Lots of work related stuff to do. Will be back up toward the end of next week.
Until then read up this ASPI blog piece:
Air combat – where to from here?
And this AV Week blog post from Bill Sweetman on understanding the F-35 industry inspired fan-base.
Wrongheaded? Really?
Certainly they are an interesting comparison of the state of the state of the F-35.
As an aside: great photo.
Although this little tip would make it better. When shooting photos from bubble canopy jets, it is good to have a large black foam doughnut around your camera lens. It is easy to fold up and stow for the non-photo-shoot part of the hop. You can make them out of black packing foam. Using this gets rid of the canopy reflections.
43 comments:
Reading anything written by Bill Sweetman regarding the F-35 will not give you any understanding...unless of course you simply like reading garbage!
The Scarlet Pimpernel
So, according to SP, to be given any understanding regarding the F-35, you simply need to like reading garbage.
That sounds about right but I wonder how SP knows this.
You can write whatever you like about Mr. Sweetman. It doesn't change the fact that he's been right, and the F-35 cheer squad have been wrong, at every turn.
F-35 advocates are like the anti-navalists of the Truman years. They were simply discredited by events.
The tangled web of self deception and denial.
The F-35 advocates are too stupid to see this and the fact that their beloved LunchMeat and the JSF sycophants in Defence are using Info War Techniques learned on the back of tax payer dollars to keep them and politicians around the world on the hook.
A simple google search on the word 'information warfare, tangled web & deception' would help these poor souls to enlighten themselves on what has been perpetrated on them for over a decade.
Right dream on guys...we'll see who has the last laugh. The F-35 is going to be around for a long, long time despite what you may like to think.
Bill Sweetman has been constantly wrong and has also been shown to be a blatant story teller as opposed to objective journalist! You guys lap him up though since he tells you the stories you want to hear. Sad really...
The Scarlet Pimpernel
Is this Peter Mark 2?
Hardly!
Calls himself the Scarlet Pimpernel, don't you know.
What he claims and how he claims them are quite hilarious
Bill Sweetman is often cited by the OMB, the CRS and ANAO, as well as the HASC and SASC along with other Congressional reports.
Don't see Mr SP or any of his little band of JSF fanboys being given like status, except maybe in the minds of the little kiddies they hang out with on the internet.
When you match the tells of the writings with the various pseudonymns they use, just how many small minds do you think are in this little cohort of JSF fanboys?
Looks to be less than a dozen, if that.
Eric,
Good tip. Also helps when taking photos and high speed digital video when chase has maneuver hard. The times have used this idea, had harness locked and feet anchored with legs pushing torso hard into the straps so could lock line of sight by pressing lens up against the canopy.
Human tripod, or rather quad pod, good for around four g, five at a pinch.
Agree with previous poster - there really aren't that many JSF fanboys.
In Canada, we have one who calls himself Alloy Cowboy. This one also posts under other idents.
Worked for the DND, then got picked up by one of the internet marketing agencies on LM's payroll.
Strange dude.
You seem to have a few of these down your way.
Well, as Eric's precious F-111 proved, one-size-fits-all usually doesn't. But there is way too much invested in the JSF to let it fail. Before all is said and done it will probably be viable at least.
Perhaps the people running the program know something about its capabilities we don't....
Or is it a high profile distraction to divert attention away from the REAL Next Gen Strike Fighter?
Faith based planning.
Not especially useful.
The second part there: "perhaps" is the operative word. Kind of like the Clinton family Bible. It only has 5 commandments, and all those start with the word "perhaps".
They're not obligated to tell you everything, Palmer. I know you think the world orbits you, but it doesn't. Sorry to pop your balloon...
I am not some JSF true believer, and the rah rah boys are a tad over-the-top at times, but this incessantly negative view doesn't pass the smell test, either.
I'm actually the guy on the team that keeps everyone's spirits up.
I don't see how questioning billions of dollars spent on a project 80pc over original estimates with no IOC date 10 years after contract award is being "incessantly negative".
The project has to deliver something. And I would predict that the 2400-some jet idea is pure fantasy; for a product that is obsolete against emerging threats and too expensive to own and operate for lessor threats.
Obsolete. Obsolete. All I hear is obsolete. I question whether it actually is.
Has to deliver something??? I think your dislike of the F-35 is blinding you.
Currently there are around 40 aircraft delivered and in various light ops including initial training at Eglin AFB. There are also another 50+ in various states of manufacture.
Flight testing is proceeding ahead of schedule from both a number of flights perspective and test points accomplished. Service pilots (including those with many, many years of operations) are praising its performance!
What more do you want?
The Scarlet Pimpernel
Eighty percent over budget. Is that REAL dollars or inflation-induced? If we canceled every project that failed to meet budget estimates we wouldn't have anything to fight with. Not saying it is right, but the F-35 (they really should call it A-35, then people would stop expecting it to be an F-22) is The rule here, not the exception.
Exactly. As to the obsolete claims, where is the proof? Please point out evidence that supports such ridiculous claims. Please point out a combat aircraft that is more advanced?
The figures being quoted are in BY2012$, so are not the REAL dollars which, as you will no doubt realise, are the dollars that must be paid at the time of purchase - standard cash flow analysis stuff, don't you know.
Speaking of which, the KPMG audit people aren't being allowed to do any such analyses or even question any of the figures from LM or the DND. These things are specifically excluded from the contract.
Now, do you reckon that is NORMAL?
Also, $330.5B divided by $177.1B is actually closer to 87 per cent and that is for some 409 fewer aircraft while the 7 per cent that you keep overlooking is about $12.4 Billion -a bit more than just pocket change, don't you think?
You don't need to be a NASA Scientist or one of the gurus at the NRC to see this thing is a gross outlier in just about all respects, is already obsolete and folks are paying thru the nose for the privelege!
Denial and self deception are the realm of idiots and fraudsters.
Read the JSF JORD.
Some of these comments remind me of reading how the Brewster Buffalo was adequate for the task in 1941.That was not the only flawed thinking in that period as evidenced by the initial setbacks in World War II.
Especially today, it is flawed thinking that that everything that comes from the West is superior, and the East is far behind.
It would also appear that there are some contributors here, who are incapable of undertaking any independent research, nor reading any of the voluminous publications by qualified and experienced academic contributors, regarding the failure of the F 35 program, both financially and technically.
Sources are freely available, and quoted on numerous occasions. The inane comments from some, exhibit extreme lack of any ability to actually see what is right in front of them. That being the case, it is obvious that the world is still full of less than adequate minds.
It also should be clear to those making those comments, that you really exhibit the fact that you have serious disabilities in the intellectual area.
Please name said "qualified and experienced academic contributors".
The Scarlet Pimpernel
A number of those names can be found in this latest compendium by the NDU of papers on the Chinese Air Force, both as authors and in the references cited.
http://www.ndu.edu/press/lib/pdf/books/chinese-air-force.pdf
Names like David Frelinger and Jessica Hart, Roger Cliff, Shen Pin-Luen, Rick Fisher, Dr Andrew Martin, and many more, including the raft of top line analysts who left the RAND Corp when, under Andy Hoehn's purview, frank and fearless made way for subordinate and fearful.
Then there are the likes of Dr Anthony Cordesman and others who have incisively identified America as becoming its own peer threat.
What is interesting is that the writings of many if not most of these analysts are beginning to map closely to the works of Australia's Dr Carlo Kopp and others from over a decade ago, both in the Grand Strategy and Techno/Strategic Planning context.
Hope this helps answer your question about names.
Now, what is yours or, like the little group of JSF fanboys, don't you have sufficient strength in your convictions to take ownership of what you say and write?
So the program is over budget by $ X billion 2012 dollars, is that it?
Well, let's consider, is the airplane we are getting better than an A-7, F-16 (outfitted for the same mission), etc.? It sure looks that way.
And any time You wish to compare brain pans I am glad to.
All your self-righteous chatter is boorish. At any rate, I am glad you have all the free-time to study all of this to a degree that makes the rest of us seem so lacking intellectually... Sure beats what I am doing, namely busting my ass working so I can pay taxes for this apparent boondoggle.
Alert 1, and SP, I guess you have demonstrated exactly that to which I was referring.
I guess we have a lesson on how to make a fool of yourself.
Not sure who your comments are directed toward, Alert 1, but by "the rest of us seem so lacking intellectually" presume you mean Mr Scarlet P and your good self - a 'rest of us' of two, may be?
Also, not sure what you mean by "brain pans" but if this relates to experience , expertise and knowledge on the subject of air power or, specifically, the JSF, some of mine can be found on the Air Power Australia web site.
www.ausairpower.net
Since you say you would be glad to, let's compare.
If you can't or aren't able to, then you hardly will need the help of others in being "so lacking intellectually".
I'm curious how (given its severe technical problems) the F-35 is better than an F-16?
Yes, I was refering to those of us being mocked for asking questions that dare question your obvious bias...
As for me, a couple of Masters Degrees, 6500+ hours in jet aircraft (including both British and American fighter/attack). I have also written a book about Naval Aviation under a pseudonym, so to attack my intellect is a wee bit presumptive.
You anti-JSF children sound like a bunch of chattering rats. I am not sold on the airplane by any means. It may well end up a colossal failure. But you folks are bordering on obsessive. Brewster Buffalo? Really now...
In the end, time will tell us what our watches won't, and if the airplane turns out to be respectable I will be looking for your mea culpa.
(Anyone who finds the F-111 viable on any planet is hardly credible, in any event.)
Name a single airplane, EVER, that lacked technical problems during development, Palmer.
*crickets*
That's what I thought.
From Alert 1, this is an obvoius reply from such an academic,and such an experienced person, do we not think?
What do you think, about 15 years old?
He has outed it's self.
Another point, even though other aircraft had problems, at least in the end they delivered,did they not?
LOL.
"Name a single airplane, EVER, that lacked technical problems during development, Palmer. "
Let's see:
Cessna 208 Caravan
Beech 350
Pilatus PC-12 NG
(Original PC-12 had some aero design issues till Raisbeck Engineering was put on the job)
SAAB JAS39-E Grippen NG
Su-30MK Series
Su-35S
.....to name but a few.
This is not to say there weren't design challenges or technically related issues to be worked through. Some even had component failures due to things like human error e.g. the loss of one of the Su-35S pre-production prototypes.
However, none of the development programs for these and many more aircraft had anywhere near the technical problems confronting the JSF Program, most of which are the result of abysmal project management by people who don't know what they don't know about things they simply just don't understand.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect has been to the fore and working diligently on this FUBAR of a program.
Trying to normalise the deviances that abound in the JSF designs and the Program, overall, is classic denial behaviour.
Read the report entitled The Nimrod Review by Mr Charles Haddon-Cave if you wish to know where such behaviour leads.
That just about takes care of your question and I suggest it's Mr Palmer to you.
Palmer will do just fine. Arrogance doesn't command respect or a "Mister"--although I know a few different ways to say it that could apply. Ahem.
I will let the performance of the final product determine who is right. I hope the thing succeeds. Would I place money on it? Probably not.
I will let you girls get back to your squawking and mutual butt patting. Can't let anyone question (need to break out my thesaurus) your disdainful group think.
Agreed. This lot are so busy assuring themselves that the F-35 will be cancelled any day and that those who might challenge that view are simply a minority of "fan boys" that they don't even deserve any more wasted time. In 20 - 30 yrs time they will still be assuring themselves that the F-35 will be cancelled...then of course, they will flip sides and say that they have always supported it and that nothing can replace it...yawn!!!
Dream on guys...
The Scarlet Pimpernel
My goodness, DT must be suffering from a dearth of(for them) intelligent posts.
The average IQ of those who post on EP just went down, and the average IQ for those on DT just went up.
I think the theme for the day should read, "the driveway does not reach the road"
Horde,
You guys at Air Power Australia rock.
I see Mr Alan Williams and others engaged in the Canadian debate are using the material on your website to great effect.
Everyone I have directed to the APA website reckons you guys are sh*thot and right on the money.
Thanks and keep up the good work.
Mike
My goodness, need some help.
My comment had nothing to do with Mike, only the post removed, for obvious reasons.
Stupidity and foul lanquage do not belong.
My goodness Horde, what an amazing comment. It would be even better if it were true...
So the SAAB JAS-39 Gripen never had any technical difficulties to overcome during it's testing?
Hmm. Actual video of some it's flight testing must be incorrect then?
http://youtu.be/wxX4QvLylLY
I guess almost completely redesigning the flight control system isn't a "technical difficulty..."
What else was there? Ah who cares? Every modern fighter has design issues and problems to overcome. Pretending something doesn't is a fools errand.
Even the mighty F-22 did.
http://youtu.be/faB5bIdksi8
Ther is one major difference, Bonza, at least they worked as promised in the end.
The F35 will not.
As you have never read any real information, highly recommend APA fo an excellent source.I know you will love it.
Hmm interesting claim. Maybe it's the sky that is hpgreen and grass is actually blue too...
The F-35 won't "work in the end".
USAF disagrees with that, but you're right, APA probably understands the F-35 better than it's users do...
Anon, Lt Colonel Bonza/AD is basically intellectually dishonest, or is intellectually unable to disseminate facts from marketing diatribe and the groupthink of those who run around making silly statements.
Anyone able to think critically and analyse facts and figures can come to the conclusion that the project is not economically viable for a start, both on purchase price and maintenance.
Secondly, the rest of the world has passed the project by, with aircraft that will be superior in most ways. After all IOC was supposed to be in 2012, and it is now 2020-22 at the earliest. (A comment made by defence Minister Stephen Smith for one)
In addition some have this strange belief that the Western world is superior in all things, and Russia and Asia are somewhat inferior in these areas. An amazing conclusion, which shows you the intellectual capacity of some of these commenters.
Air Power Australia, through its authors and contributors provide something that Lieutenant-Colonel Bonza and sycophants cannot, that is properly referenced and researched information put together by people with more than adequate academic and real world qualifications.
Amazingly despite published article after published article, I have never ever seen any information published by Lieutenant-Colonel Bonza and friends questioning nor trying to refute the points made in these publications. There is nothing more than personal attacks and inane remarks made.
Apart from Air Power Australia, there are numerous other articles published by people with proper academic qualifications, and unlike the sycophants able to be identified as are the qualifications and academic achievements.
In addition, it would appear that some these critics have never read nor digested large amounts of information provided by the American Government and the relevant agencies.
Good point, Bonza.
APA predicted the blowouts in cost and schedule as well as nailed all the problems with the designs of the JSF long (as in years) before they were finally admitted by the JPO.
So, yes, you are right - APA do understand the F-35 better than its users do...
Then there are the fine works that the experts who are published on APA and elsewhere have done on such things as the threats, including those from the enemies within.
Post a Comment