How do you feel about Drones?

2013-03-04 01:32:42

#151

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6107|eXtreme to the maX

The F35 is lookking more and more like the F4 Phantom:-

"We don't need best-in-class acceleration, agility, rate of climb, range, a canopy which lets us look behind etc because we're so badass we'll shoot every mofo out of the sky before they see us coming and be gone before they know whats hit them, and the age of the dog-fighter is over, stupid.
That and communism is stupid so communist engineers must be stupid."

Didn't work for the F4, its bound to work for the F35 right?

A cloud of hypersonic Chinese drones, which no doubt they're working on - because while Lockheed-Martin is perfecting last-decade technology and milking the taxpayer the Chinese are thinking laterally to develop the next decades technology at a tenth of the cost -would defeat them for peanuts, and probably be ready before the F35.

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2013-03-04 02:17:41

#152

War Man: Australians are hermaphrodites.; +563|6715|Purplicious Wisconsin

Agreed, F35 is a waste of fucking money.

F22 isn't as bad, we just don't need to produce more right now which we're not, thankfully. Doesn't hurt to attempt to improve it, though.

The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.

2013-03-04 06:25:04

#153

Spearhead: Gulf coast redneck hippy; +731|6691|Tampa Bay Florida

lol Dice thought they would be around in 2007. lolol

2013-03-04 07:14:31

#154

eleven bravo: Member; +1,399|5260|foggy bottom

Dilbert_X wrote:
The F35 is lookking more and more like the F4 Phantom:-

"We don't need best-in-class acceleration, agility, rate of climb, range, a canopy which lets us look behind etc because we're so badass we'll shoot every mofo out of the sky before they see us coming and be gone before they know whats hit them, and the age of the dog-fighter is over, stupid.
That and communism is stupid so communist engineers must be stupid."

Didn't work for the F4, its bound to work for the F35 right?

A cloud of hypersonic Chinese drones, which no doubt they're working on - because while Lockheed-Martin is perfecting last-decade technology and milking the taxpayer the Chinese are thinking laterally to develop the next decades technology at a tenth of the cost -would defeat them for peanuts, and probably be ready before the F35.

since when have the chinese been known to develop ANY of their own technology?

Tu Stultus Es

2013-03-04 07:35:20

#155

Superior Mind: (not macbeth); +1,755|6694

Since 5kya

x

2013-03-04 08:05:58

#156

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6717

eleven bravo wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
The F35 is lookking more and more like the F4 Phantom:-

"We don't need best-in-class acceleration, agility, rate of climb, range, a canopy which lets us look behind etc because we're so badass we'll shoot every mofo out of the sky before they see us coming and be gone before they know whats hit them, and the age of the dog-fighter is over, stupid.
That and communism is stupid so communist engineers must be stupid."

Didn't work for the F4, its bound to work for the F35 right?

A cloud of hypersonic Chinese drones, which no doubt they're working on - because while Lockheed-Martin is perfecting last-decade technology and milking the taxpayer the Chinese are thinking laterally to develop the next decades technology at a tenth of the cost -would defeat them for peanuts, and probably be ready before the F35.
since when have the chinese been known to develop ANY of their own technology?

before white people made their shit more useful.

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2013-03-04 08:14:09

#157

PrivateVendetta: I DEMAND XMAS THEME; +704|6192|Roma

eleven bravo wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
The F35 is lookking more and more like the F4 Phantom:-

"We don't need best-in-class acceleration, agility, rate of climb, range, a canopy which lets us look behind etc because we're so badass we'll shoot every mofo out of the sky before they see us coming and be gone before they know whats hit them, and the age of the dog-fighter is over, stupid.
That and communism is stupid so communist engineers must be stupid."

Didn't work for the F4, its bound to work for the F35 right?

A cloud of hypersonic Chinese drones, which no doubt they're working on - because while Lockheed-Martin is perfecting last-decade technology and milking the taxpayer the Chinese are thinking laterally to develop the next decades technology at a tenth of the cost -would defeat them for peanuts, and probably be ready before the F35.
since when have the chinese been known to develop ANY of their own technology?

Yeah, their take on the F22/F35 counter is laughable. The only similarity is the shape. They are currently FAR behind on military aerospace technology.

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/29388/stopped%20scrolling%21.png

2013-03-04 08:17:34

#158

PrivateVendetta: I DEMAND XMAS THEME; +704|6192|Roma

War Man wrote:
Agreed, F35 is a waste of fucking money.

F22 isn't as bad, we just don't need to produce more right now which we're not, thankfully. Doesn't hurt to attempt to improve it, though.

F35 was never meant as an improvement on the F22. F22 was american only cutting edge let's-keep-this-bad-ass-to-ourselves technology.
F35 or Joint Strike Fighter, if it makes it easier to comprehend, was always meant to be sold to allies to enhance cooperation and cut costs. F22 pure dog fighting dominance, F35 multi-role fighter bomber. Different beasts.

2013-03-04 09:08:28

#159

M.O.A.B: 'Light 'em up!'; +1,220|6224|Escea

Kinda makes you wonder where China's military technology would be if they didn't have access to a computer to nick everyone else's. Knock'off capital of the world.

2013-03-04 09:21:00

#160

RTHKI: mmmf mmmf mmmf; +1,736|6738|Oxferd Ohire

dilbert gonna dil

2013-03-04 09:31:41

#161

War Man: Australians are hermaphrodites.; +563|6715|Purplicious Wisconsin

PrivateVendetta wrote:
War Man wrote:
Agreed, F35 is a waste of fucking money.

F22 isn't as bad, we just don't need to produce more right now which we're not, thankfully. Doesn't hurt to attempt to improve it, though.
F35 was never meant as an improvement on the F22. F22 was american only cutting edge let's-keep-this-bad-ass-to-ourselves technology.
F35 or Joint Strike Fighter, if it makes it easier to comprehend, was always meant to be sold to allies to enhance cooperation and cut costs. F22 pure dog fighting dominance, F35 multi-role fighter bomber. Different beasts.

I am well aware of the purposes of both of the aircraft. Just there are too many problems with the F35 and the price keeps going up. It may end up being close in cost to the F22 by the time it's ready. Better off scrapping the entire project and start a new non-stealth fighter project(s). Until stealth tech becomes simpler, we should stop pursuing a "low cost" stealth fighter.

The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.

2013-03-04 09:33:27

#162

13urnzz: Banned; +5,830|6498

yeah. they should do the R & D cheaper.

2013-03-04 09:37:48

#163

PrivateVendetta: I DEMAND XMAS THEME; +704|6192|Roma

How do you make stealth simpler without research and building on current technology in use?
You said it doesn't hurt to improve the F22, then go on to say fuck making something better until it becomes cheap enough and easy enough that everyone can do it.

2013-03-04 09:39:30

#164

PrivateVendetta: I DEMAND XMAS THEME; +704|6192|Roma

War Man wrote:
Better off scrapping the entire project and start a new non-stealth fighter project(s).

And lol. The money already sunk into it alone would finance a new build 4th gen plane, but you'd spend twice the money and get half the aeroplane?

2013-03-04 09:47:21

#165

Uzique The Lesser: Banned; +382|4255

sssh private, war man is clearly destined for a career in the upper echelons of the ministry of defense. he is home-schooled in national defense.

2013-03-04 12:17:24

#166

War Man: Australians are hermaphrodites.; +563|6715|Purplicious Wisconsin

Did I say to scrap both the f22 and f35? No, scrap the f35 because it is becoming too expensive to bother having a force of these to replace our F16's, older F18's, and harriers when the design is abit impractical for its cost and purpose.

Wouldn't be a first time we invested so much money into a project only to cancel it.

Edit: That is Department of Defense to you Uzique.

Last edited by War Man (2013-03-04 12:20:09)

The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.

2013-03-04 12:46:10

#167

13urnzz: Banned; +5,830|6498

you know warman, i don't have any children, so we may be the only 2 people on the forum that believe we have money to burn.

fuck yeah, let's waste as much cash as we can, don't touch my Medicare you fuckers!

2013-03-04 13:42:27

#168

1stSFOD-Delta: Mike "The Spooge Gobbler" Morales; +376|5979|Blue Mountain State

Dilbert_X wrote:
The F35 is lookking more and more like the F4 Phantom:-

"We don't need best-in-class acceleration, agility, rate of climb, range, a canopy which lets us look behind etc because we're so badass we'll shoot every mofo out of the sky before they see us coming and be gone before they know whats hit them, and the age of the dog-fighter is over, stupid.
That and communism is stupid so communist engineers must be stupid."

Didn't work for the F4, its bound to work for the F35 right?

A cloud of hypersonic Chinese drones, which no doubt they're working on - because while Lockheed-Martin is perfecting last-decade technology and milking the taxpayer the Chinese are thinking laterally to develop the next decades technology at a tenth of the cost -would defeat them for peanuts, and probably be ready before the F35.

F-4 wasn't that bad actually.

https://www.itwirx.com/other/hksignature.jpg

Baba Booey

2013-03-04 14:02:25

#169

PrivateVendetta: I DEMAND XMAS THEME; +704|6192|Roma

War Man wrote:
Did I say to scrap both the f22 and f35? No, scrap the f35 because it is becoming too expensive to bother having a force of these to replace our F16's, older F18's, and harriers when the design is abit impractical for its cost and purpose.

Wouldn't be a first time we invested so much money into a project only to cancel it.

Edit: That is Department of Defense to you Uzique.

Did I say you said that? No, scrapping the F35 would lead to exactly the statement I said before.

2013-03-04 14:35:20

#170

War Man: Australians are hermaphrodites.; +563|6715|Purplicious Wisconsin

The F22 bit was in response to your question of how we can simplify stealth with current research on current technology to use. USA would still have F22 even if we canceled the f35. Also, we wouldn't have to immediately go start a new project after f35 cancelation.

13urnzz wrote:
you know warman, i don't have any children, so we may be the only 2 people on the forum that believe we have money to burn.

fuck yeah, let's waste as much cash as we can, don't touch my Medicare you fuckers!

I save, not spend.

The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.

2013-03-04 14:47:34

#171

13urnzz: Banned; +5,830|6498

i'm spending your children's inheritance.

2013-03-04 15:18:16

#172

Adams_BJ: Russian warship, go fuck yourself; +2,053|6623|Little Bentcock

Economists all up in this bizz

2013-03-04 15:19:03

#173

PrivateVendetta: I DEMAND XMAS THEME; +704|6192|Roma

War Man wrote:
The F22 bit was in response to your question of how we can simplify stealth with current research on current technology to use. USA would still have F22 even if we canceled the f35. Also, we wouldn't have to immediately go start a new project after f35 cancelation.
13urnzz wrote:
you know warman, i don't have any children, so we may be the only 2 people on the forum that believe we have money to burn.

fuck yeah, let's waste as much cash as we can, don't touch my Medicare you fuckers!
I save, not spend.

I am literally so confused with your logic and train of conversation

2013-03-04 17:19:49

#174

RAIMIUS: You with the face!; +244|6715|US

The bigger problem with the F-35, in my partially educated opinion, is that the DoD let "mission creep" go way too far. It's the "solution" for just about any fighter/attack problem you can think of...and now the price for that is showing. The A-10 was a brilliant aircraft because it is EXCEPTIONALLY good at just a few things. The F-22 is as well, but the R&D price was a real killer. The problem when you develop something as a multi-role platform is that everyone wants it to be great at whatever they value, so you wind up with a ton of compromises and a huge cost.

2013-03-04 20:12:53

#175

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5359|London, England

RAIMIUS wrote:
The bigger problem with the F-35, in my partially educated opinion, is that the DoD let "mission creep" go way too far. It's the "solution" for just about any fighter/attack problem you can think of...and now the price for that is showing. The A-10 was a brilliant aircraft because it is EXCEPTIONALLY good at just a few things. The F-22 is as well, but the R&D price was a real killer. The problem when you develop something as a multi-role platform is that everyone wants it to be great at whatever they value, so you wind up with a ton of compromises and a huge cost.

When you design by committee you generally end up with garbage like this:

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_F4bK7ZAp4qo/TIhlHp9guuI/AAAAAAAAAZ8/DbYb_to0bWY/s1600/Homer-Simpson-car-21638.jpg

(albeit in this case, it only took one dumbass)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

BF2S Forums How do you feel about Drones?

Dilbert_X wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

eleven bravo wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

War Man wrote:

PrivateVendetta wrote:

War Man wrote:

War Man wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

War Man wrote:

13urnzz wrote:

War Man wrote:

13urnzz wrote:

RAIMIUS wrote:

Board footer