|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: PraetorianPraetorian Date: Feb 28, 2008 15:24
"Praetorian" dontwantany.com> wrote in message news:...
You blokes are starting to confuse me.
You do all realise that the Super Hornets are not the end-state, and that
they're an interim between the F111 and the F35 (or if Hell gets a tad
cooler... the F22)?
The F35 was designed from the very outset as a strike-fighter. The F22, on
the other hand, was conceived with "not one pound for ground". As I
understand it, the USAF has broadened their views on this and are adding
some (limited.... and stand-off) strike capacity. (Notice the word "strike"
not "attack" as in the "A for attack" part of F/A18F).
|
| Show full article (2.77Kb) |
|
| | 11 Comments |
|
|
Author: Peter WebbPeter Webb Date: Feb 28, 2008 16:55
> "Praetorian" dontwantany.com> wrote in message news:...
> You blokes are starting to confuse me.
>
> You do all realise that the Super Hornets are not the end-state, and that
> they're an interim between the F111 and the F35 (or if Hell gets a tad
> cooler... the F22)?
>
> The F35 was designed from the very outset as a strike-fighter. The F22, on
> the other hand, was conceived with "not one pound for ground". As I
> understand it, the USAF has broadened their views on this and are adding
> some (limited.... and stand-off) strike capacity. (Notice the word
> "strike"
> not "attack" as in the "A for attack" part of F/A18F).
>
> But here's a scenario and a question for the F22 fans (don't get me wrong,
> I
> think they're an awesome aircraft), but, ........ Future battle
> somewhere... ...
|
| Show full article (2.56Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: PraetorianPraetorian Date: Feb 29, 2008 13:28
"Peter Webb" DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:47c757d6$0$26343$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...>> "Praetorian" dontwantany.com> wrote in message news:...
>> You blokes are starting to confuse me.
>>
>> You do all realise that the Super Hornets are not the end-state, and that
>> they're an interim between the F111 and the F35 (or if Hell gets a tad
>> cooler... the F22)?
>>
>> The F35 was designed from the very outset as a strike-fighter. The F22,
>> on
>> the other hand, was conceived with "not one pound for ground". As I
>> understand it, the USAF has broadened their views on this and are adding
>> some (limited.... and stand-off) strike capacity. (Notice the word
>> "strike"
>> not "attack" as in the "A for attack" part of F/A18F).
>> ...
|
| Show full article (4.02Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: JensenJensen Date: Mar 25, 2008 07:25
> "Praetorian" dontwantany.com> wrote in message news:...
> You blokes are starting to confuse me.
>
> You do all realise that the Super Hornets are not the end-state, and that
> they're an interim between the F111 and the F35 (or if Hell gets a tad
> cooler... the F22)?
>
> The F35 was designed from the very outset as a strike-fighter. The F22, on
> the other hand, was conceived with "not one pound for ground".
Umm, that is the F-15 you are thinking of, and have a look at the F-15E
today. As for the F-22, suggest you see what Defense Secretary Cohen (in the
Clinton Administration) had to say back in 1999. He was talking about the
F-22 having been slated to replace the F-117 at outset, and no one would
suggest that the F-117 was an air superiority asset. There have been
replacements of F-15E and F-117, in addition to replacement of F-15C. So
much for not a pund for air to ground.
|
| Show full article (3.73Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: PraetorianPraetorian Date: Mar 25, 2008 22:41
>> "Praetorian" dontwantany.com> wrote in message news:...
>> You blokes are starting to confuse me.
>>
>> You do all realise that the Super Hornets are not the end-state, and that
>> they're an interim between the F111 and the F35 (or if Hell gets a tad
>> cooler... the F22)?
>>
>> The F35 was designed from the very outset as a strike-fighter. The F22,
>> on
>> the other hand, was conceived with "not one pound for ground".>
> Umm, that is the F-15 you are thinking of, and have a look at the F-15E
> today. As for the F-22, suggest you see what Defense Secretary Cohen (in
> the Clinton Administration) had to say back in 1999. He was talking about
> the F-22 having been slated to replace the F-117 at outset, and no one ...
|
| Show full article (1.75Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: AddinallAddinall Date: Mar 26, 2008 01:28
On Mar 26, 3:41 pm, "Praetorian" dontwantany.com> wrote:>>> "Praetorian" dontwantany.com> wrote in message news:...
>>> You blokes are starting to confuse me.>
>>> You do all realise that the Super Hornets are not the end-state, and that
>>> they're an interim between the F111 and the F35 (or if Hell gets a tad
>>> cooler... the F22)?
> ...
|
| Show full article (2.98Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Bob HawkeBob Hawke Date: Mar 26, 2008 03:34
"The decision should be made on statistics, how many Muzzies can you
liquidate with a F22 compared to a F35,
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Atheist ChaplainAtheist Chaplain Date: Mar 27, 2008 00:46
>
> "The decision should be made on statistics, how many Muzzies can you
> liquidate with a F22 compared to a F35,
>
>
>
if that's your criteria we should be getting B 52's
I suggest you become FAC, about 200 meters from your target should ensure
you get a good accurate hit :-)
--
God made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom?
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Sir John HowardSir John Howard Date: Mar 27, 2008 00:49
Bob Hawke wrote:
> "The decision should be made on statistics, how many Muzzies can you
> liquidate with a F22 compared to a F35,
If we're going after arselifers, we should be using ICBMs.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: JensenJensen Date: Mar 27, 2008 03:05
>>> "Praetorian" dontwantany.com> wrote in message news:...
>>> You blokes are starting to confuse me.
>>>
>>> You do all realise that the Super Hornets are not the end-state, and
>>> that they're an interim between the F111 and the F35 (or if Hell gets a
>>> tad
>>> cooler... the F22)?
>>>
>>> The F35 was designed from the very outset as a strike-fighter. The F22,
>>> on
>>> the other hand, was conceived with "not one pound for ground".>>
>> Umm, that is the F-15 you are thinking of, and have a look at the F-15E ...
|
| Show full article (2.04Kb) |
| no comments |
|
RELATED THREADS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
