Previous 1 3
Topic: Marines Show Off New Stealth Jet
Lpdon's photo
Fri 07/29/11 04:47 PM
http://video.foxnews.com/v/1086465697001/marines-show-off-stealth-f--jet

Damn that's awesome, it can just hover then touch down like a chopper.

motowndowntown's photo
Fri 07/29/11 05:07 PM
Kind of like the Harrier or the Ospry?

Two other Marine failures.

Lpdon's photo
Fri 07/29/11 05:22 PM

Kind of like the Harrier or the Ospry?

Two other Marine failures.


Neither are failures and are used heavily. They have had their accidents just like EVERY other vehicle in the United States Armed Forces inventory.

The F-35 is amazing and when it goes into service it will be unmatched.

Lpdon's photo
Fri 07/29/11 05:23 PM
Edited by Lpdon on Fri 07/29/11 05:24 PM
They shoudn't have retired and mothballed the Stealth Fighter until these were activated in service though. One of Gates biggest mistakes.

InvictusV's photo
Fri 07/29/11 05:44 PM


Kind of like the Harrier or the Ospry?

Two other Marine failures.


Neither are failures and are used heavily. They have had their accidents just like EVERY other vehicle in the United States Armed Forces inventory.

The F-35 is amazing and when it goes into service it will be unmatched.


It is no F-22..

Well..an F-22 that is working properly I should add..

Lpdon's photo
Fri 07/29/11 05:46 PM



Kind of like the Harrier or the Ospry?

Two other Marine failures.


Neither are failures and are used heavily. They have had their accidents just like EVERY other vehicle in the United States Armed Forces inventory.

The F-35 is amazing and when it goes into service it will be unmatched.


It is no F-22..

Well..an F-22 that is working properly I should add..


No, it's 110% better!

AndyBgood's photo
Fri 07/29/11 06:24 PM
The F-35 is over priced. Also its capabilities come with trade offs like weapons capacity. It is also what is known as a Penetration Aircraft like the Wild Weasels of the Vietnam War. It is not the All Purpose Fighter is it purported to being. It is not an Air Superiority aircraft like an F-15. Our military has some confusing ideas about the planes we deploy. In a hell hole like Afghanistan an AC-130 and A-10 warthogs are perfect. We need the military to bless the A-10 II! Build it with modern engines and avionics and make it all weather and all conditions!

InvictusV's photo
Fri 07/29/11 06:30 PM




Kind of like the Harrier or the Ospry?

Two other Marine failures.


Neither are failures and are used heavily. They have had their accidents just like EVERY other vehicle in the United States Armed Forces inventory.

The F-35 is amazing and when it goes into service it will be unmatched.


It is no F-22..

Well..an F-22 that is working properly I should add..


No, it's 110% better!


the f-35 is a NATO plane. The F-22 is not. That should tell you something about which plane is better.

Lpdon's photo
Fri 07/29/11 10:13 PM
So?

jrbogie's photo
Sat 07/30/11 04:22 AM
aircraft design is a matter of trade offs mainly due to weight considerations. any vtol aircraft will always be a marginal high speed fighter while giving up vertical heavy lift capability as a hover craft. fact remains, the f22 is a much more capable air superiority fighter than the f35 ever will be with it's superior target aquisition and distruction capabilities. a single f22 was pitted against six f15s and all six eagles were toast in less than a minute having never aquired much less seen the lone raptor.

InvictusV's photo
Sat 07/30/11 04:51 AM

So?


So?

Do you really think that we are going to let NATO countries have access to our most technologically advanced plane?

Why aren't they flying F-117s? Or B-2s?

The F-35 is a nice plane. It has some cool features and innovations.

However, it isn't even comparable to the capabilities of the F-22.




Simonedemidova's photo
Sat 07/30/11 05:12 AM

The F-35 is over priced. Also its capabilities come with trade offs like weapons capacity. It is also what is known as a Penetration Aircraft like the Wild Weasels of the Vietnam War. It is not the All Purpose Fighter is it purported to being. It is not an Air Superiority aircraft like an F-15. Our military has some confusing ideas about the planes we deploy. In a hell hole like Afghanistan an AC-130 and A-10 warthogs are perfect. We need the military to bless the A-10 II! Build it with modern engines and avionics and make it all weather and all conditions!


Yeah, I was about to purchase one but considering the price and the options, i thought, what a piece of junk.

jrbogie's photo
Sat 07/30/11 05:21 AM


So?


So?

Do you really think that we are going to let NATO countries have access to our most technologically advanced plane?

Why aren't they flying F-117s? Or B-2s?

The F-35 is a nice plane. It has some cool features and innovations.

However, it isn't even comparable to the capabilities of the F-22.






quite so. the f35 will replace the harrier which the marines use in close air support of ground troops but at a hundred mil per copy an attack helicopter is much more cost effective, imo. yes, the marines have a need for range in which the ah is limited but aerial refuling can solve that issue. and besides, the harrier, like the f18, could be inhanced to remain a viable close air support aircraft far beyond it's ten year projected demise.

still, there is no question that the f35 can not be considered to be in the same class as the f22 as an air superiority fighter. in speed to intercept alone, the raptor is twice as fast and it's vectored thrust dogfight maneuver capabilities cannot be matched by the f35. bob gates was right to suspend the project into probation before leaving the pentagon in this time of ecconomic crisis.

InvictusV's photo
Sat 07/30/11 05:49 AM



So?


So?

Do you really think that we are going to let NATO countries have access to our most technologically advanced plane?

Why aren't they flying F-117s? Or B-2s?

The F-35 is a nice plane. It has some cool features and innovations.

However, it isn't even comparable to the capabilities of the F-22.






quite so. the f35 will replace the harrier which the marines use in close air support of ground troops but at a hundred mil per copy an attack helicopter is much more cost effective, imo. yes, the marines have a need for range in which the ah is limited but aerial refuling can solve that issue. and besides, the harrier, like the f18, could be inhanced to remain a viable close air support aircraft far beyond it's ten year projected demise.

still, there is no question that the f35 can not be considered to be in the same class as the f22 as an air superiority fighter. in speed to intercept alone, the raptor is twice as fast and it's vectored thrust dogfight maneuver capabilities cannot be matched by the f35. bob gates was right to suspend the project into probation before leaving the pentagon in this time of ecconomic crisis.


I agree with slowing down production of the F-22.

The F-35 is much cheaper to build and maintain.

It is a perfect replacement for the Harrier and even the F-16.

I'm not totally sold on replacing the Hornet, however.

InvictusV's photo
Sat 07/30/11 05:50 AM


The F-35 is over priced. Also its capabilities come with trade offs like weapons capacity. It is also what is known as a Penetration Aircraft like the Wild Weasels of the Vietnam War. It is not the All Purpose Fighter is it purported to being. It is not an Air Superiority aircraft like an F-15. Our military has some confusing ideas about the planes we deploy. In a hell hole like Afghanistan an AC-130 and A-10 warthogs are perfect. We need the military to bless the A-10 II! Build it with modern engines and avionics and make it all weather and all conditions!


Yeah, I was about to purchase one but considering the price and the options, i thought, what a piece of junk.


I would suggest something more along the lines of a bi-plane. Open cockpit so that 80s hair can blow around in the breeze.

no photo
Sat 07/30/11 06:16 AM
bigdog human hunting robot


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww


crusher


http://www.cmu.edu/cmnews/extra/060428_crusher.html


gatling gun suv


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ7KPctK48c


flying cameras


http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/210507_spy_drone.html


robot tanks


http://www.geekologie.com/2010/10/run_robotic_minitank_with_mach.php



and these are the old versions.it seems most of our money goes to threaten, kill and control people instead of fixing the problem.

i think if we add fluoride to the water and poison their food with MSG and transfats.like they did here the so called terrorists will be no problem in about 10 years.we can give them 2000+ channels on the boob tube and hulu.then we can advertise pills,viagra and infomercials on these channels day and night.they could be sidetracked with facebook and tweets and be yapping on their cells phones too.we could engineer hollywood movies to brain wash them and break down their morals in no time at all.

wait a minute.......... that is us

jrbogie's photo
Sat 07/30/11 06:33 AM




So?


So?

Do you really think that we are going to let NATO countries have access to our most technologically advanced plane?

Why aren't they flying F-117s? Or B-2s?

The F-35 is a nice plane. It has some cool features and innovations.

However, it isn't even comparable to the capabilities of the F-22.






quite so. the f35 will replace the harrier which the marines use in close air support of ground troops but at a hundred mil per copy an attack helicopter is much more cost effective, imo. yes, the marines have a need for range in which the ah is limited but aerial refuling can solve that issue. and besides, the harrier, like the f18, could be inhanced to remain a viable close air support aircraft far beyond it's ten year projected demise.

still, there is no question that the f35 can not be considered to be in the same class as the f22 as an air superiority fighter. in speed to intercept alone, the raptor is twice as fast and it's vectored thrust dogfight maneuver capabilities cannot be matched by the f35. bob gates was right to suspend the project into probation before leaving the pentagon in this time of ecconomic crisis.


I agree with slowing down production of the F-22.

The F-35 is much cheaper to build and maintain.

It is a perfect replacement for the Harrier and even the F-16.

I'm not totally sold on replacing the Hornet, however.


i don't think we produce the f22 at the moment. what we have does the job and i don't think the cost to maintain the f35 has been shown to be any cheaper than the f22. perhaps projected but projections have been wrong in the past when the military does the projectin'.

KerryO's photo
Sat 07/30/11 07:09 AM


The F-35 is over priced. Also its capabilities come with trade offs like weapons capacity. It is also what is known as a Penetration Aircraft like the Wild Weasels of the Vietnam War. It is not the All Purpose Fighter is it purported to being. It is not an Air Superiority aircraft like an F-15. Our military has some confusing ideas about the planes we deploy. In a hell hole like Afghanistan an AC-130 and A-10 warthogs are perfect. We need the military to bless the A-10 II! Build it with modern engines and avionics and make it all weather and all conditions!


Yeah, I was about to purchase one but considering the price and the options, i thought, what a piece of junk.


Yeah, me too! I was going to finance it with I.O.U.'s drawn against my future SSI checks. The House Tea Partiers gave the go ahead despite Cut, Cap and Balance, but at the last minute, I got cold feet and settled for a used A-10 instead, trading in my old AC-47 Spooky. I'll sure miss Puff the Magic Dragon.

-Kerry O.

Lpdon's photo
Sat 07/30/11 12:41 PM


So?


So?

Do you really think that we are going to let NATO countries have access to our most technologically advanced plane?

Why aren't they flying F-117s? Or B-2s?

The F-35 is a nice plane. It has some cool features and innovations.

However, it isn't even comparable to the capabilities of the F-22.






Ummmmmm, the are considering putting it up for export. They are putting reports together on what kind of profits we would be making etc. Look's like it might go through.

Lpdon's photo
Sat 07/30/11 12:43 PM





So?


So?

Do you really think that we are going to let NATO countries have access to our most technologically advanced plane?

Why aren't they flying F-117s? Or B-2s?

The F-35 is a nice plane. It has some cool features and innovations.

However, it isn't even comparable to the capabilities of the F-22.






quite so. the f35 will replace the harrier which the marines use in close air support of ground troops but at a hundred mil per copy an attack helicopter is much more cost effective, imo. yes, the marines have a need for range in which the ah is limited but aerial refuling can solve that issue. and besides, the harrier, like the f18, could be inhanced to remain a viable close air support aircraft far beyond it's ten year projected demise.

still, there is no question that the f35 can not be considered to be in the same class as the f22 as an air superiority fighter. in speed to intercept alone, the raptor is twice as fast and it's vectored thrust dogfight maneuver capabilities cannot be matched by the f35. bob gates was right to suspend the project into probation before leaving the pentagon in this time of ecconomic crisis.


I agree with slowing down production of the F-22.

The F-35 is much cheaper to build and maintain.

It is a perfect replacement for the Harrier and even the F-16.

I'm not totally sold on replacing the Hornet, however.


i don't think we produce the f22 at the moment. what we have does the job and i don't think the cost to maintain the f35 has been shown to be any cheaper than the f22. perhaps projected but projections have been wrong in the past when the military does the projectin'.


We are still producing it, but the order was cut down to 187 total and we are at 168 right now.

Previous 1 3