It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Has the U.S. virtually wiped out all competition in the military fighter/bomber field?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: nwtrucker

A lot of Japanese motorcycles are manufactured in China, at least most of the parts anyway. They can add a few parts in Japan, like logos and some trim and call them Japanese bikes. The Japanese company oversees the production in China.

The tools I was a distributor for would come with all the pieces and needed a tag put on and maybe some fittings installed then they could be considered made in America. That taiwan company sold a lot of tools to major companies that boast made in America. The Made in America stuff is a scam sometimes. I saw these tools, made exactly the same way sold under some of the most prestigious names in air tools. Of course, the tools were well made, that is why I actually was interested in selling them. They were more expensive than the cheap imports but way cheaper than the same tool bearing a Cornwell or snap-on or Chicago pneumatic, and other major brand name tag. The company has changed styles in the last thirteen years but it still makes quality air tools. www.mastertoolsupply.com... They custom make airtools for big companies, at least I think they still do. The prices of those tools are high now, but I got a whole lot of tools for three hundred bucks and my brother bought about a hundred bucks worth too. Saved about seventy five percent buying them direct as a distributor. I also bought some for friends in the auto repair industry. I never made anything, but we all got quality tools at a very reasonable price. I could have sold high priced tools at the cost of cheap junk and still made some money. But the drugs used to treat my epilepsy messed with my ability to run a business anymore. It doesn't pay to sell them anymore, most of the prices went up so as not to compete with the big companies buying quantity of them like the ones I mentioned.



I hope this works out for you and you rake in the money! There's always room for innovation and no doubt the Chinese are improving. They had to, in my mind.

Still, the Chinese economy is shakey, at best. They've leveraged their internal loans based on an insane 15% annual growth rate. No we don't want them to go down, financially, at all. They go down, we all go down. The same for the Euro-zone and the U.S. dollar.

I'd agree that China is the biggest competitor, both financially and militarily in the future. I am encouraged by Trump's political and economic efforts, especially the military aspect. Only China seems capable of matching that.

The rest? I don't see them buying Chinese military exports over U.S. exports, at least for now, other than for political reasons. Now India is apparently looking at F-35 purchases.
edit on 1-7-2017 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Just one point about missiles, the US has the new AIM-120D amraam with more range, this will make F-15s, F-16s, F/A-18s super deadly.
F-22 and F-35 can also carry it... so not sure there is a whole lot of lagging in the missile area.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: rickymouse
No, the US is just a little ahead in some technology at this time. Not that much that it would make a great difference. We might have some top secret stuff that is way advanced, but then so again does Russia.


Perhaps Russia does. All I see is Russian hype. Their revenues seem hinged on the SUs and the PAK-FA draining it as fast as it comes in.

Actual development takes money, boat loads of it. As does further development and advance technologies. I have to think that the lack of the income gives the U.S. a dominant position, again and still.

Seems everyone is a full generation behind in both engines and avionics, as well as directed energy weapons. That doesn't seem 'a little ahead'. I could be wrong on it, though.


You take Chinese engineers and companies that build weaponry. Because of the way their economy works, they can build these things way cheaper than we can. They do not have big corporations with their high salaried top big wiggs drawing off so much money. Even figuring the difference in money value, they can produce stuff at a fraction of the cost overall. Same with Russia, if they had our budget, they would accomplish way more than we do because of excessive profit taking here.


Yup thats the key right there.

Corruption in the US MIC is slowing the USA military down and eating away at it from the inside.

And the poor money you pour into the MIC the worse it gets.

China has not caught up with the USA yet but give 20 years? Maybe.


Just look at the Royal Navy and our Type 45 destroyers. Our Destroyers far surpass the USA at the moment while the USA has been dicking around and wasting billions on Zumwalt-class destroyer thats been a complete failure.
UK hasnt got the money to waste so we built a solid destroyer. USA turned there destroyer into a MIC vanity fest.


Those type 45 destroyers are impressive. I bet they won't get run over by a cargo ship either.


Blush...



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
The U.K. is likely 'all in' on the EF which was waxed by much improved pilots in SUs by India. The U.K. indirectly acknowledges this by purchasing F-35 thereby covering the technological gaps in the EF.


Urban myth with the India comment. Misunderstanding on the second - The Typhoon and the F35 fulfil different roles in the UKs RAF and FAA inventory. The F35 was not purchased to "cover the technological gap".


The only competition down the road seems to be China. The U.K., France and the Russians on the surface of it, don't have the monies to take it to the next level.


The next level is UCAVs. Who knows what will be pulled out of the bag and the British are quite advanced with models like Taranis (2014). The question in this space is whether the UK will continue to collaborate with France who combined their efforts a few years back, go alone, or find another partner. The US is obvious, but my money is on Japan.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: nwtrucker
The U.K. is likely 'all in' on the EF which was waxed by much improved pilots in SUs by India. The U.K. indirectly acknowledges this by purchasing F-35 thereby covering the technological gaps in the EF.


Urban myth with the India comment. Misunderstanding on the second - The Typhoon and the F35 fulfil different roles in the UKs RAF and FAA inventory. The F35 was not purchased to "cover the technological gap".


The only competition down the road seems to be China. The U.K., France and the Russians on the surface of it, don't have the monies to take it to the next level.


The next level is UCAVs. Who knows what will be pulled out of the bag and the British are quite advanced with models like Taranis (2014). The question in this space is whether the UK will continue to collaborate with France who combined their efforts a few years back, go alone, or find another partner. The US is obvious, but my money is on Japan.


Myth? Then rather than saying so, please elaborate. Misunderstanding? Really? Are you suggesting your 4th Gen EF has the systems and capabilities of the F-35? If there was 'no technology gap', you wouldn't have bought the F-35s as the EF would obviously be able to fill the F-35's roll on it's own.
edit on 1-7-2017 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: nwtrucker

A lot of Japanese motorcycles are manufactured in China, at least most of the parts anyway. They can add a few parts in Japan, like logos and some trim and call them Japanese bikes. The Japanese company oversees the production in China.

The tools I was a distributor for would come with all the pieces and needed a tag put on and maybe some fittings installed then they could be considered made in America. That taiwan company sold a lot of tools to major companies that boast made in America. The Made in America stuff is a scam sometimes. I saw these tools, made exactly the same way sold under some of the most prestigious names in air tools. Of course, the tools were well made, that is why I actually was interested in selling them. They were more expensive than the cheap imports but way cheaper than the same tool bearing a Cornwell or snap-on or Chicago pneumatic, and other major brand name tag. The company has changed styles in the last thirteen years but it still makes quality air tools. www.mastertoolsupply.com... They custom make airtools for big companies, at least I think they still do. The prices of those tools are high now, but I got a whole lot of tools for three hundred bucks and my brother bought about a hundred bucks worth too. Saved about seventy five percent buying them direct as a distributor. I also bought some for friends in the auto repair industry. I never made anything, but we all got quality tools at a very reasonable price. I could have sold high priced tools at the cost of cheap junk and still made some money. But the drugs used to treat my epilepsy messed with my ability to run a business anymore. It doesn't pay to sell them anymore, most of the prices went up so as not to compete with the big companies buying quantity of them like the ones I mentioned.



I hope this works out for you and you rake in the money! There's always room for innovation and no doubt the Chinese are improving. They had to, in my mind.

Still, the Chinese economy is shakey, at best. They've leveraged their internal loans based on an insane 10% annual growth rate. No we don't want them to go down, financially, at all. They go down, we all go down. The same for the Euro-zone and the U.S. dollar.

I'd agree that China is the biggest competitor, both financially and militarily in the future. I am encouraged by Trump's political and economic efforts, especially the military aspect. Only China seems capable of matching that.

The rest? I don't see them buying Chinese military exports over U.S. exports, at least for now, other than for political reasons. Now India is apparently looking at F-35 purchases.


I gave up on that business ten years ago, I was looking for a way to stay working even with my epilepsy but the type of epilepsy I have makes it hard to do anything on a schedule. But I did manage to get a half dozen of my friends and I a lot of good tools at a cheap price anyway.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 12:48 PM
link   
None of this matters, if WWIII broke out, and nukes went flying, idc who has the best jet. That kinda war wont last long nor would it matter who had the best fighter.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: rickymouse
No, the US is just a little ahead in some technology at this time. Not that much that it would make a great difference. We might have some top secret stuff that is way advanced, but then so again does Russia.


Perhaps Russia does. All I see is Russian hype. Their revenues seem hinged on the SUs and the PAK-FA draining it as fast as it comes in.

Actual development takes money, boat loads of it. As does further development and advance technologies. I have to think that the lack of the income gives the U.S. a dominant position, again and still.

Seems everyone is a full generation behind in both engines and avionics, as well as directed energy weapons. That doesn't seem 'a little ahead'. I could be wrong on it, though.


You take Chinese engineers and companies that build weaponry. Because of the way their economy works, they can build these things way cheaper than we can. They do not have big corporations with their high salaried top big wiggs drawing off so much money. Even figuring the difference in money value, they can produce stuff at a fraction of the cost overall. Same with Russia, if they had our budget, they would accomplish way more than we do because of excessive profit taking here.


Yup thats the key right there.

Corruption in the US MIC is slowing the USA military down and eating away at it from the inside.

And the poor money you pour into the MIC the worse it gets.

China has not caught up with the USA yet but give 20 years? Maybe.


Just look at the Royal Navy and our Type 45 destroyers. Our Destroyers far surpass the USA at the moment while the USA has been dicking around and wasting billions on Zumwalt-class destroyer thats been a complete failure.
UK hasnt got the money to waste so we built a solid destroyer. USA turned there destroyer into a MIC vanity fest.


Those type 45 destroyers are impressive. I bet they won't get run over by a cargo ship either.


Blush...

Well thats one advantage of the USS Zimwalt ...... it will break down long before it can crash into anything




Anyway I used the USS Zimwalt to show the catastrophe when the MIC and corrupt politics get to run free on a project.
You get a very expensive white elephant.

Just do the maths.

UK type 45 project cost 6 billion for 6 ships.

Zimwalt project came to $22 billion for 2 ships. Original plan was 31 for around $120 billion! They would of been 4 billion each!

If the USA had designed a soild destroyer like the UK they could had 30 soild reliable ships for $30 billion.





Personally I think its a shame as the Zimwalt had some promising features.

It does worry though the USA has been left with a technology gap with its destroyers.

China only yesterday released there new class of destroyers.


Much as I take the piss out of you guys......I dont want a China lead world




edit on 1-7-2017 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-7-2017 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)
:
edit on 1-7-2017 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-7-2017 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-7-2017 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-7-2017 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Are we talking the usas vintage fleet or our current state of the art? Cause if were talking usas state of the art fighter and bomber capability then all i have to say is this.

Unprecedented and secure C3, unprecedented sensor and data fusion. Unprecedented coordination. Nearly invisible radar stealth. Optical stealth no problem. Aural stealth no problem. IR stealth no problem. Unprecedented range loiter and penetration no problem. Unprecedented speed no problem. Unprecedented ECW no problem. Unprecedented turbine technology no problem. Unprecedented energy production no problem.

Seriously you guys should take some time to hang out in antelope valley at night and look up. Youll be surprised at what you see. Just try not to Sh!t yourself when you do.
edit on 1-7-2017 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-7-2017 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

If we are talking BT then isn't that a combined US/UK project according to a certain fellow that appeared a few years back and caused a stir



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 01:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: nwtrucker


Much vitriol on fast tracked 6th gen fighter development or upgraded 5.5 gen F-22s. From an overview it looks academic. In either scenario, or perhaps both, depending on the political decisions, no nation in the current 'competition' is able to match or even stay close.



'Wundewaffe' was the answer in its day, too. Ultimately it failed, because back then too,


Yup the USA is falling into the same trap as Germany did.

Take tanks. in 1942 there designs where some of the "best" in the world. Problem was they where high maintience, Expensive and slow to make. worse they only worked to maximum effect in idea conditions and war does not lend itself to ideal conditions. Sure tigers had up to 1:25 kill ratios but that meant nothing when most of them broke down and had to be destroyed by there own crews while the Russians simple yet soildly designed T-34 just rolled on.


Sigh, by '42 the German's infrastructure was already chewed up . Like the Me-262 and the 'V's. IF they had been developed earlier, while they still had the industrial base, the results could have been far different.

Talking points can be created without end and rebutted equally. So to turn your 'point' around, all the more reason to build more of the 'better' before they're actually needed....



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
Myth? Then rather than saying so, please elaborate. Misunderstanding? Really? Are you suggesting your 4th Gen EF has the systems and capabilities of the F-35? If there was 'no technology gap', you wouldn't have bought the F-35s as the EF would obviously be able to fill the F-35's roll on it's own.


1. You said the Typhoon had been bettered by Indian SUs. That's a myth.
2. You said the UK purchased F35 because the Typhoon was lower tech. That's simply not the case. The UK has a mix of types and the purchase was purchased to complete that mix. Typhoons (for example) are not naval. The gap is not technology, it's use.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Nope talking about aircraft the people dont know about. No bt talk



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: nwtrucker
Myth? Then rather than saying so, please elaborate. Misunderstanding? Really? Are you suggesting your 4th Gen EF has the systems and capabilities of the F-35? If there was 'no technology gap', you wouldn't have bought the F-35s as the EF would obviously be able to fill the F-35's roll on it's own.


1. You said the Typhoon had been bettered by Indian SUs. That's a myth.
2. You said the UK purchased F35 because the Typhoon was lower tech. That's simply not the case. The UK has a mix of types and the purchase was purchased to complete that mix. Typhoons (for example) are not naval. The gap is not technology, it's use.


Re myth? No elaboration.

Technology gap? None is your response.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 03:24 PM
link   
One thing to factor in especially when you sell a fighter aircraft. Its seldom about the machine itself but rather about the offsets in terms of production. In the case of the EF and the Rafale, they were unable to offer signifigant offsets to the purchaser which forced them to look elsewhere .

Countries routinely make that type of choice to make sure they get improvements into their industrial base. Its just good business
edit on 7/1/17 by FredT because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: paraphi


Of course, one could assume the U.K. would have bought some other platform for Naval use and thereby saving a fortune on the costs of the F-35. They could have bought F-18s, perhaps Raffy's and so there's no technological gap with the Lightening IIs. ....but wait you did buy lightening II, one wonders why??

Add that one to the backlogged clarifications under the SU smoking the EFs.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

A ccp lead world isn't in the best interest of the world in any form.

The UK is probably the US more intimate and interpersonal ally, because of our shared history.

Take pride in knowing we hold arms together.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Have you looked at the Queen Elizabeth? They're STOL carriers. You can't fly an F-18 off them. The only aircraft that can operate from them are Harriers and F-35Bs.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: nwtrucker

Have you looked at the Queen Elizabeth? They're STOL carriers. You can't fly an F-18 off them. The only aircraft that can operate from them are Harriers and F-35Bs.


I forgot that point. I stand corrected. Thank you.



posted on Jul, 1 2017 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: one4all
Blame it on Drone technology but all forms of air combat are now 2nd rate to Drone Swarms and abilitys.

Drones can travel on land air water and in space or any and all of these combonations.

F-35A @ 100 Million per.

www.popularmechanics.com...

DJI Phantom4 @ 1000 per......... x .......100 000 militarised drones for every F35A in the air.

store.dji.com...

Imagine puddle-jumping drones and underwater highspeed drones and aerial drones all SWARMING in concert on a Carrier...attacking in every way with cyber-attacks...chemical attacks...bio-attacks.....bomb attacks....ect ect ect.


Maybe it would take 10 F-35As to down a Carrier......but methinks the 1 MILLION drones I could enable for the same price would down 10 Carriers.

Imagine roving Drone "Mothership"incubators with 3-D printing capabilities grinding out a constant flow of attack drones.


That is indeed the future.

The rise of cybwr warfare as a legitimate arm of military operations is just about upon us, as is directed energy weapons. And printed / replicating drone armies probably arent far off. Eventually, we will see hybridized clone soldiers as well. (Human + various animal genetics to enhance them).



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join