along with a few nations are having considerable problems trying to justify this aircraft and I agree with them.

The study, by the Navy’s aviation arm, says the cost to buy and operate that service’s version of the F-35 will be dramatically higher than predicted — 40 percent more than existing aircraft — and will put a serious squeeze on future budgets.

The report follows continued reports of F-35 development delays. It was also reported Jan. 6 that the 2011 Pentagon budget, set for release Feb. 1, will cut planned F-35 purchases.

The validity and accuracy of the Navy’s cost analysis is open to debate. Navy officials did not comment or elaborate on the study, but several veteran defense observers said it was a sign that many in the naval aviation ranks remain less than committed to buying the sea service’s version of the F-35.

By allowing the cost study to leak widely, "the Navy seems to be putting a log on the fire and prepping the battlefield to bail out" of the F-35 program, said Winslow Wheeler, director of the Strauss Military Reform Project and former longtime Senate defense staff member.
Navy F-35 study has fueled new speculation in the defense industry | Business | Dallas B...

In fact the F-35 was designed originally as a compliment to the F-22 not as a stand-alone system to work in all envelopes as the DoD is trying to make it work. It would be WELL worth the effort to actually let the services decide which is best for them rather than forcing this aircraft down their throats.

In July, Davis accused Boeing outright of spreading lies and half-truths about the F-35 in order to bolster the international sales campaign for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. He specifically called out Boeing for publicly predicting future cost overruns and delays for the F-35. Boeing responded: “People with greater insight [into the F-35 programme] than I are looking at the offerings available. Let people draw their own conclusions about why.”
More recently, a commentary written by Pierre Sprey, widely considered the conceptual father of the Lockheed F-16, claimed the F-35 would be an aerodynamic “dog” and outclassed in combat by the fighters it is replacing.
Davis shot back that the F-35’s turn-rate and manoeuvring is no different than the F-16, and the latter has stealth and far more advanced sensor fusion capability.
Another article appearing in the Australian press claimed the F-35 was “clubbed like a baby seal” in a classified US Air Force exercise.
Davis replied that the “basic wargame did not even involve an air-to-air scenario.” Some “excursion” scenarios did involve F-22s, but the F-35 was mentioned only tangentially.
F-35 programme officials bash critics, suspect hidden agenda-22/09/2008-Washington DC-Flightglobal.com

I guess a lot depends on what you want to believe in this, however the last time something like this was tried it was the F-111 which turned out to be a disaster for the US Navy and a good overall aircraft because it suited the mission for the USAF but not the Navy. The Navy eventually went with another aircraft called the F-14 which most know its long and storied history. In short this one size fits all solution like the F-35 is a VERY bad solution.

they tried to cram too many missions onto a single airframe
i said this way back when they first started to develop it

I said the EXACT same thing to my brother who is an areonatical engineer about the F-22. Each service has it's OWN unique needs and buiding a SINGLE airframe to accomplish them all is foolish at best.

they didn't do that with the F-22
it was ALL Air superiority
from the beginnings

 

[SFC Ollie]

Ok so the F22 is finished, the F35 doesn't perform as well as we'd like, and the Russians are attempting to restart the cold war.

A lot of people want to go to drones, and some want to develop AI Aircraft.

I think that sort of sums up all 6 pages.

Great info there Navy, thank you.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Maybe it was the F-35 but that must have been in the making for at LEAST 10 years.

 

[DiveCon]

Maybe it was the F-35 but that must have been in the making for at LEAST 10 years.

yes, the screw up covers several administrations

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Maybe it was the F-35 but that must have been in the making for at LEAST 10 years.

yes, the screw up covers several administrations

I just meant it HAD to be that long ago because that's when I talked to my bro about it.

 

[rdean]

We're not building F-18 Hornets, F-16 Falcons, or F-15 Eagles if that's what you're thinking. Hell, the B-52 was supposed to be gone 10 years ago, but they're still flying. Our military force is becoming like our Navy was at the start of WW2, Mothball relics and obsolete antiques.

SO of course P-BO wants to shut down their replacements. He probably dreams of the day China or Russia invade so he can quickly surrender.

Do you guys have to sit and dream up that nonsense, or does it just "pop" into your tiny and frightened heads? What a thing to say about a sitting president.

 

[Big Fitz]

We're not building F-18 Hornets, F-16 Falcons, or F-15 Eagles if that's what you're thinking. Hell, the B-52 was supposed to be gone 10 years ago, but they're still flying. Our military force is becoming like our Navy was at the start of WW2, Mothball relics and obsolete antiques.

SO of course P-BO wants to shut down their replacements. He probably dreams of the day China or Russia invade so he can quickly surrender.

Do you guys have to sit and dream up that nonsense, or does it just "pop" into your tiny and frightened heads? What a thing to say about a sitting president.

Rdean you're my hero for spouting shit.

Just trying to live up to your stellar reputation, but alas, my shit will never stink as much as yours.

...but I can dream. Till then though... have a keetom.

PS... we haven't made any movies yet dreaming of his assassination yet. Ponder that, if you are able.

 

[rdean]

We're not building F-18 Hornets, F-16 Falcons, or F-15 Eagles if that's what you're thinking. Hell, the B-52 was supposed to be gone 10 years ago, but they're still flying. Our military force is becoming like our Navy was at the start of WW2, Mothball relics and obsolete antiques.

SO of course P-BO wants to shut down their replacements. He probably dreams of the day China or Russia invade so he can quickly surrender.

Do you guys have to sit and dream up that nonsense, or does it just "pop" into your tiny and frightened heads? What a thing to say about a sitting president.

Rdean you're my hero for spouting shit.

Just trying to live up to your stellar reputation, but alas, my shit will never stink as much as yours.

...but I can dream. Till then though... have a keetom.

PS... we haven't made any movies yet dreaming of his assassination yet. Ponder that, if you are able.

You should be investigated. You are as sick as they come.

 

[DiveCon]

Do you guys have to sit and dream up that nonsense, or does it just "pop" into your tiny and frightened heads? What a thing to say about a sitting president.

Rdean you're my hero for spouting shit.

Just trying to live up to your stellar reputation, but alas, my shit will never stink as much as yours.

...but I can dream. Till then though... have a keetom.

PS... we haven't made any movies yet dreaming of his assassination yet. Ponder that, if you are able.

You should be investigated. You are as sick as they come.

and typically, you missed the point

 

[beowolfe]

We're not building F-18 Hornets, F-16 Falcons, or F-15 Eagles if that's what you're thinking. Hell, the B-52 was supposed to be gone 10 years ago, but they're still flying. Our military force is becoming like our Navy was at the start of WW2, Mothball relics and obsolete antiques.

SO of course P-BO wants to shut down their replacements. He probably dreams of the day China or Russia invade so he can quickly surrender.

No we're not. We're building F-135's. A much better, more cost effective, airplane for what we need today. The F-22 is the plane for the war that was never fought.

Yes, I know that about the F22 being canceled by the military. But I was hearing rumors of the F35 also having problems being put into production. That was my only reason for concern. A gap in replacement technology.

As for the Warthog and B 52, I know they're being kept around because they're still effective. But, the airframes are hitting the wall, unless we're still building em.

Regardless, P-BO could give a shit about our national security except in how it reflects on his legacy.

You act as if his wife and kids don't depend on our national security too. See, it's over the top rhetoric like this that really screws up our national political debates. BTW, on internet forums you have to type what you mean. We won't be able to decipher what you're thinking if you don't write it down.

 

[Big Fitz]

Hypocrites. Not surprised though.

A new low in Bush-hatred - The Boston Globe

Selections from the article:

For the more literary Bush-hater, there is ``Checkpoint," a novel by Nicholson Baker in which two characters discuss the wisdom of shooting the president.

On Air America, talk show host Randi Rhodes recommended doing to Bush what Michael Corleone, in ``The Godfather, Part II," does to his brother. ``Like Fredo," she said, ``somebody ought to take him out fishing and phuw!" -- then imitated the sound of a gunshot. In the Guardian, a leading British daily, columnist Charlie Brooker issued a plea: ``John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. -- where are you now that we need you?"

Which brings us to ``Death of a President," a new movie about the assassination of George W. Bush.

Written and directed by British filmmaker Gabriel Range, the movie premieres today at the Toronto Film Festival and will air next month on Britain's Channel 4. Shot in the style of a documentary, the movie opens with what looks like actual footage of Bush being gunned down by a sniper as he leaves a Chicago hotel in October 2007. Through the use of digital special effects, the film superimposes the president's face onto the body of the actor playing him, so that the mortally wounded man collapsing on the screen will seem, all too vividly, to be Bush himself.

And of course the intelligentsia thought this of the movie:

Naturally that's not how the film's promoters see it. Noah Cowan, one of the Toronto festival's codirectors, high-mindedly describes ``Death of a President" as ``a classic cautionary tale." Well, yes, Bush's assassination is ``harrowing," he says, but what the film is really about is ``how the Patriot Act, especially, and how Bush's divisive partisanship and race-baiting has forever altered America."

So take your sanctimony and puking dog and cram it. When I hear you people condemn this filth, I'll consider you to have some point.

 

[Douger]

The US has 11 Nuclear Supercarrier groups.....no other nation has one

There's a cure for that.
It's called Sunburn.

 

[rdean]

No we're not. We're building F-135's. A much better, more cost effective, airplane for what we need today. The F-22 is the plane for the war that was never fought.

Yes, I know that about the F22 being canceled by the military. But I was hearing rumors of the F35 also having problems being put into production. That was my only reason for concern. A gap in replacement technology.

As for the Warthog and B 52, I know they're being kept around because they're still effective. But, the airframes are hitting the wall, unless we're still building em.

Regardless, P-BO could give a shit about our national security except in how it reflects on his legacy.

You act as if his wife and kids don't depend on our national security too. See, it's over the top rhetoric like this that really screws up our national political debates. BTW, on internet forums you have to type what you mean. We won't be able to decipher what you're thinking if you don't write it down.

They don't see it. That's the problem.

Obama pointed out that Republican politicians have painted themselves into a corner. For instance, Lindsey Graham repeating the partly line. Obama palling around with terrorists and he wants to "destroy" the country.

Then, after working with Democrats on a particular bill, he goes back home to a town hall meeting and gets heckled. For working with people he already said wanted to "destroy America". His base believed his outrageous rhetoric and now he's stuck with it. Think he'll get "re-elected"?

==========================

One man told Graham he had “betrayed” conservatism and made a “pact with the devil” by working with Democrats, and asked when Graham would switch parties.

Hot Air Blog Archive Video: Lindsey Graham heckled at South Carolina town hall

 

[Big Fitz]

The US has 11 Nuclear Supercarrier groups.....no other nation has one

There's a cure for that.
It's called Sunburn.

I must be missing the connection. Sunburn?

 

[rdean]

Hypocrites. Not surprised though.

A new low in Bush-hatred - The Boston Globe

Selections from the article:

For the more literary Bush-hater, there is ``Checkpoint," a novel by Nicholson Baker in which two characters discuss the wisdom of shooting the president.

On Air America, talk show host Randi Rhodes recommended doing to Bush what Michael Corleone, in ``The Godfather, Part II," does to his brother. ``Like Fredo," she said, ``somebody ought to take him out fishing and phuw!" -- then imitated the sound of a gunshot. In the Guardian, a leading British daily, columnist Charlie Brooker issued a plea: ``John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. -- where are you now that we need you?"

Which brings us to ``Death of a President," a new movie about the assassination of George W. Bush.

Written and directed by British filmmaker Gabriel Range, the movie premieres today at the Toronto Film Festival and will air next month on Britain's Channel 4. Shot in the style of a documentary, the movie opens with what looks like actual footage of Bush being gunned down by a sniper as he leaves a Chicago hotel in October 2007. Through the use of digital special effects, the film superimposes the president's face onto the body of the actor playing him, so that the mortally wounded man collapsing on the screen will seem, all too vividly, to be Bush himself.

And of course the intelligentsia thought this of the movie:

Naturally that's not how the film's promoters see it. Noah Cowan, one of the Toronto festival's codirectors, high-mindedly describes ``Death of a President" as ``a classic cautionary tale." Well, yes, Bush's assassination is ``harrowing," he says, but what the film is really about is ``how the Patriot Act, especially, and how Bush's divisive partisanship and race-baiting has forever altered America."

So take your sanctimony and puking dog and cram it. When I hear you people condemn this filth, I'll consider you to have some point.

Don't include me. I'm not typing that stuff out, YOU ARE. Sicko.
You are not part of the solution. You ARE the problem.