Can you please get us some BLK 60’s with all the toys until this platform is proven?
Why waste the money on blk 60's??
Sponsor
Posted: Jul 24, 2008 - 10:56 PM
F-16.net Sponsor
This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.
LMAggie
Posted: Dec 23, 2007 - 05:42 PM
Veteran
Joined: Aug 12, 2007
Posts: 271
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Status: Offline
checksixx wrote:
VarkVet wrote:
Dear Hillary,
Can you please get us some BLK 60’s with all the toys until this platform is proven?
Why waste the money on blk 60's??
To delay forward progress.
_________________ “Its not the critic who counts..The credit belongs to the man who does actually strive to do the deeds..”
FlightDreamz
Posted: Dec 25, 2007 - 12:19 AM
Regular User
Joined: Aug 18, 2007
Posts: 54
Location: Long Island, NY
Status: Offline
First of all thanks to Sundowner for the support! And to JohnWill as well who brought up some good points I neglected to mention. Such as Grumman being partners with General Dynamics (yeah I knew Grumman was subcontracting for General Dynamics). I couldn't dispute anything in JohnWill's first paragraph if I wanted to (frankly I wish I had posted that first) and in regards to Grumman's upper management possibly sabotaging the F-111B - interesting theory! I can't prove that one way or the other, but it certainly sounds possible.
And to LMaggie I would be delighted to thank Lockheed Martin for any cost savings (if there are any - this bird isn't in production yet). From LMaggie response,"X-35C went through extensive testing and proved to be a solid platform (and that was without Nothrop Grumman). Do you know how good NGC is at making jets for the Navy (case-in-point: F-18, F-14, etc.)?" Um, wow - lets just agree to disagree on that one. The F-18 has shorter range and less payload than the aircraft its replacing. And lastly an external gun pod is all well and fine for air to ground missions but if the F-35 ever needs to dispatch an enemy fighter at less than sidewinder range you better hope the stealthy gun pod doesn't spray rounds all over the sky and hits its target and oh YEAH! You better hope someone thought ahead and actually put the gun pod ON the aircraft (no disrespect intended to the loaders/maintenance personal intended)!
VarkVet
Posted: Dec 25, 2007 - 09:22 AM
Elite
Joined: Oct 30, 2006
Posts: 609
Location: Las Vegas
Status: Offline
LMAggie wrote:
checksixx wrote:
VarkVet wrote:
Dear Hillary,
Can you please get us some BLK 60’s with all the toys until this platform is proven?
Why waste the money on blk 60's??
To delay forward progress.
The best offense is complimented by a proven defense. The F-16 is proven, why not have a few “newer” rounds in you’re mag when/if the sh*t hits the fan.
The “cheek” holding up progress?
AND, they are easier to fix … I think that should have a big part in the decision making process?
_________________ My eyes have seen the glory of the Lord and the esthetics of the Flightline
Pilotasso
Posted: Dec 26, 2007 - 09:17 AM
Veteran
Joined: Oct 29, 2006
Posts: 265
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Status: Offline
I dont know how block 60 could hold progress since only 1 country ever bought it. US wont have it EVER. So whats that going to influence any other type from being adopted?
asiatrails
Posted: Dec 27, 2007 - 01:24 AM
Elite
Joined: Aug 30, 2005
Posts: 605
Location: San Antonio
Status: Offline
sferrin wrote:
VarkVet wrote:
Another HUGE milestone for the program, the first stovl F-35 goes out to the flightline (on schedule I might add).
Dear Hillary,
Can you please get us some BLK 60’s with all the toys until this platform is proven?
Ha ha. Keep dreamin' If Billary gets in you'll be lucky if you get anything at all.
Not to mention that they will be built in Arkansas, Mass(Tax)achusetts and West Virginia with ethical supervision by Ted Kennedy and Robert Byrd.
Environmental clearance including management of carbon offsets will be managed by a bipartisan team selected and chaired by Al Gore. Operational effectiveness will be assessed by John Murtha
Facilities construction will be supervised and managed effectively by the seasoned and expert team which delivered the Boston Central Artery/Third Harbor Tunnel Project, Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff and the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority.
Funding will be subject to the capricious whims of Nancy Pelosi and others, vigorous oversight will be provided by a bipartisan team who all have voting records above 95% as assessed by the ADA (Americans for Democratic action).
Management and design review will be directed by the GAO who will always operate in 20/20 hindsight, select the facts to support their opinion, and be more expert than anyone else. Obviously the failure by the Senate and Congress to deliver funding will have no effect on the program viability or cost.
Plane captain services will be performed by Bill Clinton with multiple pitot and hydraulic pressure checks by . . . .
Please send all bills and complaints concerning gored oxen, distressed animals and ruffled feathers to PETA
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Forum Guidelines
Um, wow - lets just agree to disagree on that one. The F-18 has shorter range and less payload than the aircraft its replacing. And lastly an external gun pod is all well and fine for air to ground missions but if the F-35 ever needs to dispatch an enemy fighter at less than sidewinder range you better hope the stealthy gun pod doesn't spray rounds all over the sky and hits its target and oh YEAH! You better hope someone thought ahead and actually put the gun pod ON the aircraft (no disrespect intended to the loaders/maintenance personal intended)!
