Skip to main content

In an attempt to deflect my thread on the Obamacare disaster, Crash posted, " I wonder why you never post a topic about the $400 billion dollar F35 fighter. pushed by the republicans. not wanted by any military agency. and to top it off... it doesn't even work!"

 

I'm slightly familiar with the project and did a bit of research.  The F-35 is a joint project amongst the Air Force, Navy and Marines with three variants for the three services -- regular fighter plane, an aircraft carrier capable craft and a short take and landing plane for Marine Amphibious Assault ships.

 

The program was funded by the US and its allies.  The partner nations are either NATO members or close U.S. allies, including United Kingdom, Israel, Italy, The Netherlands, Australia, Canada,
Norway, Denmark, and Turkey.

 

A word on weapons system costs, the $400 billion covers the cost of the entire program implementation.  That includes not just the cost to buy 2,445 planes, but all costs over 55 years.  That includes estimates for all repair parts, fuel, munitions, the cost to pay the pilots and ground crews, all the repair tools unique to the program, all the associated equipment from pilot suits, helmets, small arms carried by the pilots, everything! 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...in_F-35_Lightning_II

 

There are problems with the production program as documented in the DoDIG report:

http://www.dodig.mil/pubs/report_summary.cfm?id=5339

 

 

As to the services not desiring the plane, not true.

 

"The U.S. Air Force in its 2014 budget request seeks to buy more F-35 fighter jets, restock its inventory of precision munitions and slightly thin the ranks of active-duty airmen.

 

The Air Force stands to gain at least $4.65 billion under the Defense Department’s budget unveiled yesterday for the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1. The boost — the only year-over-year increase for any service — is part of a larger Pentagon strategy to shift emphasis from the ground wars of the past decade and toward threats in the Asia-Pacific region."

 

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2013/04...et-boost-more-f-35s/

 

This budget request was from the service, not a political add-on as is done at the DoD level, or at the Capitol, itself.

 

The navy is also considering more:

 

"...But Breaking Defense interviews with Navy and industry sources strongly suggest that the service has little appetite for another expensive development program and that the most likely candidate for the F/A-XX is, in fact, an upgraded F-35.

 

“We’re not chasing the next shiny object,” a Navy official told Breaking Defense. “We’re looking to what is the art of the possible with regard to affordable warfighting capability.”

 

So while the Navy is considering an all-new design for F/A-XX, he said, “the answer might be a continued buy of whatever legacy platforms are out there at the time.” And the only existing fighter that will still be in production in 2030, he acknowledged, will be the F-35.

 

The driver here isn’t some Navy desire for a sixth-generation super-plane: It’s the Navy’s need to replace Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets that will start reaching the end of their projected service life after 2025. F/A-XX is simply the Navy’s name for whatever aircraft comes next. The service’s Request For Information sent out to aerospace companies this spring explicitly solicited concepts – no one is at the stage of submitting actual proposals – both for “new design aircraft” and for “concepts derived from legacy aircraft.'"

http://breakingdefense.com/201...r-f-a-xx-initiative/

 

Again, a service study and request.

 

Japan has ordered the F-35 and Singapore and South Korea are considering a buy.

 

So, not working --No! Up and flying. Not desired by the service.  No!  They are ordering and fielding. One ally has purchased the craft and more are considering purchases. 

 

Problems with the program -- absolutely.  Show me an advanced technology program that doesn't have them.  Research the steam powered dynamite canon fielded in the Spanish-American war for a hoot!

 

I'm certain skeptics told Washington to not use those new fangled rifles, as the smooth bore muskets were more reliable.  Certainly, infantry didn't need a weapon that was accurate to 80 yards and could kill at 100. 

 

Fortunately, the few progressives of his day were Tories.  After the war, most were smart enough to be quite or shipped off to Canada. 

 

 

 

 

TRUTH -- THE NEW HATE SPEECH!

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

 
Jul. 15, 2012

Editorial observes that a new Government Accountability Office report shows that the F-35 and F-22 fighter jet projects have significant performance problems despite being grossly over budget; contends that the Pentagon must make sure that it spends every defense dollar wisely, particularly in light of impending budget cuts, and that the GAO report shows that it is far from that goal.

 

Nov. 29, 2012

Marine Corps' F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, still plagued by technological troubles after 12 years in development, will ultimately cost taxpayers a record $396 billion if the Pentagon sticks to its plan; jet is likely to become target for cost cutters, as analysts expect Pentagon budget to decline in next decade

 

Dec. 13, 2012

Canada says it will reconsider plans to buy 65 F-35 fighter jets after independent audit finds the sophisticated Lockheed Martin stealth planes would cost substantially more than the government had promised.

 

Feb. 23, 2013

Pentagon says it has grounded all new F-35 fighter jets made by Lockheed Martin after an inspection found a crack in a turbine blade in the engine of one of the planes; decision comes as the Pentagon estimates that it could spend as much as $396 billion to buy 2,456 jets by the late 2030s, but program is plagued by cost overruns and delays and could easily become a target for budget cuts

 

Feb. 28, 2013

Lt Gen Christopher Bogdan, who oversees building of new F-35 fighter jet, sharply criticizes main contractors Lockheed Martin and engine maker Pratt & Whitney for trying to 'squeeze every nickel' out of program; comment echoes Bogdan's earlier remarks suggesting poor relationship between Lockheed and the government threatened program.

 

Jul. 31, 2013

Defense Department announces agreement in principle to purchase 71 more F-35 fighter jets from Lockheed Martin; Pentagon officials say they will pay 4 percent less for 36 jets under new orders and 8 percent less than previous year's price; deal is said to be worth more than $7 billion.

 

Sep. 18, 2013

Dutch defense ministry, ending years of uncertainty, says it will replace its fleet of F-16 fighter jets with F-35s made by Lockheed Martin; will buy fewer than planned

 

Oct. 11, 2013

Pentagon announces decision to stop working on a conventional backup helmet for pilots of the new F-35 fighter jet and stick with a troubled, but improving, higher-tech model

 

yep, you can tell i just made it all up.. .and i can tell, you don't have a clue what you're talking about, again. not to mention, the maintenance on the planes will be more than the cost of the plane. heaven forbid someone read the new york times.

 

Originally Posted by direstraits:

That the thing costs more than the original estimate and has bugs to work out is common with new technology. 

____________________

so, by your own words... we should give "new technology" time to "work out"?

hypocritical much? and you need to work on that "reading comprehension"... how long were the F35s grounded for mechanical failures? and all this from a $400 billion dollar project? really? i'm sure it's all obama's fault.

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by direstraits:

That the thing costs more than the original estimate and has bugs to work out is common with new technology. 

____________________

so, by your own words... we should give "new technology" time to "work out"?

hypocritical much? and you need to work on that "reading comprehension"... how long were the F35s grounded for mechanical failures? and all this from a $400 billion dollar project? really? i'm sure it's all obama's fault.

If by putting "new technology" in quotes you are referring to the Obomacare website then I hate to tell you but a retail website is not "new technology" nor should it require time to "work out".

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

so, there are websites similar to the AHA website? sites built to handle the type of volume and the amount of linked information? really?  can you provide such a site?

Were they not aware of the volume beforehand? 

 

I would say that the cbssports website receives a ton of traffic in March streaming the NCAA bball tourney and I have never had any issues with it. That's just 1 off the top of my head. I am sure there are more.

 

Maybe they will figure it out but I doubt it as gov't has an incredibly poor track record of doing anything in an efficient manner.

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by direstraits:

That the thing costs more than the original estimate and has bugs to work out is common with new technology. 

____________________

so, by your own words... we should give "new technology" time to "work out"?

hypocritical much? and you need to work on that "reading comprehension"... how long were the F35s grounded for mechanical failures? and all this from a $400 billion dollar project? really? i'm sure it's all obama's fault.

_________________________________________________________________________

And, your point is?  As I stated, cutting edge technology usually involves delays.  When one deals with new unproved technology such a this stealth aircraft in three different variants and a headsup display in the helmet, I'd be surprised if we didn't have problems.  People with your mentality are the equivalent of those idiots that ordered horse cavalry to draw swords and attack machine guns. 

 

As to the cost, did up you read my statement?  A word on weapons system costs, the $400 billion covers the cost of the entire program implementation.  That includes not just the cost to buy 2,445 planes, but all costs over 55 years.  That includes estimates for all repair parts, fuel, munitions, the cost to pay the pilots and ground crews, all the repair tools unique to the program, all the associated equipment from pilot suits, helmets, small arms carried by the pilots, everything! 

 

Amortized on 55 years that is not an unreasonable cost. 

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

so, there are websites similar to the AHA website? sites built to handle the type of volume and the amount of linked information? really?  can you provide such a site?

___________________________________________

Amazon. com and Ebay.com are good examples of websites that provide high volume service. 

 

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

not even close.. people have to "upload" their information. not even a good caparison.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Have you ever used, either!  One must upload personal date to include name, address, email address, credit card data and other particulars when one orders from either.  I've used both, including a recent order on Ebay from the UK. 

 

The Healthcare.gov website is simply a combination of code writing for the software and hardware servers,  Most of the problem appears to be with the software -- its poorly written and buggy, with little protection of personal data from hackers.  You are demonstrating a certain IT ignorance.   

 

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

everyone who knows me, on these forums, just started laughing at you. i promise. now i KNOW you're as full of **** as a christmas goose!

______________________________________________

Those who know you, either make jokes about you, or insult you based on intelligence, like QD.  Now, ante up!

 

That must be a Christmas goose with really clean innards. 

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

have a great night. you've earned it, if from sheer comic relief.

 

i'd appreciate it, if you'd leave QD from any conversation you intend to have, with me.

_________________________________________________

So, Crash uses the crawdad defense when unable to answer a query -- he throws up his claws and jets off.

 

Wonder why he was upset with mention of QD -- the other leftie blogger who most resembles him in political beliefs and intellect. 

 

Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

have a great night. you've earned it, if from sheer comic relief.

 

i'd appreciate it, if you'd leave QD from any conversation you intend to have, with me.

_________________________________________________

So, Crash uses the crawdad defense when unable to answer a query -- he throws up his claws and jets off.

 

Wonder why he was upset with mention of QD -- the other leftie blogger who most resembles him in political beliefs and intellect. 

 

Freud would not be as harsh as you.
His observation would be that Crash suffers from the effects of "Celibacy Syndrome".

Much like BetrnU/Contendah.

Although not "self imposed"...such as the Monks of history, but brought about by ANY Female whom comes into contact with Crash...hears his blather...then would rather be with an aged Mongolian Goat...than be with Crash...

It frustrates him...

THUS! The often warped posts here.

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

listen, simpleton. i have no desire to talk to a person who insults we, with every post. then claims "insults are a sign of a weak mind and a lost argument".... by your own standards, you sir, are a pretentious douche. keep it classy, idiot.

___________________________________________________

Insults are most of your replies.  I have yet to receive an answer of worth from you on this thread.  Now, as to your manner in insult -- "douche" appears to be your main, if not only response.  Why you choose that particular word is revealing.  Is it misogyny, or have women disappointed you during your lifetime. 

 

Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

listen, simpleton. i have no desire to talk to a person who insults we, with every post. then claims "insults are a sign of a weak mind and a lost argument".... by your own standards, you sir, are a pretentious douche. keep it classy, idiot.

___________________________________________________

Insults are most of your replies.  I have yet to receive an answer of worth from you on this thread.  Now, as to your manner in insult -- "douche" appears to be your main, if not only response.  Why you choose that particular word is revealing.  Is it misogyny, or have women disappointed you during your lifetime. 

 

SEE PREVIOUS POST>>>>>

the forum idiot and the most pretentious person to ever grace these forums, don't like me... i must be doing something right! woo hoo!

as to the reference to my "disappointment in women"... you're making a bigger douche out of yourself. i didn't think that was possible. i answered each and every part of your your feeble attempt to explain away 400 billion dollars, all the while whining about the AHA website. i tried to explain to you the problems facing the website .. your answer "amazon and ebay" along with "my IT ignorance"... you don't have a clue what you're talking about and EVERYONE on these forums , that knows me personally, knows you don't have a clue. get a grip. go back to counting change in your drawer at mcdonalds and calling yourself an accountant.

Originally Posted by direstraits:

Run a long, Crash, you've made your incompetence on this thread known.  I explained the reasons for such a large amount and what it actually represents.  You, have added nothing to the thread,  You said you were thru with this thread, then stand by your word and go.

 

 

diredouchebag, at what point did you become the controller of the forums?

how about you stick to taking care of yourself and try NOT telling anyone else what to do?

 

how about you spend some time thinking about being a little less pretentious!

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
 

 

 

diredouchebag, at what point did you become the controller of the forums?

how about you stick to taking care of yourself and try NOT telling anyone else what to do?

 

how about you spend some time thinking about being a little less pretentious!

__________________________________________________

What an absolute piece of s* of a human being you are. You just can’t stand it when you’re wrong all the time.

Originally Posted by Jobe:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
 

 

 

diredouchebag, at what point did you become the controller of the forums?

how about you stick to taking care of yourself and try NOT telling anyone else what to do?

 

how about you spend some time thinking about being a little less pretentious!

__________________________________________________

What an absolute piece of s* of a human being you are. You just can’t stand it when you’re wrong all the time.

_______________

wow... how can you tell anything with your head so far up your ass?

no wonder your wife likes me best! ha!

as i've said repeatedly, you can lead a republican to fact, but you can't make them think.

it's evident in almost every post... you can show them all the facts and the reply will still be "it's all obama's fault". 

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Jobe:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
 

 

 

diredouchebag, at what point did you become the controller of the forums?

how about you stick to taking care of yourself and try NOT telling anyone else what to do?

 

how about you spend some time thinking about being a little less pretentious!

__________________________________________________

What an absolute piece of s* of a human being you are. You just can’t stand it when you’re wrong all the time.

_______________

wow... how can you tell anything with your head so far up your ass?

no wonder your wife likes me best! ha!

as i've said repeatedly, you can lead a republican to fact, but you can't make them think.

it's evident in almost every post... you can show them all the facts and the reply will still be "it's all obama's fault". 


"No wonder your wife likes me best" ???

What kinda' little boy, 2nd grader, kind of response is that?

Man, you have got to be the biggest retard I've ever come across...

What's next from you...Retard.

We await another laugh via your dumb a s s.

the funny thing is how you three project...

you call someone the things you fear you are/have become.

each and every one of you have hurled insults at every liberal, on these forums.

let someone prove you wrong or challenge you on some of your bull**** facts, and they become "retarded" or "disrespectful to women" or "lives in his parents basement"....

you three make me sick.... first, roland lives on the government handout program. it's a known fact... yet, he's on here crying about anyone else needing a little help...

then you've got jobe, who's threatened to whip me about two dozen times... i'll meet him anywhere, anytime.. .yet, i'm "retarded" because i won't post my name and address on the forums...

and then we've got ole dire... his biggest fear is he's not the "most interesting man in the world"...

and dire, no woman is interested in a pretentious douche... it's a common term, dire.... try google... you just may learn something.

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

dire, i make it a POINT to never insult anyone until they start slinging insults... take it for what you wish, but your insults have been coming for a while... an insult to all liberals is still an insult and you've made a career of it.

That's a crock. Every post you make is aimed at what your simple mind perceives as "rightwingnuts".

You invite "insults" because of your very hypocritical character.

I've heard stories of you, from people who know, and have come into contact with you.

Your the kind off braying ass I despise and have no qualms about calling you out on your lies.

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
what, dog? you never make typos? i'll bet you know what word i meant.

Was it this:

Caparison

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Jump to: navigation, search
Knight on a caparisoned horse

A caparison is a covering, or cloth, laid over a horse or other animal, especially a pack animal, or horse of state. In modern times, it is used mainly for decoration in parades and for historical reenactments. A similar term is horse-trapper.[1]The word is of Spanish origin, being derived from an augmentative form of the Latin word caput, "head".

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×