If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gizmodo)   This insane image is not a 3D game or a movie, it's the first production model of America's newest stealth machine of destruction   (gizmodo.com) divider line 117
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

15695 clicks; posted to Geek » on 31 Jul 2013 at 9:45 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



117 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-31 08:19:56 PM  
thank god. we were starting to fall behind the rest of the globe on jet fighter technology.
 
2013-07-31 08:58:56 PM  
I, for one, welcome our America's newest stealth machine of destruction overlords
 
2013-07-31 09:08:35 PM  
Real life is much cooler than stupid games. I've been there.

You could be there too.
 
2013-07-31 09:18:56 PM  
And it's how many billions of dollars over budget and how many years late?
 
2013-07-31 09:22:16 PM  

log_jammin: thank god. we were starting to fall behind the rest of the globe on jet fighter technology.


The F-35 is a giant step behind when you compare its capabilities to the capabilities of the aircraft it's supposed to be replacing.
 
2013-07-31 09:24:09 PM  
Interesting side note:  The full payload is 5 nuclear missiles stuffed with 10 trillion dollars each.
 
2013-07-31 09:28:14 PM  
Other than debt, we could solve all of our problems with less than a trillion dollars.  We could high speed rail the country, fix our bridges and have roads that recharge electric cars...Or we could have this fighter jet.
 
2013-07-31 09:48:31 PM  

Makh: Other than debt, we could solve all of our problems with less than a trillion dollars.  We could high speed rail the country, fix our bridges and have roads that recharge electric cars...Or we could have this fighter jet.


Well, to be fair, that jet is pretty damn cool.
 
2013-07-31 09:51:45 PM  
img24.imageshack.us

^ What subby's idea of "cool" may look like.
 
2013-07-31 09:54:50 PM  

Makh: Other than debt, we could solve all of our problems with less than a trillion dollars.  We could high speed rail the country, fix our bridges and have roads that recharge electric cars...Or we could have this fighter jet.


Yeah, back in my Peace Corps days I calculated that the cost of building one nuclear-powered aircraft carrier -- forget manning, equipping and operating it -- would pay for Peace Corps' world-wide operations for 20 years.

So campaign for and vote for Hillary. She might actually make some of those smarter decisions.

/one can hope
 
2013-07-31 09:59:50 PM  

Fark It: log_jammin: thank god. we were starting to fall behind the rest of the globe on jet fighter technology.

The F-35 is a giant step behind when you compare its capabilities to the capabilities of the aircraft it's supposed to be replacing.


Great. soon the Ugandan air force will be raining death over the skies of America.
 
2013-07-31 09:59:56 PM  
Wow, that looks like a 1 trillion dollar boondoggle, seeing as how they had lowered the performance requirements so it could past the tests, I'm not very impressed.
 
2013-07-31 10:08:04 PM  
Oh, it's an airplane.
 
2013-07-31 10:13:28 PM  

Makh: Other than debt, we could solve all of our problems with less than a trillion dollars.  We could high speed rail the country, fix our bridges and have roads that recharge electric cars...Or we could have this fighter jet.


Oddly, a couple years ago the Federal Government had a blank check for just a little under a trillion dollars.  I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the party in control at the time is the same one you vote for.  Even more oddly, they chose not to spend it on high speed rail, bridges, roads that recharge electric cars (which, frankly, is an incredibly stupid idea), combating global warming, building massive solar charging arrays, converting all of our coal power plants into more environmental friendly plants, building out a larger reaching fiber-optic Internet infrastructure, converting our ageing power grid to something more modern, or building massive water desalination plants.

Also, I'm pretty sure you have no idea how much it would cost to "high speed rail the country".
 
2013-07-31 10:13:31 PM  
cdn.physorg.com

Has been done better.
 
2013-07-31 10:13:31 PM  
So, this program cost a trillion dollars? What would have been the comparative costs of designing three different specialized aircraft instead? I doubt they saved any money following this approach.
 
2013-07-31 10:17:38 PM  
Why would anyone, for even a second, think that image was from a game or movie? There was absolutely nothing about it that made me think that. Not even a little. Are people these days really that stupid?
 
2013-07-31 10:20:18 PM  

Reverend J: Wow, that looks like a 1 trillion dollar boondoggle, seeing as how they had lowered the performance requirements so it could past the tests, I'm not very impressed.


Sad thing is, if it's electronic warfare systems go down, they're billion dollar sitting ducks to 30-40 year old technology.  The entire premise is that they can shoot down things from 20 miles away having never been detected.  But it's all based on super, complicated electronic and computer systems.

If war has taught us anything, it's that WSHTF complicated = useless and death.  This might be fine for blowing up those useless migs buried in the sand of some 3rd world nation, but it's not going to work well once Russia or China decides they can jam electronics just fine.
 
2013-07-31 10:21:23 PM  
Every decade has its over budget and delayed all-in-one plane that's decried as a boondoggle at the time...

www.vojsko.net
 
2013-07-31 10:22:27 PM  

JonBuck: So, this program cost a trillion dollars? What would have been the comparative costs of designing three different specialized aircraft instead? I doubt they saved any money following this approach.


Lifetime program cost.

And for anybody thinking not buying this thing would free up that money for other uses, keep in mind that we DO need some kind of new multirole fighter. Even if it isn't the F-35 (I think this has turned into quite the boondoggle, myself), it would need to be something else that would cost the majority of that money.
 
2013-07-31 10:23:29 PM  

JonBuck: What would have been the comparative costs of designing three different specialized aircraft instead? I doubt they saved any money following this approach.


I've had to sit through DAU's damned classes on acquisition programs.  You underestimate the scale of the bureaucracy involved.
 
2013-07-31 10:23:31 PM  
 Disappointing performance, unsatisfactory radar cross section, and over budget. What's not to love??
 
2013-07-31 10:23:59 PM  
I'm glad the USA is out of debt and able to put its money into RnD again. Also, it's good to know that they have a responsible, trustworthy government that wouldn't exhibit any signs of fascism. Otherwise this project might be cause for some concern.
 
2013-07-31 10:32:45 PM  
What a beautiful waste of money.

I admit that I love good aviation design, but the money could be spent better somewhere else.
 
2013-07-31 10:39:51 PM  
My favorite for the modern day fighters has to be the F-16, incredible maneuverability, pretty good speed but most importantly the only aircraft to cost less then it's predecessor
 
2013-07-31 10:40:25 PM  

Fark It: log_jammin: thank god. we were starting to fall behind the rest of the globe on jet fighter technology.

The F-35 is a giant step behind when you compare its capabilities to the capabilities of the aircraft it's supposed to be replacing.


Yep. Other than it's stealth capabilities it is an inferior aircraft compared to the F-16.
 
2013-07-31 10:42:15 PM  
i.imgur.com /photos/airplane porn/
/different from /porn/airplanes/
 
2013-07-31 10:44:41 PM  
They should first worry about making sure the planes don't explode if hit by lightning
http://rt.com/usa/f35-lightning-design-flaw-360/

But then again, the Pentagon lowered a bunch of the performance benchmarks asked of the F-35 just so it could pass.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/02/pentagon-downgrades-jet-spec s

And then you have the Pentagon clearly admit it sucks.
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-f-35-would-be-defeated-aerial-com ba t-2013-3


The F-35 is the ugly chick at the bar, when you're drunk and the bartender announces its last call before closing.
 
2013-07-31 10:47:35 PM  

Stone Meadow: Makh: Other than debt, we could solve all of our problems with less than a trillion dollars.  We could high speed rail the country, fix our bridges and have roads that recharge electric cars...Or we could have this fighter jet.

Yeah, back in my Peace Corps days I calculated that the cost of building one nuclear-powered aircraft carrier -- forget manning, equipping and operating it -- would pay for Peace Corps' world-wide operations for 20 years.

So campaign for and vote for Hillary. She might actually make some of those smarter decisions.

/one can hope


Yeah given her record Hildabeast is just a farking genius. The peace corp? Please.
 
2013-07-31 10:50:48 PM  
And I thought that "The Pentagon Wars" was fictional.
 
2013-07-31 10:52:30 PM  

arentol: Why would anyone, for even a second, think that image was from a game or movie?


The blurry black line made it look, to me, like the plane was about an inch long. That made it seem like pretty wild new technology until I actually read the first sentence.

/sure, the first sentence is just the Fark headline, but I never expect truth in Fark headlines
 
2013-07-31 10:57:32 PM  
I thought drones were the new thing, and manned fighter aircraft were being phased out?
 
2013-07-31 10:58:58 PM  
Sledgehammer, meet fly. Fly, meet sledgehammer.
 
2013-07-31 11:00:39 PM  

trailerpimp: Stone Meadow: Makh: Other than debt, we could solve all of our problems with less than a trillion dollars.  We could high speed rail the country, fix our bridges and have roads that recharge electric cars...Or we could have this fighter jet.

Yeah, back in my Peace Corps days I calculated that the cost of building one nuclear-powered aircraft carrier -- forget manning, equipping and operating it -- would pay for Peace Corps' world-wide operations for 20 years.

So campaign for and vote for Hillary. She might actually make some of those smarter decisions.

/one can hope

Yeah given her record Hildabeast is just a farking genius. The peace corp? Please.


I also have a DD214 Honorable Discharge as a USAF E-5, too, and am equally proud of that service.

Anyway, yes, the Peace Corps. I was a graduate biologist and spent 3 years teaching itinerant farmers how to better feed their families: animal and crop science. I served the standard two years and then extended for another. It was the Tzedakah I set for myself. What have you ever done for anyone other than yourself?
 
2013-07-31 11:01:31 PM  

mrlewish: Fark It: log_jammin: thank god. we were starting to fall behind the rest of the globe on jet fighter technology.

The F-35 is a giant step behind when you compare its capabilities to the capabilities of the aircraft it's supposed to be replacing.

Yep. Other than it's stealth capabilities it is an inferior aircraft compared to the F-16.


And inferior to the A-10 in CAS, and F/A-18 in maneuverability....
 
2013-07-31 11:04:50 PM  

netgamer7k: I thought drones were the new thing, and manned fighter aircraft were being phased out?


Manned aircraft are going to remain relevant until we solve:

1) Hackable remotely-piloted drones
2) The moral dilemna of allowing a machine to make a kill/no-kill decision.

So, a long long long long time.
 
2013-07-31 11:06:34 PM  

Fark It: mrlewish: Fark It: log_jammin: thank god. we were starting to fall behind the rest of the globe on jet fighter technology.

The F-35 is a giant step behind when you compare its capabilities to the capabilities of the aircraft it's supposed to be replacing.

Yep. Other than it's stealth capabilities it is an inferior aircraft compared to the F-16.

And inferior to the A-10 in CAS, and F/A-18 in maneuverability....


Well, that's the problem with any all-in-one option.  You may reach the point where it can do everything well, but it will never be best at anything.  That doesn't mean that's a bad thing.
 
2013-07-31 11:06:46 PM  

Quantum Apostrophe: Every decade has its over budget and delayed all-in-one plane that's decried as a boondoggle at the time...

[www.vojsko.net image 850x637]


Yeah, but it sure was an interesting airplane.

I saw one at an air show in the desert on static display. It had the coolest name for its nap-of-the-earth mission:

Shine Runner
 
2013-07-31 11:08:06 PM  
That's cool, but how many people can I kill in a single strike before people who care about human lives start to wonder if thirty children were worth one suspected terrorist.
 
das
2013-07-31 11:14:41 PM  

phamwaa: Quantum Apostrophe: Every decade has its over budget and delayed all-in-one plane that's decried as a boondoggle at the time...

[www.vojsko.net image 850x637]

Yeah, but it sure was an interesting airplane.

I saw one at an air show in the desert on static display. It had the coolest name for its nap-of-the-earth mission:

Shine Runner


Pretty sure that pic is a B-1.
 
2013-07-31 11:17:07 PM  
with its weapons bay open

www.myfacewhen.net
 
2013-07-31 11:22:34 PM  

arentol: Why would anyone, for even a second, think that image was from a game or movie? There was absolutely nothing about it that made me think that. Not even a little. Are people these days really that stupid?


It's subconscious.

The picture is blurry, which implies 24/30 FPS which is what film/Xbox run at.

The engine is glowing orange, with a teal blue sky in the background.  That sort of color grading also indicates "big budget entertainment fest"

I guarantee that if it was in focus, no one would be saying "It looks like a videogame!"  Which is SAD and STUPID.

OMG VIDEOGAME:
indopakdef.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-07-31 11:25:32 PM  

das: Pretty sure that pic is a B-1.


Nope...F-111 Aardvark. A high school classmate of mine went to the AF Academy and then flew them.

/beyond cosmic
 
2013-07-31 11:28:16 PM  
Meh

img.ehowcdn.com
 
2013-07-31 11:36:31 PM  

fluffy2097: [i.imgur.com image 850x667] /photos/airplane porn/
/different from /porn/airplanes/


Don't worry.  Nobody's worried about your Strike Witches Rule 34 folder.
 
2013-07-31 11:42:15 PM  
And what good is this against the zombie hordes?!
 
2013-07-31 11:48:55 PM  
This came in waaaayyyyy under budget:

911research.wtc7.net

and was a whole lot more effective.

But don't let that ruin your views on 'Merica

Rock flag and Eagle!!!!

maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com
 
2013-07-31 11:58:39 PM  
Meh. If Boeing get's their advanced super hornets right, the navy will just go "nope" and drop the 35C, but might split the savings on another 35B or two.
 
2013-08-01 12:00:00 AM  
Well, thank god.  With the cancellation of the F-22, we didn't a defense-contract money pit in which to pour billions of dollars over the next 20 years.

We can rest easy knowing that your tax money is being wasted as it is traditionally wasted.  On obscenely expensive military contracts.

And just in time, too.  Some lunatics in Congress were talking about putting money into education of all things.
 
2013-08-01 12:11:44 AM  

Infernalist: Well, thank god.  With the cancellation of the F-22, we didn't a defense-contract money pit in which to pour billions of dollars over the next 20 years.

We can rest easy knowing that your tax money is being wasted as it is traditionally wasted.  On obscenely expensive military contracts.

And just in time, too.  Some lunatics in Congress were talking about putting money into education of all things.


Well if the job creators were to put all of their defense contract monies back into this country to educated a base of citizens to build their black holes...

No, wait...less education for 'Mericans....they want too much money so they can have fancy things like a refrigerator, and if they get real uppity; a paid vacation.


i1045.photobucket.com
 
2013-08-01 12:22:19 AM  
Two things:
1) WTF is so impressive about a blurry snapshot of an airplane?
2) WTF is it lately with all the greenlighted headlines lately that just copy and paste the headline of the god damned article?
 
2013-08-01 12:27:58 AM  

RassilonsExWife: 2) WTF is it lately with all the greenlighted headlines lately that just copy and paste the headline of the god damned article?


Fark has, unfortunately, gone from "It's not news" to "Real news."
 
2013-08-01 12:35:31 AM  
And each one costs as much as Obamacare, but it's ok because war.
 
2013-08-01 12:41:17 AM  

Starry Heavens: RassilonsExWife: 2) WTF is it lately with all the greenlighted headlines lately that just copy and paste the headline of the god damned article?

Fark has, unfortunately, gone from "It's not news" to "Real news."


Starve the squirrel.
 
2013-08-01 12:42:56 AM  
25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-08-01 12:43:35 AM  
It might as well be a movie or a game. By the time that thing ever enters active service *if it does* we'll have moved to a mostly drone fleet anyway.
 
2013-08-01 01:02:18 AM  

Quantum Apostrophe: Every decade has its over budget and delayed all-in-one plane that's decried as a boondoggle at the time...

[www.vojsko.net image 850x637]


My understanding was that the only good thing to come out of the F-111 program was the F-14 and F-15 after they saw what a bag of fail the VFX was.
 
2013-08-01 01:21:39 AM  
Why are we still preparing to fight the Soviet Union in a world war in Europe?
 
2013-08-01 01:24:03 AM  
isnt this the one with the engine and the replacement engine developed for some awful reason?
 
2013-08-01 01:25:37 AM  
The great thing about the F-35, is that it can operate either as a stealth fighter, with two bombs, or it can operate as a non-stealth fighter, with the payload of an F-16. Yet it costs more than buying a stealth fighter and an F-16.

Isn't our military-industrial complex awesome?
 
2013-08-01 01:32:45 AM  
I will say one positive thing about the F-35, though: the engine (and also the second, unnecessary engine) they developed for it is bad-farking-ass. 40,000lbf at afterburner, good TSFC at military power, and it doesn't bat an eyelash at vectored thrust, vertical flight, or supersonic cruise.

If they built a slightly enlarged F-16 (say, the size of the Mitsubishi F-2) powered by an F135 engine, using the multi-axis vector system that was tested in the 80s, with more radar-absorbent materials and using the radar developed for the F-22 program, it'd be the best fighter plane of all time.

/of all time
 
2013-08-01 02:27:16 AM  

akula: JonBuck: So, this program cost a trillion dollars? What would have been the comparative costs of designing three different specialized aircraft instead? I doubt they saved any money following this approach.

Lifetime program cost.

And for anybody thinking not buying this thing would free up that money for other uses, keep in mind that we DO need some kind of new multirole fighter. Even if it isn't the F-35 (I think this has turned into quite the boondoggle, myself), it would need to be something else that would cost the majority of that money.


Why? No, really, why? What imminent threat to America has anywhere near the capabilities to take on our current military? For farks sake, most of our wars in the last half century or more have been against people using guerilla tactics, which aren't much of a challenge when it comes to air superiority. And we're allied (or at least VERY important trading partners) with pretty much all of the few nations that COULD challenge us on technologically even footing.
 
2013-08-01 02:37:52 AM  
Its simple. Wrack up trillions of dollars in debt (much of it to China) maintaining military superiority over the world. Start a war with China, win, cancel our debts, remain the most powerful nation on earth for free.
 
2013-08-01 02:44:51 AM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: My favorite for the modern day fighters has to be the F-16, incredible maneuverability, pretty good speed but most importantly the only aircraft to cost less then it's predecessor


A 40 year old airframe is 'modern?'
 
2013-08-01 03:06:07 AM  
It is a pretty cool looking boondoggle.
 
2013-08-01 03:20:20 AM  

MrEricSir: [img24.imageshack.us image 432x604]

^ What subby's idea of "cool" may look like.


Yea, because military research and development never ever helped humanity
 
2013-08-01 04:16:46 AM  
Yo F35, I'm really happy for you. I'mma let you finish, but the F14 Tomcat was the most iconic fighter jets of all time. The most iconic fighter jet of all time.

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-08-01 05:35:39 AM  
log_jammin:Great. soon the Ugandan air force will be raining death over the skies of America.

I thought Uganda's stealth jets were all carrier-based.
 
2013-08-01 05:39:13 AM  

Cthulhu_is_my_homeboy: The great thing about the F-35, is that it can operate either as a stealth fighter, with two bombs, or it can operate as a non-stealth fighter, with the payload of an F-16. Yet it costs more than buying a stealth fighter and an F-16.

Isn't our military-industrial complex awesome?


Listen man, just because 'Merica already has a fleet of bombers capable of flying to the other side of the planet, drop a nuke, then fly back without ever stopping on top of dozens of nuclear armed submarines and thousands of ICBMs doesn't mean we're safe.  The eagle will never stop crying until we have complete air coverage by hundreds of invisible jet fighters that transform into fighting robots that can give high fives to the Statue of Liberty.  And maybe not even then.
 
2013-08-01 05:39:42 AM  

RassilonsExWife: Two things:
1) WTF is so impressive about a blurry snapshot of an airplane?
2) WTF is it lately with all the greenlighted headlines lately that just copy and paste the headline of the god damned article?


1) subby is easily impressed
2) subby has no imagination and fark is not what it once was. see featured partner.

-Everyone likes revenue, but it's a little jarring to see some of these partner links in the mix on Fark, a site with such a sharply defined sensibility. Fark's guidelines for submissions exhort users not once but twice to "Make the tagline funny" but the links to Buzzfeed's sponsored stories don't even attempt that.
 
2013-08-01 05:41:47 AM  
CSB:
Was out tooling around in a 172 today near Hill AFB. Had a pair of F-16s fly practically right over top of us...probably within a few thousand feet.

The F-16 is a magnificent fighter jet.
 
2013-08-01 06:20:55 AM  

Cyno01: Its simple. Wrack up trillions of dollars in debt (much of it to China) maintaining military superiority over the world. Start a war with China, win, cancel our debts, remain the most powerful nation on earth for free.


And you know someone at the Pentagon has already discussed this option. Sadly, the amount of people we would have to kill for this to work would be in the 10s of millions. We would basically have to knock China back 100yrs on infrastructure and decimate their population which would leave them as the big, starvingest third world country on the planet. Just to cancel some irresponsible debt.
 
2013-08-01 07:19:37 AM  

INeedAName: Cyno01: Its simple. Wrack up trillions of dollars in debt (much of it to China) maintaining military superiority over the world. Start a war with China, win, cancel our debts, remain the most powerful nation on earth for free.

And you know someone at the Pentagon has already discussed this option. Sadly, the amount of people we would have to kill for this to work would be in the 10s of millions. We would basically have to knock China back 100yrs on infrastructure and decimate their population which would leave them as the big, starvingest third world country on the planet. Just to cancel some irresponsible debt.


The US doesn't need to worry about its "irresponsible debt" to China.  It is literally non-material.  Boogety boo.
 
2013-08-01 07:22:49 AM  
I am assuming we can now afford this plane because the US has balanced its budget and nearly paid off the $15 Trillion debt.
 
2013-08-01 07:32:54 AM  

Makh: Other than debt, we could solve all of our problems with less than a trillion dollars.  We could high speed rail the country, fix our bridges and have roads that recharge electric cars...Or we could have this fighter jet.


A new high speed rail line is approximately $10 million per mile. That comes out to a conservative $500 billion for the U.S. So half your money would just go towards rail. Bridge repair in the US is another conservative $76 billion. Building better batteries technology and production, electric charging infrastructure, smart grid technology development and implementation, etc., is estimated to be more than the rest of your budget. That still leaves alternative energy technology to fix coal or nuclear power issues, etc. Unless if you are saying we could use the money to build a time machine that would move us back in time so we could make those investments up front. That may be a better way to use the investment.
 
2013-08-01 07:42:49 AM  
It's no YF-29.
 
2013-08-01 07:44:22 AM  
No. I will not get excited over weapon porn. Lockheed is a drain on society. They are the quintessence of the military-industrial complex. They get tens of billions of dollars per year to make offensive weapons that return little to no value to the taxpayer, as anyone actually in the business of defending us from foreign invaders will tell you that we have more tanks, helicopters, and jet fighters than we need. Lockheed's corporate logo should be a f*cking mothball.
 
2013-08-01 07:47:50 AM  
Is this the one where the engine alone ended up costing more than the Manhattan Project? Well at least we're getting some spiffy pics out of it. Lemme know when they shoot down their first underwear bomber.
 
2013-08-01 08:06:53 AM  
Meh. I'm dissapoint.
 
2013-08-01 08:21:06 AM  
www.wired.com
F-35,go home and get your farkin' shinebox.
 
2013-08-01 08:25:40 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Yo F35, I'm really happy for you. I'mma let you finish, but the F14 Tomcat was the most iconic fighter jets of all time. The most iconic fighter jet of all time.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 800x523]


Iconic, yes, But the Tomcat was also maintenance heavy and quite the disaster during its testing phase.
Granted if we start listing weapons that started out as boondoggles and ended up icons, we could be here all day.
 
2013-08-01 08:31:43 AM  
Meh, will never compare to the Raptor..

i336.photobucket.com
 
2013-08-01 08:38:03 AM  
It's never the things you fear that get you, in the end.
It's always something else, some unanticipated, unintended consequence that takes you out.
 
2013-08-01 08:41:23 AM  
And the enemy now has AC in their top of the line attack vehicle.
 
2013-08-01 08:41:40 AM  

Fark It: And inferior to the A-10 in CAS, and F/A-18 in maneuverability....


...with the loyalty of a cat, and the cleanliness of a dog!
 
2013-08-01 08:45:58 AM  
Yes citizens.
Your government will do this, but then when you break a leg or get sick, you're on your farking own.
 
2013-08-01 08:48:32 AM  
And NOT due to TopGun, I really miss the F14.
 
2013-08-01 08:55:09 AM  

jpo2269: Meh, will never compare to the Raptor..


don't be hasty, the F-35 may yet have it's numbers slashed due to budget overruns.
 
2013-08-01 08:55:16 AM  

Mr. Eugenides: Fark It: mrlewish: Fark It: log_jammin: thank god. we were starting to fall behind the rest of the globe on jet fighter technology.

The F-35 is a giant step behind when you compare its capabilities to the capabilities of the aircraft it's supposed to be replacing.

Yep. Other than it's stealth capabilities it is an inferior aircraft compared to the F-16.

And inferior to the A-10 in CAS, and F/A-18 in maneuverability....

Well, that's the problem with any all-in-one option.  You may reach the point where it can do everything well, but it will never be best at anything.  That doesn't mean that's a bad thing.


It does when we could have ordered one each of the three old planes, out of the factory this year, for less money than a single replacement. And not have to completely change any of our logistics/maintenance infrastructure.
 
2013-08-01 09:02:31 AM  

clkeagle: Mr. Eugenides: Fark It: mrlewish: Fark It: log_jammin: thank god. we were starting to fall behind the rest of the globe on jet fighter technology.

The F-35 is a giant step behind when you compare its capabilities to the capabilities of the aircraft it's supposed to be replacing.

Yep. Other than it's stealth capabilities it is an inferior aircraft compared to the F-16.

And inferior to the A-10 in CAS, and F/A-18 in maneuverability....

Well, that's the problem with any all-in-one option.  You may reach the point where it can do everything well, but it will never be best at anything.  That doesn't mean that's a bad thing.

It does when we could have ordered one each of the three old planes, out of the factory this year, for less money than a single replacement. And not have to completely change any of our logistics/maintenance infrastructure.




Factories don't work that way.
The tooling been dismantled and the staff has gone home. You'd be paying new jet money for a thirty year old design. You can remanufacture old frames but they'll run out of flight hours eventually.
Cutting the numbers of new stealth fighters doesn't help much either since the production costs are nothing compared to the design costs, and we still need the planes.
Hence why its a boondoggle.

Maybe we should have bought half a dozen less specialized designs, but you'd end up spending similar money if you want anything that conforms to the modern ideal of a fighter.
 
2013-08-01 09:10:13 AM  

BHShaman: And NOT due to TopGun, I really miss the F14.


It's OK grandpa. Take a nap and feel better.
/F-14 was a hog.
 
2013-08-01 09:30:28 AM  
It's not too late to pick up some new migs.
 
2013-08-01 09:39:40 AM  
i30.tinypic.com

"i farking warned you, but nooooooooo! you wouldn't listen!"
 
2013-08-01 10:01:55 AM  

LordJiro: akula: JonBuck: So, this program cost a trillion dollars? What would have been the comparative costs of designing three different specialized aircraft instead? I doubt they saved any money following this approach.

Lifetime program cost.

And for anybody thinking not buying this thing would free up that money for other uses, keep in mind that we DO need some kind of new multirole fighter. Even if it isn't the F-35 (I think this has turned into quite the boondoggle, myself), it would need to be something else that would cost the majority of that money.

Why? No, really, why? What imminent threat to America has anywhere near the capabilities to take on our current military? For farks sake, most of our wars in the last half century or more have been against people using guerilla tactics, which aren't much of a challenge when it comes to air superiority. And we're allied (or at least VERY important trading partners) with pretty much all of the few nations that COULD challenge us on technologically even footing.


It takes so long to make a new weapon system that an imminent threat will be long gone by the time the weapon designed to counter it hits production. Does the fire department wait until ther's a fire to order a new truck? It is called planning and preparing. You don't wait until something happens and then prepare for it.

Tommy Moo: No. I will not get excited over weapon porn. Lockheed is a drain on society. They are the quintessence of the military-industrial complex. They get tens of billions of dollars per year to make offensive weapons that return little to no value to the taxpayer, as anyone actually in the business of defending us from foreign invaders will tell you that we have more tanks, helicopters, and jet fighters than we need. Lockheed's corporate logo should be a f*cking mothball.


You're right. We don't need anything made by Lockheed. They make nothing but weapons, right?
 
2013-08-01 10:02:43 AM  

jpo2269: Meh, will never compare to the Raptor..

[i336.photobucket.com image 850x637]


I got yelled at for hugging the nose cone of the Yf-22 at the Wright Pat Airforce Museum.  Good thing they didn't see me trying to get a better look inside the engines.  Badass plane in person.
 
2013-08-01 10:17:44 AM  

GardenWeasel: Meh

[img.ehowcdn.com image 615x475]


I wish I was smart enough to pilot one of those.  I'd probably be dead now, but I would have lived out that dream.
 
2013-08-01 10:55:13 AM  

Tobin_Lam: LordJiro: akula: JonBuck: So, this program cost a trillion dollars? What would have been the comparative costs of designing three different specialized aircraft instead? I doubt they saved any money following this approach.

Lifetime program cost.

And for anybody thinking not buying this thing would free up that money for other uses, keep in mind that we DO need some kind of new multirole fighter. Even if it isn't the F-35 (I think this has turned into quite the boondoggle, myself), it would need to be something else that would cost the majority of that money.

Why? No, really, why? What imminent threat to America has anywhere near the capabilities to take on our current military? For farks sake, most of our wars in the last half century or more have been against people using guerilla tactics, which aren't much of a challenge when it comes to air superiority. And we're allied (or at least VERY important trading partners) with pretty much all of the few nations that COULD challenge us on technologically even footing.

It takes so long to make a new weapon system that an imminent threat will be long gone by the time the weapon designed to counter it hits production. Does the fire department wait until ther's a fire to order a new truck? It is called planning and preparing. You don't wait until something happens and then prepare for it.

Tommy Moo: No. I will not get excited over weapon porn. Lockheed is a drain on society. They are the quintessence of the military-industrial complex. They get tens of billions of dollars per year to make offensive weapons that return little to no value to the taxpayer, as anyone actually in the business of defending us from foreign invaders will tell you that we have more tanks, helicopters, and jet fighters than we need. Lockheed's corporate logo should be a f*cking mothball.

You're right. We don't need anything made by Lockheed. They make nothing but weapons, right?


Spy satellites, I suppose, aren't technically weapons, but it's certainly fair to say that Lockheed makes absolutely nothing that isn't part of the military/intelligence/security triad. Some amount of that is necessary, but don't try to pretend the company isn't three times the size it needs to be, which absolutely does constitute a "drain on society," like I said.
 
2013-08-01 11:16:43 AM  

Tommy Moo: Spy satellites, I suppose, aren't technically weapons, but it's certainly fair to say that Lockheed makes absolutely nothing that isn't part of the military/intelligence/security triad.


Look at their product page. Just look at their space products on the left pull-down and you can that sentence is incorrect.
 
2013-08-01 11:40:13 AM  
I wonder if we can consider the trillions in debt a kind of insurance policy on Taiwan. I.E. if China ever invades Taiwan we just claim all debt invalid.
 
2013-08-01 12:37:30 PM  
Um, Lockheed doesn't build the F-35, that's McDonnell-Douglas, same folks who make the F-18. Lockheed does have an interesting project in the works for compact fusion. If they pull that off, they'll own the world.  http://www.fusenet.eu/node/400
 
2013-08-01 12:41:25 PM  

Stone Meadow: trailerpimp: Stone Meadow: Makh: Other than debt, we could solve all of our problems with less than a trillion dollars.  We could high speed rail the country, fix our bridges and have roads that recharge electric cars...Or we could have this fighter jet.

Yeah, back in my Peace Corps days I calculated that the cost of building one nuclear-powered aircraft carrier -- forget manning, equipping and operating it -- would pay for Peace Corps' world-wide operations for 20 years.

So campaign for and vote for Hillary. She might actually make some of those smarter decisions.

/one can hope

Yeah given her record Hildabeast is just a farking genius. The peace corp? Please.

I also have a DD214 Honorable Discharge as a USAF E-5, too, and am equally proud of that service.

Anyway, yes, the Peace Corps. I was a graduate biologist and spent 3 years teaching itinerant farmers how to better feed their families: animal and crop science. I served the standard two years and then extended for another. It was the Tzedakah I set for myself. What have you ever done for anyone other than yourself?


while publicly lauding yourself is itself kind of douche-like, whatever.  you should be proud of all that.

however, then you take another train to douche-ville.  couldn't just say "i'm great & here's why" huh?
 
2013-08-01 12:49:03 PM  

alberta_beef: Um, Lockheed doesn't build the F-35, that's McDonnell-Douglas, same folks who make the F-18. Lockheed does have an interesting project in the works for compact fusion. If they pull that off, they'll own the world.  http://www.fusenet.eu/node/400


McDonnell-Douglas doesn't exist anymore after they merged with Boeing, who made the aircraft that lost out to the F-35.
 
2013-08-01 12:51:38 PM  
The cost will kill you two years before the weapons bay opens.
 
2013-08-01 02:10:55 PM  

Quantum Apostrophe: Every decade has its over budget and delayed all-in-one plane that's decried as a boondoggle at the time...

[www.vojsko.net image 850x637]


While true, previous boondoggles were at least confined to specific role aircraft/airframes. Since this is a Joint Services replacement, if it f@#$ up, it will be f@#$ing things up for several branches of service across the board.
 
2013-08-01 02:37:33 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: BHShaman: And NOT due to TopGun, I really miss the F14.

It's OK grandpa. Take a nap and feel better.
/F-14 was a hog.


Love the A-10 as well.

Guess I like aircraft that can bring their pilots home when hit.
 
2013-08-01 02:46:59 PM  
DoD just bought 70 more of the damned things.  But don't worry, they got a price cut.
 
2013-08-01 03:16:15 PM  

xxmedium: Quantum Apostrophe: Every decade has its over budget and delayed all-in-one plane that's decried as a boondoggle at the time...

[www.vojsko.net image 850x637]

While true, previous boondoggles were at least confined to specific role aircraft/airframes. Since this is a Joint Services replacement, if it f@#$ up, it will be f@#$ing things up for several branches of service across the board.


It's not for lack of trying. The TFX program tried to fark up several branches in the 60s and 70s, but luckily there were some people in the Pentagon who nipped it in the bud, and quickly developed the F-14 and F-15.
 
2013-08-01 04:32:37 PM  

inner ted: Stone Meadow: trailerpimp: Stone Meadow: Makh: Other than debt, we could solve all of our problems with less than a trillion dollars.  We could high speed rail the country, fix our bridges and have roads that recharge electric cars...Or we could have this fighter jet.

Yeah, back in my Peace Corps days I calculated that the cost of building one nuclear-powered aircraft carrier -- forget manning, equipping and operating it -- would pay for Peace Corps' world-wide operations for 20 years.

So campaign for and vote for Hillary. She might actually make some of those smarter decisions.

/one can hope

Yeah given her record Hildabeast is just a farking genius. The peace corp? Please.

I also have a DD214 Honorable Discharge as a USAF E-5, too, and am equally proud of that service.

Anyway, yes, the Peace Corps. I was a graduate biologist and spent 3 years teaching itinerant farmers how to better feed their families: animal and crop science. I served the standard two years and then extended for another. It was the Tzedakah I set for myself. What have you ever done for anyone other than yourself?

while publicly lauding yourself is itself kind of douche-like, whatever.  you should be proud of all that.

however, then you take another train to douche-ville.  couldn't just say "i'm great & here's why" huh?


He asked for it...he even said please.
 
2013-08-01 04:52:11 PM  

Science_Guy_3.14159: My favorite for the modern day fighters has to be the F-16, incredible maneuverability, pretty good speed but most importantly the only aircraft to cost less then it's predecessor


Cool plane, right up until this was found. I still would like one if it didn't come with the wing-or-cockpit-falling-off feature. Kind of like I would like a Bell AH-1 Cobra Helicopter (not a super cobra, just the old one).
 
2013-08-01 05:37:47 PM  

RaisingKane: JonBuck: What would have been the comparative costs of designing three different specialized aircraft instead? I doubt they saved any money following this approach.

I've had to sit through DAU's damned classes on acquisition programs.  You underestimate the scale of the bureaucracy involved.


you get a smart clicky for that one. If folks really knew...
 
2013-08-01 05:43:05 PM  

zarberg: I wonder if we can consider the trillions in debt a kind of insurance policy on Taiwan. I.E. if China ever invades Taiwan we just claim all debt invalid.


Right, instead of causing a war it might actually prevent one.  The Chinese have so many people (unmarried males) that they would risk a war with the US if all that was at stake was lives.
 
2013-08-01 05:50:41 PM  

Cyno01: Its simple. Wrack up trillions of dollars in debt (much of it to China) maintaining military superiority over the world. Start a war with China, win, cancel our debts, remain the most powerful nation on earth for free.


completely off topic but related to your post- I say we let Texas secede and then invade them for their oil. Problem solved. Also, this will attract some more money to the m/I complex, what with rebuilding and replacing all the military shiat we destroy in the process. Like a mini-Iraq, we can install democracy and help them build a better place for their children and their children's children...
God told me it's what he wanted.
Just leave Austin and greater Houston alone.
Blah blah blah ok I'll stop now.

/already took a precious 3 minutes to write it, so post it I will
 
2013-08-01 05:58:00 PM  

lewismarktwo: INeedAName: Cyno01: Its simple. Wrack up trillions of dollars in debt (much of it to China) maintaining military superiority over the world. Start a war with China, win, cancel our debts, remain the most powerful nation on earth for free.

And you know someone at the Pentagon has already discussed this option. Sadly, the amount of people we would have to kill for this to work would be in the 10s of millions. We would basically have to knock China back 100yrs on infrastructure and decimate their population which would leave them as the big, starvingest third world country on the planet. Just to cancel some irresponsible debt.

The US doesn't need to worry about its "irresponsible debt" to China.  It is literally non-material.  Boogety boo.


It's all an illusion, man. Whop bop a doo whop, a whop bam boom
 
2013-08-01 06:00:53 PM  

BHShaman: HotIgneous Intruder: BHShaman: And NOT due to TopGun, I really miss the F14.

It's OK grandpa. Take a nap and feel better.
/F-14 was a hog.

Love the A-10 as well.

Guess I like aircraft that can bring their pilots home when hit.


the A-10 was a bad mutha
 
2013-08-01 06:22:47 PM  

TheMysticS: BHShaman: HotIgneous Intruder: BHShaman: And NOT due to TopGun, I really miss the F14.

It's OK grandpa. Take a nap and feel better.
/F-14 was a hog.

Love the A-10 as well.

Guess I like aircraft that can bring their pilots home when hit.

the A-10 was a bad mutha


Shut 'yo mouth!
 
2013-08-02 07:38:18 AM  
Completely off-topic, but Dolphins just announced that Cena is keeping the belt in the next PPV to stay consistent with the "reality" television show Divas, where the Bellas become more distant to DB before dissing him completely for Cena. Vince thinks reality show programming is where the real money is for wrestling. So, promoting a reality show is the new reason for where wrestling story lines may go in the future. I had thought that the kayfab in the TNA story lines were bad, but new levels of horrible are now being explored by both franchises.
 
2013-08-02 07:39:02 AM  
Wrong thread, lol.
 
Displayed 117 of 117 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report