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.

 

some new good info about f-22 :))

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 02:21 AM
link   
I'm not to sure but I think that old ICBMs exploded on contact of sort (German V-2s) but I think some use radar built in to the nose to do an echolocation of the ground. And the newer ones I think are pinpoint by satellite emitted laser. So I guess you actually need physical interference to detonate one.




posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 08:13 PM
link   
this jets preformance has been poor at best...everyone hears how it does at lockheed and other test sites..but belive me this f-22 is not mission capable about 75% of the time..i have worked on this jet and its a waste of taxpayers dollars...i have seen this aircraft grounded for 1 week before because of a 1 inch scratch...it does not even have to capabilites to fire munitions yet..it has been done but not in the operation ac that are @ tyndall afb



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 09:50 PM
link   
You got any proof that you work near or on the Raptor and grounded because of a one inch scratch if your going to lie please make it believable here on ats its either proof or don't talk so unless you got some proof



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 10:17 PM
link   
bro what kind of proof can i show or tell u that i work at or around the f-22 or the f-117...try this and loook it up...i have worked around both...the f-22 is being kept @ tyndall afb...they currently have 5 of them...all of them more worthless than the next...i mean guy who can belive anything anyone says...its just what it is...lol



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Well you surely can tell me something that is not on the news or online right if you are so close to the raptor tell me some things about its supercomputer onboard or something else.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 10:35 PM
link   
its subcomputer or anything like that how would you know if im telling the truth....??? how about this im telling you stuff that you wont hear in the news or find on the internet



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 10:44 PM
link   
but the stuff you are telling me is not really conclusive i can say hey i work really close to the raptor and did you know that it can reach speeds of mach 2.5+ on full afterburner because it has the strongest engine ever producd for a US jet see what im saying anyone can claim things



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 10:53 PM
link   
i can only tell you things i know and have have heard or seen.....the f-22 can hit mach with out afterburner....it too cannot back at very very high speeds because of its stealthy skin...these stealth jets all have one flaw they way they are made..the skin used for these ac limit what they could possibly achive otherwise



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 11:00 PM
link   
also the Raptor was on another show it was going up against an F-16 and it made the most sharp angle turn i had ever seen and i have been t a few airshows and seen jets fly and again i did not see any thing flying away from the jet or the ram peeling off.

Here is the threadF-22 has good ram



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 11:10 PM
link   
lol this thing is weak man....the military rushed its release date and now we have 5 operational f-22's at tyndall afb that dont even have anything in their weapons bays to hold weapons...the ram might not peel off the 22 but its skin will be damaged...as for the f-117 the skin will peel off that big girl easy...behind the runway at Holloman afb, newmexico they cleared a 3 acre area because thats where the ram that peels off usually landed and they wanted to get people out of hrarms way



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 11:23 PM
link   
hey i have video of the F-22 firing a missile and i can give you the website where they have at least 5 different times the F-22 fired a missile and its not only the Aim-9 ok.



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 11:36 PM
link   
congress will not fund a pos!!! get what im saying...the usaf can sure as hell get this f-22 to fire a few missles off during test phase....but in a combat situation it cannot...the weapons systems and avionics on the f-22 are still years behind...they got it to fire a couple of times to get congress to give money for the project now that they have the f-22's they can start worring about them working lol



posted on Jul, 6 2004 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by wickedwillow
congress will not fund a pos!!! get what im saying...the usaf can sure as hell get this f-22 to fire a few missles off during test phase....but in a combat situation it cannot...the weapons systems and avionics on the f-22 are still years behind...they got it to fire a couple of times to get congress to give money for the project now that they have the f-22's they can start worring about them working lol


There is no percentage in it. Lockheed knows that if they try to conceal any serious deficits, congress will cancel it in a shot. Much like the commanche. The last time a contractor tried that the A-12 Avenger II and it was terminated.



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 05:41 AM
link   
Westpoint, you leap upon half truths decrying the Typhoon with glee and clutch them to your busom, yet anything detrimental to US types is dismissed as rubbish. Are you really denying ignorance?


I remember the footage of the YF-22 scraping its arse along the ground as it tried to get airborne, now that was funny



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 07:24 AM
link   
What are you talking about the typhoon is a good aircraft but even its own pilots say it has some problems and every aircraft does im not saying the F-22 doesn't have small problems but this person is saying the F-22 peels ram/ cant handle sharp turns, cant fire missiles cuz it will break cant fly fast, I mean c'mon deny ignorance plus I don't believe people who come out of nowhere say stuff and then cant back them up.



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 05:17 PM
link   
i have worked on this pos! its not at all ready for a war time situation....maybe you dont know but these pos break almost hourly...engine problems avionics...they fly 3 days a week and then they are broke for 2 weeks...if we had to rely on these pos saveing us from enimies kiss your arse good bye


jra

posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 05:42 PM
link   
wickedwillow: Even i'm not a big fan of the F-22 (i liked the 23 better, but whatever). But even i can't take your claims as the fact. I'm not saying you're making this up, but that i just can't believe you untill i see something to support your claims... any document or website or photo helps. Does the AFB you work at allow you to bring a camera in? You could take some snap shots of a raptor getting fixed. Or is it all fairly restricted there? Anything you could do to support your claims would be great.



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 05:44 PM
link   
i dont work near the area anymore but no one can get a camera near it,,,,,,plus all these scratche i speak of are just every day stuff that happens



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Whatever your just full of BS just saying stuff left and right all that time you supposedly "worked" there and you didn't get one piece that could back up your claims and what level of clearance did you have and what was you title.
l



posted on Jul, 7 2004 @ 06:33 PM
link   
I read the article and I don't believe the EMI/EMP they are talking about involves "hacking into" an enemy network. It is more like, "Your net-work becomes your net-doesn't-work". I have trouble believing any sensible hack could be done to a random network from afar that would make any hackable sense.

One thing I think was pretty cool related to enemy network sabatoge was that I heard somewhere during the first gulf war (George Senior's), supposedly HP network printers were sold to the Iraqi government beforehand that had Trojan Horse/virus code in them that activated and disabled whatever network they were attached to at the start of the invasion. That was pretty cool.

I have been a programmer for 24 years and have mainly focused on networking software and other embedded software development all along and I have trouble believing that a plane could fly over and actually do anything other than destroy my network. Hacking into it and doing something clever is pretty much beyond my belief. Destroying it is feasible and is pretty useful during an attack...manipulating the data in it, I don't think so, and the article never actually said that.

To hack into a network requires a two way exchange of data. Blasting data into a network from afar is only a one way data stream. Who or what would that data stream command? When hackers get into your computer at your desk, they write and read data to get in. They can't do it by just writing data alone. For example, they will ping your computer across the internet and when your computer replies, they know they have a target. Then they continually poke at different TCP/IP ports to find one that is "open". They know this because your computer replies to open port commands. This wouldn't work from 30000 feet above with a high power beam blasting away at the twisted pair wire between your computer equipment.

My kid's school has three buildings all connected by a network I installed. We are finally switching the building interconnects to fiber optic cables since each summer, a major electrical storm takes out one or more of our ethernet switches. This would be pretty easy to duplicate in an electromagnetic weapon of some sort.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join