![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:26:12 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote: "Scott Ferrin" wrote in message .. . I agree. On the other hand China has close to 300 Flankers and counting, have intriduce the AA-12 into service, and are working on acquiring the J-10. I have no doubts that Russia would offer the KS-172 to China if they asked. I wouldn't want to face a Su-30 with THAT thing in an F-15. Again, I'm not saying it's impossible I'm just saying that the cost in pilots and airframes lost would be higher. This is a rhetorical question but is it worth losing F-15s, F-35s, and their pilots to save a few bucks by not buying the F-22? You make an excellent case for the reliable airborn weapons platform designated F/A-18E. The USAF could do well by tabbing to USN's application of AFRL's parts and software reliability technology. I wonder if the pirates at China Lake could make the F/A-18x weapons data port USAF compatable rapidly. The F/A-18E is a reliable platform true, but I'd be surprised if there is a pilot out there who wouldn't rather be in an F-15K or I if they had to go air to air. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Scott Ferrin" wrote in message ... On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:26:12 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "Scott Ferrin" wrote in message .. . I agree. On the other hand China has close to 300 Flankers and counting, have intriduce the AA-12 into service, and are working on acquiring the J-10. I have no doubts that Russia would offer the KS-172 to China if they asked. I wouldn't want to face a Su-30 with THAT thing in an F-15. Again, I'm not saying it's impossible I'm just saying that the cost in pilots and airframes lost would be higher. This is a rhetorical question but is it worth losing F-15s, F-35s, and their pilots to save a few bucks by not buying the F-22? You make an excellent case for the reliable airborn weapons platform designated F/A-18E. The USAF could do well by tabbing to USN's application of AFRL's parts and software reliability technology. I wonder if the pirates at China Lake could make the F/A-18x weapons data port USAF compatable rapidly. The F/A-18E is a reliable platform true, but I'd be surprised if there is a pilot out there who wouldn't rather be in an F-15K or I if they had to go air to air. The F-15's politics have taken a serious turn for the worse. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:02:52 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote: "Scott Ferrin" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:26:12 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "Scott Ferrin" wrote in message .. . I agree. On the other hand China has close to 300 Flankers and counting, have intriduce the AA-12 into service, and are working on acquiring the J-10. I have no doubts that Russia would offer the KS-172 to China if they asked. I wouldn't want to face a Su-30 with THAT thing in an F-15. Again, I'm not saying it's impossible I'm just saying that the cost in pilots and airframes lost would be higher. This is a rhetorical question but is it worth losing F-15s, F-35s, and their pilots to save a few bucks by not buying the F-22? You make an excellent case for the reliable airborn weapons platform designated F/A-18E. The USAF could do well by tabbing to USN's application of AFRL's parts and software reliability technology. I wonder if the pirates at China Lake could make the F/A-18x weapons data port USAF compatable rapidly. The F/A-18E is a reliable platform true, but I'd be surprised if there is a pilot out there who wouldn't rather be in an F-15K or I if they had to go air to air. The F-15's politics have taken a serious turn for the worse. I know I bitch about political stupidity a lot myself, but fortunatley politics aren't the be-all and end-all. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Scott Ferrin" wrote in message ... On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:02:52 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "Scott Ferrin" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:26:12 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "Scott Ferrin" wrote in message .. . I agree. On the other hand China has close to 300 Flankers and counting, have intriduce the AA-12 into service, and are working on acquiring the J-10. I have no doubts that Russia would offer the KS-172 to China if they asked. I wouldn't want to face a Su-30 with THAT thing in an F-15. Again, I'm not saying it's impossible I'm just saying that the cost in pilots and airframes lost would be higher. This is a rhetorical question but is it worth losing F-15s, F-35s, and their pilots to save a few bucks by not buying the F-22? You make an excellent case for the reliable airborn weapons platform designated F/A-18E. The USAF could do well by tabbing to USN's application of AFRL's parts and software reliability technology. I wonder if the pirates at China Lake could make the F/A-18x weapons data port USAF compatable rapidly. The F/A-18E is a reliable platform true, but I'd be surprised if there is a pilot out there who wouldn't rather be in an F-15K or I if they had to go air to air. The F-15's politics have taken a serious turn for the worse. I know I bitch about political stupidity a lot myself, but fortunatley politics aren't the be-all and end-all. All aviation is politics and the F-15 survives on Gephardt's vote. The USAF has less options than they did last Summer. I personally believe an F/A-18x buy would be symbolic of why dishonest management leads to humble pie. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Tarver Engineering wrote: All aviation is politics and the F-15 survives on Gephardt's vote. The USAF has less options than they did last Summer. I personally believe an F/A-18x buy would be symbolic of why dishonest management leads to humble pie. Pardon my ignorance, but isn't he F/A-18E/F managed by the same people that manage the F-15? Aren't they both built in St. Louis? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Michael Zaharis" wrote in message ... Tarver Engineering wrote: All aviation is politics and the F-15 survives on Gephardt's vote. The USAF has less options than they did last Summer. I personally believe an F/A-18x buy would be symbolic of why dishonest management leads to humble pie. Pardon my ignorance, but isn't he F/A-18E/F managed by the same people that manage the F-15? Aren't they both built in St. Louis? I am not claiming there is any ethical problem with the F-15's management. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Tarver Engineering wrote: "Michael Zaharis" wrote in message ... Tarver Engineering wrote: All aviation is politics and the F-15 survives on Gephardt's vote. The USAF has less options than they did last Summer. I personally believe an F/A-18x buy would be symbolic of why dishonest management leads to humble pie. Pardon my ignorance, but isn't he F/A-18E/F managed by the same people that manage the F-15? Aren't they both built in St. Louis? I am not claiming there is any ethical problem with the F-15's management. Then why is the F-15 in worse shape, politically, as mentioned in your earlier post? Not disagreeing, just trying to understand. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Tarver Engineering wrote: "Michael Zaharis" wrote in message ... Tarver Engineering wrote: All aviation is politics and the F-15 survives on Gephardt's vote. The USAF has less options than they did last Summer. I personally believe an F/A-18x buy would be symbolic of why dishonest management leads to humble pie. Pardon my ignorance, but isn't he F/A-18E/F managed by the same people that manage the F-15? Aren't they both built in St. Louis? I am not claiming there is any ethical problem with the F-15's management. Then why is the F-15 in worse shape, politically, than the F/A-18, as mentioned in your earlier post? Not disagreeing, just trying to understand. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|