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.

 

F-35 scared of Sparrows

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Is GOOSEUK ever going to post the source article.

Looking back I see a bunch of bickering about an article that we have yet to see for ourselves.

Could anyone else possibly post it?




posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Pyros said;


This is money, of course, to which the British have not contributed, yet they will reap the benefits of this expediture in the form of technology transferred to the F-35 at no cost to them.


This statement is utterly false as the UK is a risk sharing partner in the development of the F-35 and while the stake of BAE and Rolls Royce may appear relatively small overall it is nonetheless a fact that F-35 development is costing, and will continue to cost, the UK billions.

However I am of the opinion that the articles claims are in error anyway and rather sensationalist in the light of the other claims made therein, therefore I don't see any reason to get overexcited about these codes until real facts emerge over and above the tabloid gossip we are debating here.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 05:18 PM
link   
This thread has shown many americans attitudes to thier "greatest" ally and their knowledge of exactly what we do....



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 06:44 PM
link   
And also can someone tell me who is getting the F-35 or versions of it besides the British and the U.S.?
And also the Raptor is only for the U.S. right?



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by Murcielago
The US mostly trusts the UK, and I think the only way we would trust you even more would be to start breaking off ties with Europe. Not that I think that will ever happen...i'm just saying.

Why though?
Why would you want us to break ties with them?
They are good people and strong allies...some of the best in the world infact.

because of one country apart of Europe that most Americans (including me) dont like.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 10:51 PM
link   


because of one country apart of Europe that most Americans (including me) dont like.


Speak for yourself buddy, I like them just fine, as do most Americans I know.

As for the F-35, I think Australia, Italy, and Spain all are seen as likely customers for the aicraft, and I am pretty sure the Australians already have some degree of formal involvement in the program.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
because of one country apart of Europe that most Americans (including me) dont like.


Would that be because they were right about the case for the invasion of Iraq, namely there wasnt one?



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 05:39 AM
link   
At the end of 2004, the countries who were either involved in the program or interested in buying the F-35 JSF in one of its versions are: (in europe, don't have any source for the others, but someone talked about Australia, I trust himl
)
United Kingdom, Denmark ( CTOL variant, F-35A), Spain, Italy, (these two countries are currently using the same concept of aircraft carriers, as the UK Ark Royal class, so are interested in the STOVL variant, F-35B. Note that Italy uses also the AV-8 Harrier.)

(Source, www.raidsmag.com, HS-no 15.)

Read somewhere that UK spent almost 2 billions at the end of 2002, anyone knows how much UK spent for the whole program??


[edit on 29-3-2005 by Element]



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Against ANY nation we can defend ourselves, MI6 and MI5 are excellent agencies....even the CIA admit that and respect them


George Tenet is on record as saying that the CIA have a better working relationship with MI6 than the FBI.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 06:46 AM
link   
Along side the precedent the recent UK purchase of inoperable Boeing Chinooks (and all of that 'too secret or too commercially sensitive' coding debacle) is setting I imagine this story has just about killed the F35's export potential.

Why would anyone leave themselves open to the slightest question over any of this nonsense......on an issue as sensitive and fundamental as their national security!?

(Like the US would. Yeah right.
)

I think it has also put huge questions against the continued UK involvement in the program (which given the problems in the program to date must surely place questions against the entire program.....how Boeing must be laughing......do you think the Chinook episode was deliberate seeing as how they lost the F35 competition?).

Here's hoping the US 'defence' industry enjoys a life devoid of cost and risk sharing partners and with significantly reduced export potential.
All thanks to the paranoia of the current administration's 'defence/business' policies.

[edit on 29-3-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago
because of one country apart of Europe that most Americans (including me) dont like.

What france?
Because they didnt support you in the war?
Well if thats so then you really must hate cuba and chili....



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Back to the subject at hand.

I highly doubt that with this many UK comapines involved:
UK companies with JSF involvement
BAe Systems, Warton & Samlesbury
BAe Systems, Rochester
Rolls-Royce, Bristol
Smiths Aerospace, Bristol & Basingstoke
TRW-Lucas, Solihull
Ultra-Electronics, Cheltenham
Flight Refuelling, Wimborne
Matra-BAe Dynamics, Stevenage
Aerospace Composite Technologies, Rochester
Martin Baker Aircraft Company, Uxbridge
ARA, Bedford
Honeywell Normalair-Garrett, Yeovil
QinetiQ, Farnborough
Bombardier, Belfast
Cytec Engineering, Wrexham

That there will be any doubt as to the sharing of information.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 12:58 PM
link   
The plane isn't going to be ready for several years, is it impossible that the code might not be ready at all?

The code as it is now will probably be revamped, added to, debugged, and fine-tuned considerably between now and when the aircraft is ready for deployment. Meaning that any code the US could provide to the UK now would be either incomplete, and totally useless in the long run.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Intel5
The code as it is now will probably be revamped, added to, debugged, and fine-tuned considerably between now and when the aircraft is ready for deployment. Meaning that any code the US could provide to the UK now would be either incomplete, and totally useless in the long run.


- That is as maybe for right now but as the Chinook debacle demonstrates (to anyone with the eyes to see it) if that is how the US 'defence' industy and gov treats its supposed 'best closest ally' why should anyone trust a contract with America for anything anymore?

Frankly I think this is dynamite to any of the big high-tech US arms deals.

I'd go as far as to say forget about selling any of this stuff overseas anymore........

......and hope the industry loves the long-term implications along with the US taxpayer just loving the cost implications.

Way to go, the wonders of xenophobic paranoia.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Hey we did not need foreign help to create the F-15 F-14 and F-16 not to mention the F/A-22. And they all turned out fine and we can afford them all.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Hey we did not need foreign help to create the F-15 F-14 and F-16 not to mention the F/A-22. And they all turned out fine and we can afford them all.

You kinda wrong there since BAE are involved in the F-22......



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Hey we did not need foreign help to create the F-15 F-14 and F-16 not to mention the F/A-22. And they all turned out fine and we can afford them all.


- The point is, surely, Westy that the USA sold more than a few F16's and F15's. not so many F14's (but then in turn didn't make so many F14's) and did actually have some foreign input into the F22.

Foreign sales generated 'economies of scale', kept production and spares manufacturing lines open and generated a not inconsiderable positive income to the US balance of payments (which if you hadn't noticed is appalling at the moment and has been for some time).

All of which reduced the costs to the US taxpayer.

Now, consider, why should anyone buy US again if the manufacturers and/or US gov is going to insist that the codes to operate the computers/systems either (1) cannot be passed over to the foreign power meaning additional huge expenditure for them to create their own or (2) the foreign buyer gets a 2nd rate version or (3) the foreign buyer has to consider the 'easter egg' concept where the US deliberately installs programs the buyer is kept unaware of and might not choose to have.

......and again if this is how the US is treating it's supposed 'best closest ally' why the hell should anyone else have the slightest confidence they would not be treated worse?

So, yes, I think it's perectly reasonable to conclude that the US gov and 'defence' industry in their idiotic paranoia have not so much shot themselves in the foot as taken a Vulcan cannon to their entire legs!

(......and like I said just wait until the US taxpayers and skilled workers in the industry cotton on to what the long term effects of this short-sighted stupidity is going to be)

If any justification was ever needed as to why we in Europe maintain our own high-tech base and have an EDS/Airbus/Panavia etc etc this is it in spades; how 'green' do you think we are hmmm? With 'friends' like you guys........




[edit on 29-3-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 10:28 PM
link   
LOL

This reminds me of a video we once watched in one of my aerospace classes. We were talking about jet engine qualifications of turbine engines (to be exact) and one of the major characteristics is to be able to (as you have mentioned) withstand birds and such. Well, in the video...i kid you not...engineers were literaly throwing chickens into the turbine engines..we got to see the total side view in SLOW MOTION!! talk about badass eh : P

Ooo i'll email my instruct and see if he still has them from last semester. There was also a cool ass simulation of what would happen in the case of a blade flying off the main centrifuge...it's so sweet i gotta see it again lol



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 11:59 PM
link   

You kinda wrong there since BAE are involved in the F-22......


What exactly are they involved in? Don't tell me they are making the landing gear



......and again if this is how the US is treating it's supposed 'best closest ally' why the hell should anyone else have the slightest confidence they would not be treated worse?

So, yes, I think it's perectly reasonable to conclude that the US gov and 'defence' industry in their idiotic paranoia have not so much shot themselves in the foot as taken a Vulcan cannon to their entire legs!

(......and like I said just wait until the US taxpayers and skilled workers in the industry cotton on to what the long term effects of this short-sighted stupidity is going to be)


People are willing to take that risk to be friends with the biggest person on the block and some counties automatically think if they have U.S. tech then they have the finest in the world. So I don think this will have any long term implications, notice that the Pakistani don't seem to be worried about codes.

Also I’m a U.S. taxpayer and I don't mind dishing out some extra loot to keep our military programs domestic.



posted on Mar, 30 2005 @ 01:33 AM
link   


Walters leads a 300-member BAE SYSTEMS team responsible for F-22 EMD programs and digital receiver product improvement programs.
...
The EMD programs include F-22 electronic warfare, mission support element, airborne video tape recorder and operational debrief system, graphics processor video interface, stores management system, and antennas.

Source

BAe also do the HUD systems.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join