« Yet more "norming" of the abnormal | Main | “Crime by the underclass is racial, predatory, and very much targeted against whites. »

September 27, 2013

Handicapped Weapon

aaa_joint-strike-fighter.jpg

Will the F-35, the U.S. Military’s Flaw-Filled, Years-Overdue Joint Strike Fighter, Ever Actually Fly? The men who fly the F-35 are among the best fighter jocks America has ever produced.
They are smart, thoughtful, and skilled—the proverbial tip of the spear. But I also wondered: Where’s the rest of the spear? Why, almost two decades after the Pentagon initially bid out the program, in 1996, are they flying an aircraft whose handicaps outweigh its proven—as opposed to promised—capabilities?

Posted by gerardvanderleun at September 27, 2013 7:51 AM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.

Your Say

Blah, blah, blah, I bet cavemen were bitching about the flaws and arrival time of the latest spear points.

Since I’ve have the pleasure of inhabiting this orb it’s been the same ole concerning - the M16, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, The M1 Abrams tank, the Osprey…and every GD thing, small and large, in between.

Here’s a clue, shit is hard. Especially shit that is used to kill MF’s. And the stuff that involves hundreds if not thousands of bits of sophisticated technology, some of which is cutting edge and never applied before, is even that much motherhumping harder.

Shut it already. You and I can sleep in our warm little beds because of “flawed filled and years overdue” badass weaponry. Oh, and the badasses that use it. Can’t forget them.

(And no, this is not directed at AD)

Posted by: tim at September 27, 2013 12:31 PM

I remember that in the lead-up to the Gulf War there were stories about the serious shortcomings of the M1 Abrams main battle tank. It kicked ass when it was finally unleashed on the Republican Guard's T-72s. The "journalists" who wrote about the Abrams didn't seem to realize that the kinks had been worked out of the system well before 1990.

Posted by: Don Rodrigo at September 27, 2013 3:01 PM

Erleichda!

Everything we purchase - armament, computers, landing gear for aircraft, the brake assemblies on our vehicles, so forth - is provided by the lowest bidder. Everything.;

There. Feel better?

Posted by: chasmatic at September 27, 2013 7:00 PM

My guess is that too much was asked too soon out of a certain amount of weight.

Imagfine launching USS Michigan in the 1840's - an iron hulled bark rigged steam powered gunboat for Great Lakes service. And then being told:

"Wonderful! Now triple the size and get the engines to quadruple the power while still using the same tonnage of coal per hour."

The engineers are not screwing around, they want to do this and do it right; they are just being asked to do a lot of things in one airframe that will be very difficult to do: Interceptor; fighter; fighter-bomber; supersonic; stealth; J-STOL; carrier arrest landing.


My problems are not theirs and their problems are not mine - and I am grateful.

Posted by: Mikey NTH at September 27, 2013 9:02 PM

But it looked good on powerpoint. One aircraft that does everything and replaces all the others. Imagine the savings!

Meanwhile the existing fleet of jets is in their third or fourth decade and keeping them in service is also getting more and more expensive.

We should have built more F-22. They worked fine. Should have built more late model A-10, F-15 and F-16 too, since they would be "good enough" in the air-to-ground role for a while, and much cheaper.

Posted by: El Gordo at September 28, 2013 5:15 AM

But it looked good on powerpoint. One aircraft that does everything and replaces all the others. Imagine the savings!

Meanwhile the existing fleet of jets is in their third or fourth decade and keeping them in service is also getting more and more expensive.

We should have built more F-22. They worked fine. Should have built more late model A-10, F-15 and F-16 too, since they would be "good enough" in the air-to-ground role for a while, and much cheaper.

Posted by: El Gordo at September 28, 2013 5:16 AM

I'm not sure what to think about this yet, a ton of previous military gear was panned before it was really used in earnest and turned out wonderful. On the other hand a lot of very knowledgeable people are saying this thing is a stinker.

Like others I'm not sure why they gave up on the F22 so fast, and only a complete idiot abandons the A-10.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 28, 2013 2:59 PM

One size fits all just doesn't.

Posted by: Casca at September 29, 2013 7:37 AM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)