![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Man, this attribution fell apart.
"EB Jet" wrote in message ... "EB Jet" wrote in message ... On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 09:35:24 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "Lyle" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 15:37:19 -0700, Scott Ferrin wrote: On 26 Mar 2004 10:17:09 GMT, (MLenoch) wrote: Has the configuration and mission been publicized for the FB-22 as contrasted to the F/A-22? The press has written of the two, but I don't recall the descriptions and differences of the bomber aspect. Thx in advance, VL So far from what I've read it's becoming a PR disaster. The USAF needs to be crystal clear what they are talking about as the clueless politicians are already getting the whole mess confused and whining that in order to put the "A" in "F/A-22" it's going to cost $11 billion additional dollars. even the F-15A and F-14A were able to drop bombs from the start, even though they may not have had the best delivery system in the world. How hard would it be to design a external stealthy bombay to put under the wings, i mean if your going to spend $11 billion dollars you might as well design a replacement for the F-15E. And you could also put the external weapons bay on the JSF. And at only $329 million each, the fighter version is such a bargain. ![]() (GAO) And most that sky high price is because they keep slashing numbers. No, most of the sky high price is a direct result of losing configuration control; the excessive R&D is Peter Principle driven. Did you know that Lockheed's winning entry to be the YF-22 would not even fly? I think the taxpayer would have been better off to have let the contract to GD. You'd think the politicians would have figured that out by now but noooooooo. "We can't afford 1000 $100 million planes, cut it to 500. The airplane has no mission and even if we bought 1000 of them the flyaway price with no R&D is $110 million a copy. WHAT??? We can't afford 500 $170 million planes. Cut it to 250. WHAT!!!!! What the hell is the matter with them, we can't afford 250 $300 million planes." They'll never figure out that R&D and EMD are fixed costs. Even Fisher Price couldn't get it through their heads. They haven't seemed to figure out that the current flyaway cost is FAR less than the $300 million figure being tossed around. A La B-2 no doubt...... Right now we could have had 50 conventional B-2s for the same price, if the F-22 had been cancelled before the prototype. Agreed...Maybe even more. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|