Goodbye F/A-22!

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 21:25:10 +0300, noname wrote:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon (news - web sites) may have to scrap
its premier fighter jet program to help pay for the war in Iraq (news -
web sites), Sen. John McCain, an influential member of the Armed
Services Committee, said on Sunday.

"It's obvious that we're paying a heavy price, I think, for not having
had enough troops there from the beginning," the Arizona Republican said
on NBC's "Meet the Press."


But hey, we're "transformational" don't ya know? I've come to the
conclusion that "transformational" is politic-speak for "we'll do
whatever the hell we want no matter how it short-changes the guy in
the field and we're right".

The thing that is truely disgusting about the whole thing (the war) is
that the terrorists are right. Bloody us a little and we run home
like a little Chihuahua who got it's ass handed to it by a hamster.
Granted it's just a CNN poll but one the other day showed the majority
of those taking the vote thought we ought to withdraw from Iraq and
today's majority 68% say we shouldn't be in Iraq. No doubt the
terrorists are reading the same polls with glee. F----ing sickening.


What the hell does it take people before you'll stand up for what's
right instead of running home to hide under the blankets and hoping
the boogey man won't come to call?


No doubt that same majority will vote Kerry in come November thinking
that somehow everything will be better. Well we'll deserve everything
that comes of it. (rant over. ndtwemdaaatdwtft)

"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 21:25:10 +0300, noname wrote:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon (news - web sites) may have to scrap
its premier fighter jet program to help pay for the war in Iraq (news -
web sites), Sen. John McCain, an influential member of the Armed
Services Committee, said on Sunday.

"It's obvious that we're paying a heavy price, I think, for not having
had enough troops there from the beginning," the Arizona Republican said
on NBC's "Meet the Press."


But hey, we're "transformational" don't ya know? I've come to the
conclusion that "transformational" is politic-speak for "we'll do
whatever the hell we want no matter how it short-changes the guy in
the field and we're right".

Perhaps what you wrote can be formed into the F-22 motto, Ferrin. The
fighter mafia really screwed the pooch on this one. Being split across the
2000 production break did not help either. The whole F-22 mess has been
like watching a man play soliare with a deck of 51.

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:21:09 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 21:25:10 +0300, noname wrote:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon (news - web sites) may have to scrap
its premier fighter jet program to help pay for the war in Iraq (news -
web sites), Sen. John McCain, an influential member of the Armed
Services Committee, said on Sunday.

"It's obvious that we're paying a heavy price, I think, for not having
had enough troops there from the beginning," the Arizona Republican said
on NBC's "Meet the Press."


But hey, we're "transformational" don't ya know? I've come to the
conclusion that "transformational" is politic-speak for "we'll do
whatever the hell we want no matter how it short-changes the guy in
the field and we're right".

Perhaps what you wrote can be formed into the F-22 motto, Ferrin. The
fighter mafia really screwed the pooch on this one. Being split across the
2000 production break did not help either. The whole F-22 mess has been
like watching a man play soliare with a deck of 51.


You are SO predictable.

"rant over. ndtwemdaaatdwtft"

No Doubt Tarver Will Eqaute My Disgust At Average Americans To
Disapopointment With The F-22 Thing.

"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:21:09 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 21:25:10 +0300, noname wrote:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon (news - web sites) may have to
scrap
its premier fighter jet program to help pay for the war in Iraq
(news -
web sites), Sen. John McCain, an influential member of the Armed
Services Committee, said on Sunday.

"It's obvious that we're paying a heavy price, I think, for not having
had enough troops there from the beginning," the Arizona Republican
said
on NBC's "Meet the Press."


But hey, we're "transformational" don't ya know? I've come to the
conclusion that "transformational" is politic-speak for "we'll do
whatever the hell we want no matter how it short-changes the guy in
the field and we're right".

Perhaps what you wrote can be formed into the F-22 motto, Ferrin. The
fighter mafia really screwed the pooch on this one. Being split across
the
2000 production break did not help either. The whole F-22 mess has been
like watching a man play soliare with a deck of 51.


You are SO predictable.

The unified wave therom and probabilities is my game.

Reliability - Availability - Revenue

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 13:32:38 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:21:09 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 21:25:10 +0300, noname wrote:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon (news - web sites) may have to
scrap
its premier fighter jet program to help pay for the war in Iraq
(news -
web sites), Sen. John McCain, an influential member of the Armed
Services Committee, said on Sunday.

"It's obvious that we're paying a heavy price, I think, for not having
had enough troops there from the beginning," the Arizona Republican
said
on NBC's "Meet the Press."


But hey, we're "transformational" don't ya know? I've come to the
conclusion that "transformational" is politic-speak for "we'll do
whatever the hell we want no matter how it short-changes the guy in
the field and we're right".

Perhaps what you wrote can be formed into the F-22 motto, Ferrin. The
fighter mafia really screwed the pooch on this one. Being split across
the
2000 production break did not help either. The whole F-22 mess has been
like watching a man play soliare with a deck of 51.


You are SO predictable.

The unified wave therom and probabilities is my game.

Reliability - Availability - Revenue



Pavlov made a dog drooling predictable so is your response suppose to
impress me?


I'll conceed one one point with a qualifier. Our ongoing fued hasn't
ever been WOULD the F-22 be cancelled but SHOULD it. That being said,
I still maintain (as does the USAF) that the F-22 is the best of the
available choices. The F-22 as an aircraft that is. As a *program*
meaning mainly the the way it's being managed, funded, scheduled etc.
it looks to have all the finesse of a monkey trying to **** a
football. I hope for the sake of the pilots who'll have to fight that
we get it but who knows what will happen.

"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 13:32:38 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:21:09 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 21:25:10 +0300, noname
wrote:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon (news - web sites) may have to
scrap
its premier fighter jet program to help pay for the war in
Iraq(news -
web sites), Sen. John McCain, an influential member of the Armed
Services Committee, said on Sunday.

"It's obvious that we're paying a heavy price, I think, for not
having
had enough troops there from the beginning," the Arizona Republican
said
on NBC's "Meet the Press."


But hey, we're "transformational" don't ya know? I've come to the
conclusion that "transformational" is politic-speak for "we'll do
whatever the hell we want no matter how it short-changes the guy in
the field and we're right".

Perhaps what you wrote can be formed into the F-22 motto, Ferrin. The
fighter mafia really screwed the pooch on this one. Being split
across the
2000 production break did not help either. The whole F-22 mess has
been
like watching a man play soliare with a deck of 51.


You are SO predictable.

The unified wave therom and probabilities is my game.

Reliability - Availability - Revenue



Pavlov made a dog drooling predictable so is your response suppose to
impress me?

Just because what I have always posted about the F-22 has turned out to have
always been true does not change my tendancy to post it.

I'll conceed one one point with a qualifier. Our ongoing fued hasn't
ever been WOULD the F-22 be cancelled but SHOULD it.

The F-22 should have been cancelled in 1998. The question of will the F-22
be cancelled is still open.

That being said,
I still maintain (as does the USAF) that the F-22 is the best of the
available choices. The F-22 as an aircraft that is.

In for a penny, in for a pound ...

I don't see the Pentagon buying that and McCain has reason to be proud of
USN's airplane procurement right now.

As a *program*
meaning mainly the the way it's being managed, funded, scheduled etc.
it looks to have all the finesse of a monkey trying to **** a
football.

Wasn't there a lune CF-18 pilot aound ram by that name?

I hope for the sake of the pilots who'll have to fight that
we get it but who knows what will happen.

Why? For what?

Pavlov made a dog drooling predictable so is your response suppose to
impress me?

Just because what I have always posted about the F-22 has turned out to have
always been true does not change my tendancy to post it.


Cancelled doesn't always equate to "bad". Nor does poorly managed
mean the platform in question sucks. The pilots who acutally FLY the
F-22 and have flown the F-22 like it better. Are they delusional?
The USAF has fought tooth and nail to get it. Are they not qualified
to determine what they need? Who is more qualified to decide what the
air force needs; a general who has to run the wing and fight the
fight, or a politician who doesn't even know the X-35 was suppose to
be the F-24? THAT is a scarey thought. I heard the annoucment.
Sounded like Barney from the Simpsons ". . .so what's it going to be
called? 'Duh. . .the F-35?'"


Oh yeah, and I still haven't seen any strakes.





I'll conceed one one point with a qualifier. Our ongoing fued hasn't
ever been WOULD the F-22 be cancelled but SHOULD it.

The F-22 should have been cancelled in 1998. The question of will the F-22
be cancelled is still open.

That being said,
I still maintain (as does the USAF) that the F-22 is the best of the
available choices. The F-22 as an aircraft that is.

In for a penny, in for a pound ...

I don't see the Pentagon buying that and McCain has reason to be proud of
USN's airplane procurement right now.



Proud that the USN has that dog of a "Super" Hornet? More like Cheney
should be kicking himself in the ass for shutting down the Tomcat
production line. The so-called "Super" Hornet now has to fill the
role of whatver it is it does when it was only intended as an interim
fighter. Seeing how in the end it will likely be used more for
tanking and EW than air combat it should be obvious that it's lacking
in that particular area.





As a *program*
meaning mainly the the way it's being managed, funded, scheduled etc.
it looks to have all the finesse of a monkey trying to **** a
football.

Wasn't there a lune CF-18 pilot aound ram by that name?


I don't know. It wouldn't surprise me. First time I heard the saying
I about fell out of my chair but it *does* get the point across :-)





I hope for the sake of the pilots who'll have to fight that
we get it but who knows what will happen.

Why? For what?


China. They've already got Flankers with AA-12s. What is an F-15
going to do when it comes up against a Flanker with KS-172s? (Which
China is trying to get from Russia.). It would be like shooting the
proverbial fish in a barrel.

"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
But hey, we're "transformational" don't ya know? I've come to the
conclusion that "transformational" is politic-speak for "we'll do
whatever the hell we want no matter how it short-changes the guy in
the field and we're right".

The thing that is truely disgusting about the whole thing (the war) is
that the terrorists are right. Bloody us a little and we run home
like a little Chihuahua who got it's ass handed to it by a hamster.
Granted it's just a CNN poll but one the other day showed the majority
of those taking the vote thought we ought to withdraw from Iraq and
today's majority 68% say we shouldn't be in Iraq.

It's part of how media works these days - when there is no major news, minor
news are reported as major news, and things in public can get blown out of
proportions.

Bit of a same is going on with F-22. Although the program has seen some
difficulties, I've never thought there was much real ground to cancel it,
but some people have speculated about it or pushing for it for years and
after much repetition, message has been going through...will be
psychologically interesting to see whether the opponents of the program
really do prevail.

But hey, we're "transformational" don't ya know? I've come to the
conclusion that "transformational" is politic-speak for "we'll do
whatever the hell we want no matter how it short-changes the guy in
the field and we're right".

I'm inclined to agree. I think there is no real concept of what the
transformed military will look like, only that it will manage and share
information better ... maybe.

R / John

"John Carrier" wrote in message
...
But hey, we're "transformational" don't ya know? I've come to the
conclusion that "transformational" is politic-speak for "we'll do
whatever the hell we want no matter how it short-changes the guy in
the field and we're right".

I'm inclined to agree. I think there is no real concept of what the
transformed military will look like, only that it will manage and share
information better ... maybe.

While I hate the overuse of the word, there is plenty of merit to the
concept, and the increased quality, scope, and distribution of information
as it applies to situational awareness is not only of great future promise,
but is also yielding benefits *now*. Examples of systems in current use
abound, from the USMC's datalinking of its AV-8B's Lightning targeting pod
imagery to ground combat HQ's during OIF to the use of digital C3I systems
in Army maneuver units up through the corps level and down through (at
present) the BTF or BCT levels. I have no doubt whatsoever that we are
better at desseminating information more rapidly today to the military
commanders who have to make decisions at all levels than we were ten years
ago. In 1996 I participated in my first division level Warfighter exercise,
and we were doing everything pretty much the same we had for the last thirty
or fourty years in terms of battle tracking; but by 1999 and 2000, when that
same division performed back-to-back corps level WFX's, we were utilizing
digital command and control packages that really did improve our SA, and
that of our subordinate units. Of course, achieving a more "network centric"
joint force is not the only transformational goal.

In regards to what the final transformed force will "look like"...it won't.
Look like anything, that is. Why? Because transformation is an open-ended
process; it will result in continuous evolution of the forces to face the
emerging and evolving threats. At least that is what DoD says:
(http://www.oft.osd.mil/library/libra...StrategyDoc1.p
df)

Brooks


R / John