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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"Denyav" wrote in message ... But they're not. The military has cancelled stuff before that they wanted but were not living up to their promises. The A-12, Sgt, York, and TSSAM come to mind. Now even Air Force wants to get rid of Jurassicfighter. It was aready too late for cancellation in year 2001,thats the only reason why it survived up to now. Georgia pork is the only thing keeping the jurassic turd alive. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Mary Shafer" wrote in message ... On 4 Jan 2004 14:13:53 -0800, (Henry J. Cobb) wrote: http://globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040104-f-22.htm "They're just trying to find a role for this plane because they've sunk so much money into it," Riccioni said. Ed's a nice guy, but he's spent his lifetime advocating light-weight fighters. He was an original member of the LWF mafia, back in the pre-YF-12/YF-17 days. He's just a little biased on the subject. "Honest" is the word, Mary. The mix will still be big/small, is we build the robot flock to run with the F-18. I don't see any indication that USAF is prepared to make a COTS procurement, at this time and mil-spec procurement is "expired". |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Denyav" wrote in message ... They're just trying to find a role for this plane because they've sunk so much money into it," Riccioni said. I think EF-22 could be a perfect ECM plane,but if everything else fails we have still Smithsonian for the Jurassicfighter. Lockmart did things a little differently with the F-22 development and in doing so validated the old school way. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 09:00:26 -0800, Mary Shafer
wrote: On 4 Jan 2004 14:13:53 -0800, (Henry J. Cobb) wrote: http://globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040104-f-22.htm "They're just trying to find a role for this plane because they've sunk so much money into it," Riccioni said. Ed's a nice guy, but he's spent his lifetime advocating light-weight fighters. He was an original member of the LWF mafia, back in the pre-YF-12/YF-17 days. He's just a little biased on the subject. The combination of Riccioni, Pearson and a clueless reporter leaves the entire article garbled into senselessness for anyone in the fighter business. How can they be trying to "find a role" for an airplane that has been, from the first release of RFP, a dedicated "air dominance fighter" replacement for the F-15? What's so damning about initial 1-v-1 engagements with F-15s in which the Raptor starts in trail or the Eagle starts in trail--these are standard 1-v-1 setups. You will probably also see shoulder to shoulder same way and shoulder to shoulder opposing initial setups. Riccioni's comments on A/A missile failures read like someone who's been in a time warp since the '70s. And Pearson's fumbling comments about the effectiveness of stealth indicate a possible Rip Van Winkle period during Desert Storm. Don't know that we could accuse Riccioni of being LWF Mafia, it sounds like he was much more Eagle than Viper and definitely not F-5 over F-4. The Mafia were much more centered on the operational side of the house than development. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message ... On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 09:00:26 -0800, Mary Shafer wrote: On 4 Jan 2004 14:13:53 -0800, (Henry J. Cobb) wrote: http://globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040104-f-22.htm "They're just trying to find a role for this plane because they've sunk so much money into it," Riccioni said. Ed's a nice guy, but he's spent his lifetime advocating light-weight fighters. He was an original member of the LWF mafia, back in the pre-YF-12/YF-17 days. He's just a little biased on the subject. The combination of Riccioni, Pearson and a clueless reporter leaves the entire article garbled into senselessness for anyone in the fighter business. For anyone in the engineering businees that has been following the F-22 cluster ****, the article is a laughable lie. I don't see how the Pentagon can put out this kind of bull**** with a straight face. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 09:38:54 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote: "Ed Rasimus" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 09:00:26 -0800, Mary Shafer wrote: On 4 Jan 2004 14:13:53 -0800, (Henry J. Cobb) wrote: http://globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040104-f-22.htm "They're just trying to find a role for this plane because they've sunk so much money into it," Riccioni said. Ed's a nice guy, but he's spent his lifetime advocating light-weight fighters. He was an original member of the LWF mafia, back in the pre-YF-12/YF-17 days. He's just a little biased on the subject. The combination of Riccioni, Pearson and a clueless reporter leaves the entire article garbled into senselessness for anyone in the fighter business. For anyone in the engineering businees that has been following the F-22 cluster ****, the article is a laughable lie. I don't see how the Pentagon can put out this kind of bull**** with a straight face. Having been in the ATF Dem/Val stage, I've got a bit of insight into the program and I commented on the quotes in the article which make little sense in the context of modern fighter operations. Now, how can you have such great engineering insights into the program which you've repeatedly indicated is still so "black" that taking pictures of OT&E vehicles is felonious? The article certainly didn't come from the Pentagon, but from spokesmen at Edwards and it certainly didn't sound like a whitewash, but rather the rantings of someone who is opposed to the airplane. Did you read the article at the link? It seems to be from folks in your camp rather than mine. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Emmanuel Gustin" wrote in message
... These are people with an axe to grind -- the 'light weight fighter maffia'. Their arguments don't impress me much; lightweight fighters have never been very successful. I've read part of Stevenson's "The Pentagon Paradox" book once, but found it hard to take seriously -- too many errors and fallacies. For more of Stevenson's views check "Fighter Jet Fix Video Transcription" Interview James Stevenson July 27, 1998 http://www.cdi.org/adm/1233/Stevenson.html ADM's Jon Lottman interviews James Stevenson, for "Fighter Jet Fix" |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message ... On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 09:38:54 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "Ed Rasimus" wrote in message .. . On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 09:00:26 -0800, Mary Shafer wrote: On 4 Jan 2004 14:13:53 -0800, (Henry J. Cobb) wrote: http://globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040104-f-22.htm "They're just trying to find a role for this plane because they've sunk so much money into it," Riccioni said. Ed's a nice guy, but he's spent his lifetime advocating light-weight fighters. He was an original member of the LWF mafia, back in the pre-YF-12/YF-17 days. He's just a little biased on the subject. The combination of Riccioni, Pearson and a clueless reporter leaves the entire article garbled into senselessness for anyone in the fighter business. For anyone in the engineering businees that has been following the F-22 cluster ****, the article is a laughable lie. I don't see how the Pentagon can put out this kind of bull**** with a straight face. Having been in the ATF Dem/Val stage, I've got a bit of insight into the program and I commented on the quotes in the article which make little sense in the context of modern fighter operations. My comments go directly to the title of the article, as calling the results from 2003, "turning a corner" made me laugh. In light of Congres' notice that the F-22 will be canceled in FY05, unless the program squares away it's problems during FY04, I can't see how even a casual observer could believe the article's main premise. Now, how can you have such great engineering insights into the program which you've repeatedly indicated is still so "black" that taking pictures of OT&E vehicles is felonious? The desire to prevent photographs of the F-22s on the Edwards flight line has gone so far as to provide each aircraft with it's own little dog house. It is a security violation on Edwards to take pictures. The article certainly didn't come from the Pentagon, but from spokesmen at Edwards and it certainly didn't sound like a whitewash, but rather the rantings of someone who is opposed to the airplane. I didn't take the article that way, but as a recognition that a ground attack version of the F-22 is probably not viable in light of current inventory. The Bone lighting up for the terror war is a pleasant surprise from a deployable asset viewpoint. Did you read the article at the link? It seems to be from folks in your camp rather than mine. I read the article and your critique. It seems to me that the Bone addresses certain forward basing issues, that have hounded fighter community funding over the past decade; favoring Navy funding. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote: "Denyav" wrote in message ... Now even Air Force wants to get rid of Jurassicfighter. It was aready too late for cancellation in year 2001,thats the only reason why it survived up to now. Georgia pork is the only thing keeping the jurassic turd alive. So now we have Denyav *and* Tarver against the F-22. Safe to say it's going to be one of the greatest figher planes, *ever*, looking at their past records... -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
13 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | December 13th 03 08:47 PM |
27 Nov 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 1 | November 30th 03 05:57 PM |
11 Nov 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | November 11th 03 11:58 PM |
18 Sep 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 19th 03 03:47 AM |
04 Sep 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 5th 03 02:57 AM |