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 |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As
Raymond O'Hara wrote:
"Roger Conroy" wrote in message ... "Tiger" wrote in message ... Roger Conroy wrote: "Raymond O'Hara" wrote in message . .. "Jim Wilkins" wrote in message ... On Jun 10, 8:14 pm, Ian B MacLure wrote: the "have nots" are not in position to threaten the "haves" Iran Is not hearing you. Hugo Chavez & Putin do not believe you. Nigeria & Mexico are internally screwed up. Hell just this week a "have not," called Israel Said stop the nuke building or we will do it for you to Iran (a oil have). Sounds like a position to threat to me, And Wall street agreed, thus the price spike. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As
Raymond O'Hara wrote:
"Andrew Swallow" wrote in message ... Raymond O'Hara wrote: [snip] or maybe a new barbarian invasion or the south will try to secede again. OH NO! the sky might fall. French speaking Quebec may decide to leave. wars are won by spare parts and what you can replace. That is long wars. what other kind are there? "home before the leaves fall" popular saying in august 1914 6 Day ones. Hitler thought he had found a short war strategy. Churchill had other plans. Andrew Swallow |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As
"Raymond O'Hara" wrote in
: [snip] and you want to spend billions on pure fantasy speculation? who has anything anywhere near as good as what wer have? who is building up anything. its not the 1930s its not the cold war. so stop fighting WWII andWWIII, they aren't going to happen as you imagine. What Hairy Ray fails to comprehend is that folks with far more clue than he has have concluded he has **** for brains. IBM |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As
"Raymond O'Hara" wrote in news:aeudndUYX8-
: [snip] Still in a state of denial from the last war I see. IBM huh? do you mean WWII? or what? Pick one. Any one will do for you apparently. IBM |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As
"Andrew Swallow" wrote in message ... Raymond O'Hara wrote: "Andrew Swallow" wrote in message ... Raymond O'Hara wrote: [snip] or maybe a new barbarian invasion or the south will try to secede again. OH NO! the sky might fall. French speaking Quebec may decide to leave. wars are won by spare parts and what you can replace. That is long wars. what other kind are there? "home before the leaves fall" popular saying in august 1914 6 Day ones. Hitler thought he had found a short war strategy. Churchill had other plans. Andrew Swallow it was chamberlain who declared war on hitler. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As
"Tiger" wrote in message ... Raymond O'Hara wrote: "Roger Conroy" wrote in message ... "Tiger" wrote in message ... Roger Conroy wrote: "Raymond O'Hara" wrote in message ... "Jim Wilkins" wrote in message ... On Jun 10, 8:14 pm, Ian B MacLure wrote: the "have nots" are not in position to threaten the "haves" Iran Is not hearing you. Hugo Chavez & Putin do not believe you. Nigeria & Mexico are internally screwed up. Hell just this week a "have not," called Israel Said stop the nuke building or we will do it for you to Iran (a oil have). Sounds like a position to threat to me, And Wall street agreed, thus the price spike. they are have nots? they are 3 of the worlds largest oil producers. russia and venezuela are all set for water too. and iran has plenty at the moment. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As
Raymond O'Hara wrote:
"Tiger" wrote in message ... Raymond O'Hara wrote: "Roger Conroy" wrote in message .. . "Tiger" wrote in message ... Roger Conroy wrote: "Raymond O'Hara" wrote in message t... "Jim Wilkins" wrote in message ... On Jun 10, 8:14 pm, Ian B MacLure wrote: the "have nots" are not in position to threaten the "haves" Iran Is not hearing you. Hugo Chavez & Putin do not believe you. Nigeria & Mexico are internally screwed up. Hell just this week a "have not," called Israel Said stop the nuke building or we will do it for you to Iran (a oil have). Sounds like a position to threat to me, And Wall street agreed, thus the price spike. they are have nots? they are 3 of the worlds largest oil producers. russia and venezuela are all set for water too. and iran has plenty at the moment. The paragraph "is" discussing Haves. Read again.... |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As
On Jun 10, 10:03*pm, Tiger wrote:
g lof2 wrote: On Jun 10, 5:32 pm, Tiger wrote: William Black wrote: "Mike" wrote in message .... Inside the Air Force Next-gen bomber must be adequately funded YOUNG: GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As --------------------------------- Given current wars they'd be better off buying a load of Douglas A-1 Skyraiders and a few WWII twin engined bombers. What they need is something very reliable that lugs a largish bombload around and can absorb ground fire while dropping it in smallish quantities with great precision. What they don't need right now is large complex jet fighter/bombers that are designed to fight a major European war. In other words."Why pay 2008 Corvette money to do a job your old 1988 F150 could do?" I'm sure there plenty of stuff in the boneyard that fits the bill. A-10's, A6's, A-4's, Phantoms, A-7's. Old stuff, but to drop bombs in zones with no Mig threats they work. I think the A-1 may be pushing the concept a bit, but I hear you..... Until the run into the a battery on the latest SAMs , ot a Nex-Gen Stealth fighter, which are design to handle the latest fighters. At which point they become so much flying scrap metal. And remember, the reason we have air conreol is because we have the best fighter to knock the other sides fighter out before the get to shoot at our troops. Frankly what I read in the story reminds me of the old warning about fighting the last war, and not planning for the next. The bad guys of late seem to prefer Ied's & rpg's to Radar guided SAm sites... Nor does most of the world *have the $$$ for next gen Stealth fighters. Even our Allies can bearly put a decent force together. The topic point was spending money on a F22 air superiorty fighter. A job it does well but there is no air threat. That makes it useless when the current need for the airforce is to supply CAS. The F35 which will do, said mission is years away. If your planning for the next war, Nethier plane is *really what you want.- Hide quoted text - The problem with your argument is your assumion that there cannot be future threat to US air superiority. The key to US military power over the last sixty years was your control of the air. It is important for us to maintain that superiority if we are to remain the top military power. Therefore we must build enough F-22 to assure we retain that power while the production lines are still open, else it will become far more expensive to re open the production lines later when it becomes necessary. - Show quoted text - |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As
g lof2 wrote:
On Jun 10, 10:03 pm, Tiger wrote: g lof2 wrote: On Jun 10, 5:32 pm, Tiger wrote: William Black wrote: "Mike" wrote in message ... Inside the Air Force Next-gen bomber must be adequately funded YOUNG: GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As --------------------------------- Given current wars they'd be better off buying a load of Douglas A-1 Skyraiders and a few WWII twin engined bombers. What they need is something very reliable that lugs a largish bombload around and can absorb ground fire while dropping it in smallish quantities with great precision. What they don't need right now is large complex jet fighter/bombers that are designed to fight a major European war. In other words."Why pay 2008 Corvette money to do a job your old 1988 F150 could do?" I'm sure there plenty of stuff in the boneyard that fits the bill. A-10's, A6's, A-4's, Phantoms, A-7's. Old stuff, but to drop bombs in zones with no Mig threats they work. I think the A-1 may be pushing the concept a bit, but I hear you..... Until the run into the a battery on the latest SAMs , ot a Nex-Gen Stealth fighter, which are design to handle the latest fighters. At which point they become so much flying scrap metal. And remember, the reason we have air conreol is because we have the best fighter to knock the other sides fighter out before the get to shoot at our troops. Frankly what I read in the story reminds me of the old warning about fighting the last war, and not planning for the next. The bad guys of late seem to prefer Ied's & rpg's to Radar guided SAm sites... Nor does most of the world have the $$$ for next gen Stealth fighters. Even our Allies can bearly put a decent force together. The topic point was spending money on a F22 air superiorty fighter. A job it does well but there is no air threat. That makes it useless when the current need for the airforce is to supply CAS. The F35 which will do, said mission is years away. If your planning for the next war, Nethier plane is really what you want.- Hide quoted text - The problem with your argument is your assumion that there cannot be future threat to US air superiority. The key to US military power over the last sixty years was your control of the air. It is important for us to maintain that superiority if we are to remain the top military power. Therefore we must build enough F-22 to assure we retain that power while the production lines are still open, else it will become far more expensive to re open the production lines later when it becomes necessary. - Show quoted text - Going back to the start of this " GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As." We are not exactly facing any Battles of Britian from anybody or collection of somebodies. The F-22 is a high end Air superority fighter. Great! And we are going to buy about 180 of them. At something like $100 Million each. About the price of 4 F-15's. We never intended for a whole airforce of them. The volume plane is the F35. Most our allies or enemies don't even have 180 planes in there whole air force; let alone fighters. You might like to refuel those F22's? Where are going to get $$$ for tankers? You might like Transport troops and parts for your F-22's? Where's the money to upgrade your airlift that has racking up flight time running back & forth to Kabul & baghdad??? I like the F-22 as well. But we are not spending the whole DOD budget on it, Hoping to re-fight Eagle-Day..... |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As
"Tiger" wrote in message ... g lof2 wrote: On Jun 10, 10:03 pm, Tiger wrote: g lof2 wrote: On Jun 10, 5:32 pm, Tiger wrote: William Black wrote: "Mike" wrote in message ... Inside the Air Force Next-gen bomber must be adequately funded YOUNG: GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As --------------------------------- Given current wars they'd be better off buying a load of Douglas A-1 Skyraiders and a few WWII twin engined bombers. What they need is something very reliable that lugs a largish bombload around and can absorb ground fire while dropping it in smallish quantities with great precision. What they don't need right now is large complex jet fighter/bombers that are designed to fight a major European war. In other words."Why pay 2008 Corvette money to do a job your old 1988 F150 could do?" I'm sure there plenty of stuff in the boneyard that fits the bill. A-10's, A6's, A-4's, Phantoms, A-7's. Old stuff, but to drop bombs in zones with no Mig threats they work. I think the A-1 may be pushing the concept a bit, but I hear you..... Until the run into the a battery on the latest SAMs , ot a Nex-Gen Stealth fighter, which are design to handle the latest fighters. At which point they become so much flying scrap metal. And remember, the reason we have air conreol is because we have the best fighter to knock the other sides fighter out before the get to shoot at our troops. Frankly what I read in the story reminds me of the old warning about fighting the last war, and not planning for the next. The bad guys of late seem to prefer Ied's & rpg's to Radar guided SAm sites... Nor does most of the world have the $$$ for next gen Stealth fighters. Even our Allies can bearly put a decent force together. The topic point was spending money on a F22 air superiorty fighter. A job it does well but there is no air threat. That makes it useless when the current need for the airforce is to supply CAS. The F35 which will do, said mission is years away. If your planning for the next war, Nethier plane is really what you want.- Hide quoted text - The problem with your argument is your assumion that there cannot be future threat to US air superiority. The key to US military power over the last sixty years was your control of the air. It is important for us to maintain that superiority if we are to remain the top military power. Therefore we must build enough F-22 to assure we retain that power while the production lines are still open, else it will become far more expensive to re open the production lines later when it becomes necessary. - Show quoted text - Going back to the start of this " GIVEN CURRENT WARS, F-35s ARE BETTER CHOICE THAN MORE F-22As." We are not exactly facing any Battles of Britian from anybody or collection of somebodies. The F-22 is a high end Air superority fighter. Great! And we are going to buy about 180 of them. At something like $100 Million each. About the price of 4 F-15's. We never intended for a whole airforce of them. The volume plane is the F35. Most our allies or enemies don't even have 180 planes in there whole air force; let alone fighters. You might like to refuel those F22's? Where are going to get $$$ for tankers? You might like Transport troops and parts for your F-22's? Where's the money to upgrade your airlift that has racking up flight time running back & forth to Kabul & baghdad??? I like the F-22 as well. But we are not spending the whole DOD budget on it, Hoping to re-fight Eagle-Day..... Anyone who bases their armaments aquisition programme on CURRENT wars is an idiot and is doomed to be on the losing side in the NEXT war. Major equipment is intended to be used for about 20-30 years. Take the example of the "Teens" generation of US fighter aircraft. They came off the drawing boards in the 1970's and are now at the end of their useful life as first world front-line equipment. It really is not acceptable for a 1st world fighter pilot to be flying the same plane that his father did. "Shock and Awe" only works if you have a clear margin of superiority over the enemy. Any leader who sends his forces into battle equipped at parity to the enemy should be shot for gross incompetence. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Logger Choice | Jamie Denton | Soaring | 10 | July 6th 07 03:13 PM |
Headset Choice | jad | Piloting | 14 | August 9th 06 07:59 AM |
Which DC Headphone is best choice? | [email protected] | Piloting | 65 | June 27th 06 11:50 PM |
!! HELP GAMERS CHOICE | Dave | Military Aviation | 2 | September 3rd 04 04:48 PM |
!!HELP GAMERS CHOICE | Dave | Soaring | 0 | September 3rd 04 12:01 AM |