31–40 of 136 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are probably very few parts on that plane that are cheaper than 400k.
The pilot. I doubt fighter pilots make $400k/year. Maybe they need to ask for a raise...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are probably very few parts on that plane that are cheaper than 400k.
The pilot. I doubt fighter pilots make $400k/year. Maybe they need to ask for a raise...
Lolz! Who does not recognize this article as complete propagandistic advertisement for a project completely over in time and budget that even fails competing with its competitors. Just besides that it's a weapon for killing people. Wake up.
Weapons aren't evil. Evil is what's evil. Burying one's head in the sand à la Chamberlain led to the extermination of millions. The Khymer Rouge had no advanced weaponry and slaughtered millions.
In Gulf War I, 35,000 total deaths, in no small part because of smarter weapons. An entire country liberated from the Iraqis in just over a month.
How would advanced weaponry have changed the game in wars across history?
Even the Iraq war, which has been one of Anerica's longest has resulted in about 500,000 deaths. In the much shorter WWI it was 16 million deaths.
High tech weapons save lives. Wars will always happen be it with machetes or spears or with billion dollar aircraft systems. A world without war would be nice, but there will always be evil in the hearts of men.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
looking at the low tech - WWII style - war in Ukraine with a lot of civil population and property being hit, intentionally and unintentionally, i'd take high tech any time over it. For example when a full salvo (16) of unguided missiles (from "Uragan" system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BM-27_Uragan ) with 100Kg cluster warheads rains over the center of large city (Donetsk) ... i wish that US give Ukraine high-precis…
I wish the US go home instead of seeding war anywhere they go. I visited Ukraine last month and one of the best things I saw was that war there was contained and "light" using mostly light weapons. Russia probably has not the tech the US has, but Europe does, and Europe does not need a heavy nuclear war or loosing their main energy supplier(Russia).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
may be it isn't cutting edge anymore?
It is cutting edge from an operational perspective. You normally want to keep the precise capabilities of weapon systems hidden from adversaries for as long as possible, as knowing these make countering the systems much easier - but not in the case of the F-35; testing information, development progress, flight envelope and technologies are routinely discussed.
All this technology just to kill people. It is a sad world we live in.
Without such technology, we will be in a world where virtually every able bodied young man will have to serve in the armed forces. Because of such specialized technology and people who dedicate their lives to the craft of warfare, most of our young generation do not have to serve in the military.
But as long as we carry the bigger gun, we'll always have an incentive to fight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
looking at the low tech - WWII style - war in Ukraine with a lot of civil population and property being hit, intentionally and unintentionally, i'd take high tech any time over it. For example when a full salvo (16) of unguided missiles (from "Uragan" system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BM-27_Uragan ) with 100Kg cluster warheads rains over the center of large city (Donetsk) ... i wish that US give Ukraine high-precis…
I wish the US go home instead of seeding war anywhere they go. I visited Ukraine last month and one of the best things I saw was that war there was contained and "light" using mostly light weapons. Russia probably has not the tech the US has, but Europe does, and Europe does not need a heavy nuclear war or loosing their main energy supplier(Russia).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No modern Russain Federation tanks can be seen around Donetsk (like T-14 or at least T-90). No regular army either (except DPR army).
T-14 is still not in the army. Probably not even in the mass production yet. No T-90 has been sent to Ukraine. Modernized versions of T-72 is still in wide service with Russian army. Regular Russian army units (at the scale of several "battalion tactical groups", about 2000-3000 soldiers total) were sent to Ukraine in August 2014 - they stopped very successful Ukraine offensive by encircling significant forces near I…
>>Modernized versions of T-72 is still in wide service with Russian army.
Oh, that's funny. SKS is in wide service. Along with Mosin-Nagant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
looking at the low tech - WWII style - war in Ukraine with a lot of civil population and property being hit, intentionally and unintentionally, i'd take high tech any time over it. For example when a full salvo (16) of unguided missiles (from "Uragan" system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BM-27_Uragan ) with 100Kg cluster warheads rains over the center of large city (Donetsk) ... i wish that US give Ukraine high-precis…
I wish the US go home instead of seeding war anywhere they go. I visited Ukraine last month and one of the best things I saw was that war there was contained and "light" using mostly light weapons. Russia probably has not the tech the US has, but Europe does, and Europe does not need a heavy nuclear war or loosing their main energy supplier(Russia).
I'm not sure how discouraging Russian and Islamic expansionism is somehow 'seeding war.' I don't recall Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait being 'seeded' by the U.S. During the Korean War, it was the Chinese supported North that attacked the South. How about Tibet? Or pretty much every conflict in Africa? This "America as invader" meme has no basis in reality or fact. The U.S. just doesn't sit around throwing darts on maps to pick countries to invade. We could suggest that countries like France in Africa and Indochina, the British with Northern Ireland and the Faulklands, the Germans (twice) in Europe, the Italians in Ethiopia and Libya, the Egyptians in the Six Day war and the Yom Kippir War.. The U.S. has been the belligerents in very few conflicts. We could talk about the Cubans in Grenada, the Soviets in Afghanistan..
The U.S. isn't perfect, but they definitely don't spend their time invading their neighbors because of some ethnic claim or another. The U.S. is involved in many places but there's a big difference between getting involved defensively as opposed to offensive, territorial-grabbing objectives such as seen in the Ukraine and the Caucasus.
By the way, I am not passing judgement on any country; it's just important to maintain perspective based on facts and not some knee-jerk assumption.
Ask Poland and the Baltics if they want the U.S. around. Huge majorities would say yes. Woukd you rather have the US sit in the sidelines while Russia marches unchecked to the German border?
It's a very 'agile' project. When will it be done? Don't ask! How much will it cost? Who knows! It's going to be awesome, though! But... you don't have to wait to see how powerful this weapons system is. The F-35 completely took out the Dutch government before one even rolled off the assembly line! Note to governments: when ordering your weapons systems it may be a good idea to get a cost-per-unit quote before signin…
What makes you think they're unhappy about the outcome?