@shavixmir saidI wouldn't want to disappoint you, Here.
Damn, when I saw you’d posted on this thread, I was hoping you were going to write about secret alien technology, the highly secret F-227g being developed at Area 51 and sonic bubble-technology.
You always end up disappointing me.
https://unlimitedhangout.com/2020/12/investigative-series/developers-of-oxford-astrazeneca-vaccine-tied-to-uk-eugenics-movement/
Feel better now?
@metal-brain saidHahaha
I wouldn't want to disappoint you, Here.
https://unlimitedhangout.com/2020/12/investigative-series/developers-of-oxford-astrazeneca-vaccine-tied-to-uk-eugenics-movement/
Feel better now?
@shavixmir saidThere. Now you can deny it is true because you got it from me.
Hahaha
It is a bit off topic though. I wouldn't want to disappoint WG by digressing to much. This involves the military.
https://unlimitedhangout.com/2020/10/investigative-reports/operation-warp-speed/
The post that was quoted here has been removedLockheed Martin have a habit of producing extremely expensive kit. I don't think the RAF regard the F35 as a stopgap, for one thing what are they going to replace it with? The Tempest won't be available for a decade, and in any case is more aimed at the interception/air superiority role.
The decision to buy the F35 was made under Labour, having contributed about 10% of the development costs the government's pretty committed to using it as the main Strike plane. The difficulty for the UK is that it's extremely expensive. It's entirely plausible that the F35B could be limited to the FAA and the RAF get a non-VTOL plane, but I don't think that that's the policy, unless there's been a statement from the MOD - as opposed to media speculation - that says otherwise, the policy is to use the F35 as the RAF's strike aircraft for the next twenty years or so.
@DeepThought - that says otherwise, the policy is to use the F35 as the RAF's strike aircraft for the next twenty years or so.
Of course. It's not a "stop gap" effort.
I can't imagine buying 20 of the expensive crafts to hold them over until the
inexpensive ones are available. And what would they do with the F35 at that point, dump it?
No, the UK is committed. Only have 20? But if the F-35 was cheaper, they would have more.
@earl-of-trumps saidA great consequence of good sales has meant a steady reduction in the F-35's price. As its reputation grows and with that increased sales, who knows how cheap they could actually become.
But if the F-35 was cheaper, they would have more.
One of the biggest obstacles to purchase has been the life cycle running cost which has been exacerbated by a scarcity of spare parts. Lockheed says those days are over so its a bit of a wait and see. Part of the purchasing dilemma is the Pentagons modelling of how many F-35s are actually needed, a number down somewhat on original estimates given the rise and efficacy of drones that can be deployed and function alongside the F-35. Something impossible to evaluate at the time of the F-35's inception given the state of drone development at that time.
@metal-brain saidI think an overall reduction in the defense department budget would force at least some consideration of project costs and the value of such projects to American citizens.
I do too, but they are just corrupt puppets doing the bidding of the money changers. Know who is pulling the strings from behind the scenes. Oh, that's right....the share holders of the privately owned FRS is a secret.
A good first step is to make the shareholders of the FRS public. They are behind all of that crap.
@kmax87 saidI once read a compelling article about the overall cost of the expensive craft. The article said if you factor in purchase cost and cost of keeping it running, and get a final tally on cost per hour, you could get 2 cheaper jets for the same price as one expensive one, and do battler with more jets, albeit - not as sophisticated,
A great consequence of good sales has meant a steady reduction in the F-35's price. As its reputation grows and with that increased sales, who knows how cheap they could actually become.
One of the biggest obstacles to purchase has been the life cycle running cost which has been exacerbated by a scarcity of spare parts. Lockheed says those days are over so its a bit of a wa ...[text shortened]... e to evaluate at the time of the F-35's inception given the state of drone development at that time.
I see Turkey has been taken out of the F-35 loop and they want back in, badly.
UAE is buying 50 F-35's. So it does have its admirers.
@Duchess64 - My original point was opposed to the claim that the UK is 'EAGER' to buy F-35s.
The UK's not 'eager' because of the F-35's high costs and general lack of operational
need beyond filling a requirement for STOVL aircraft to be used on aircraft carriers.
Lockheed Martin hopes that the UK will buy 138 F-35s. The UK has bought 20 so far.
I do NOT see any 'eagerness' in the UK to buy as many as 138 F-35s.
-----------------
An awful lot of unnecessary speculation there, Duchess64.
Why can't you just admit that the UK bought 20 F-35's and just let it go. You put
your own spin on it saying the Brits were reluctant to do so when you have no
substantiation to that opinion.
If you find it in print from a reliable source that the UK is unhappy with the F-35
purchases or that they do not intend to purchase any more F-35's, perhaps that
info might be interesting to include here. Maybe. But your thrust basically belongs in an Op-Ed piece.