|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 22 2016 10:45 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2016 10:37 m4ini wrote:On March 22 2016 10:25 oneofthem wrote:On March 22 2016 10:17 m4ini wrote:On March 22 2016 10:04 oneofthem wrote:
this is some high comedy but please stop In case you're talking to me, feel free to counter any statement i made. But i assume you can't (clearly, since nothing i said was untrue), so this doesn't even do as comedy. Just rather lame. there are public resources available to dispel your various delusions. i'm not going to do it for you. Yeah, .. Right. Lets see, because i'm in the mood to point out your non-knowledge. Lets start with the F-117. Out of 7 machines lost, only one was shot down. The rest all had technical failures up to losing a wing midflight. That certainly sounds reliable. Tiger tank, i don't even know what's there to argue, you won't find a single source in the internet stating it was a reliable tank. More tanks were lost to failures in the drivetrain than due to the enemy. What else? The F-35 underperforming? Not my words, but the words of an actual test pilot who flew the machine. You know, infinitely more knowledge than you. Or me, but i'm going with what he said. And it was said in regards to something that can't be changed by software. It doesn't retain energy in fight, and it has a very limited pitch rate. Both inferior to the F-16. He went as far as calling it dead meat in the air. Not to mention that pilots barely can move their heads in the cockpit because of the bulky helm - also stated by testpilots. And that is publicly available, so instead of throwing out stupid oneliners, i'd urge you to read up on it. I don't think i really need to go into everything the A-10 does, and how well it does it. every one of your points is either a misrepresentation or wild conjecture. do you know what an airframe control law test is?
Tiger tank:
Entering combat on September 23, 1942, near Leningrad, the Tiger I proved formidable but highly unreliable. Typically deployed in separate heavy tank battalions, Tigers suffered high breakdown rates due to engine problems, the overly complicated wheel system, and other mechanical issues.
In regards to the F-35: it was a simulated dogfight with an empty F-35 against an F-16 with added and fueled wing tanks. I don't even know why you're arguing there, it takes 5 seconds to google and see the statement of the testpilot in regards to pitch and energy loss, as well as the statement in regards to the (needed) helmets being too bulky so the visibility is heavily obstructed. I don't really know what an "airframe control law test" is, i do know what "flight control law" is though. You might want to read up on that too, in regards to the F-35. But feel free to tell me what the "airframe control law test" is, and how that explains that the F-35 pretty much flies like a brick. I'm eager to learn.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
stealth isn't the entire package when it comes to f35 air superiority. the avionics and EW, off bore targeting etc, all makes dogfighting minimal impact as an area of improvement. the doctrine of the f-35 is networked with other assets in the area including f-22s. with future weapons upgrades like hypersonic missiles the effective kill zone of missiles is yuuuuge.
the f-35 program is for some reason the military's own kind of populism. it's not smooth sailing but the rhetoric and propaganda around it is extreme.
|
On March 22 2016 10:59 oneofthem wrote:
stealth isn't the entire package when it comes to f35 air superiority. the avionics and EW, off bore targeting etc, all makes dogfighting minimal impact as an area of improvement. the doctrine of the f-35 is networked with other assets in the area including f-22s.
the f-35 program is for some reason the military's own kind of populism. it's not smooth sailing but the rhetoric and propaganda around it is extreme.
If you're assessing the F35 on these grounds, then it is already obsolete to drone technology.
|
|
|
Dog fighting, something that air force is concerned with that hasn't happened in 30 years. Pretty sure the F35 is a pile of garbage meant to keep the Lockheed Martin flush with billions. The fighter jet to fight an enemy that isn't building fighter jets.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On March 22 2016 10:54 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2016 10:45 oneofthem wrote:On March 22 2016 10:37 m4ini wrote:On March 22 2016 10:25 oneofthem wrote:On March 22 2016 10:17 m4ini wrote:On March 22 2016 10:04 oneofthem wrote:
this is some high comedy but please stop In case you're talking to me, feel free to counter any statement i made. But i assume you can't (clearly, since nothing i said was untrue), so this doesn't even do as comedy. Just rather lame. there are public resources available to dispel your various delusions. i'm not going to do it for you. Yeah, .. Right. Lets see, because i'm in the mood to point out your non-knowledge. Lets start with the F-117. Out of 7 machines lost, only one was shot down. The rest all had technical failures up to losing a wing midflight. That certainly sounds reliable. Tiger tank, i don't even know what's there to argue, you won't find a single source in the internet stating it was a reliable tank. More tanks were lost to failures in the drivetrain than due to the enemy. What else? The F-35 underperforming? Not my words, but the words of an actual test pilot who flew the machine. You know, infinitely more knowledge than you. Or me, but i'm going with what he said. And it was said in regards to something that can't be changed by software. It doesn't retain energy in fight, and it has a very limited pitch rate. Both inferior to the F-16. He went as far as calling it dead meat in the air. Not to mention that pilots barely can move their heads in the cockpit because of the bulky helm - also stated by testpilots. And that is publicly available, so instead of throwing out stupid oneliners, i'd urge you to read up on it. I don't think i really need to go into everything the A-10 does, and how well it does it. every one of your points is either a misrepresentation or wild conjecture. do you know what an airframe control law test is? Tiger tank: Show nested quote +
Entering combat on September 23, 1942, near Leningrad, the Tiger I proved formidable but highly unreliable. Typically deployed in separate heavy tank battalions, Tigers suffered high breakdown rates due to engine problems, the overly complicated wheel system, and other mechanical issues.
In regards to the F-35: it was a simulated dogfight with an empty F-35 against an F-16 with added and fueled wing tanks. I don't even know why you're arguing there, it takes 5 seconds to google and see the statement of the testpilot in regards to pitch and energy loss, as well as the statement in regards to the (needed) helmets being too bulky so the visibility is heavily obstructed. I don't really know what an "airframe control law test" is, i do know what "flight control law" is though. You might want to read up on that too, in regards to the F-35. But feel free to tell me what the "airframe control law test" is, and how that explains that the F-35 pretty much flies like a brick. I'm eager to learn.
so the answer is no.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On March 22 2016 11:02 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2016 10:59 oneofthem wrote:
stealth isn't the entire package when it comes to f35 air superiority. the avionics and EW, off bore targeting etc, all makes dogfighting minimal impact as an area of improvement. the doctrine of the f-35 is networked with other assets in the area including f-22s.
the f-35 program is for some reason the military's own kind of populism. it's not smooth sailing but the rhetoric and propaganda around it is extreme. If you're assessing the F35 on these grounds, then it is already obsolete to drone technology.
drones can't do it alone. f35 can work with drones and command a bunch. if you are looking at drones then it would be in favor of the f35's direction of development.
|
On March 22 2016 11:08 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2016 11:02 xDaunt wrote:On March 22 2016 10:59 oneofthem wrote:
stealth isn't the entire package when it comes to f35 air superiority. the avionics and EW, off bore targeting etc, all makes dogfighting minimal impact as an area of improvement. the doctrine of the f-35 is networked with other assets in the area including f-22s.
the f-35 program is for some reason the military's own kind of populism. it's not smooth sailing but the rhetoric and propaganda around it is extreme. If you're assessing the F35 on these grounds, then it is already obsolete to drone technology. drones can't do it alone. f35 can work with drones and command a bunch. if you are looking at drones then it would be in favor of the f35's direction of development.
Since when exactly are drones not capable of ground striking targets by themselves?
|
I hate, hate, hate when Bernie dismisses the Deep South. Does he have any idea how hard it is to be a progressive here? I'm from Louisiana, a state which had Bobby fucking Jindal as governor. He gutted our education system, our budget and did more damage to our state than fucking Hurricane Katrina. We fight every day against religious freedom acts, creationism and all sorts of dumb shit every day. We work our asses to keep from losing ground, let alone getting ahead. Our small victories are hard won. Revolution looks easy as shit from lily white, ultra blue Vermont I bet.
|
On March 22 2016 11:21 ticklishmusic wrote:
I hate, hate, hate when Bernie dismisses the Deep South. Does he have any idea how hard it is to be a progressive here? I'm from Louisiana, a state which had Bobby fucking Jindal as governor. He gutted our education system, our budget and did more damage to our state than fucking Hurricane Katrina. We fight every day against religious freedom acts, creationism and all sorts of dumb shit every day. We work our asses to keep from losing ground, let alone getting ahead. Our small victories are hard won. Revolution looks easy as shit from lily white, ultra blue Vermont I bet.
But the crawfish and oysters are fucking awesome!
|
On March 22 2016 11:16 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2016 11:08 oneofthem wrote:On March 22 2016 11:02 xDaunt wrote:On March 22 2016 10:59 oneofthem wrote:
stealth isn't the entire package when it comes to f35 air superiority. the avionics and EW, off bore targeting etc, all makes dogfighting minimal impact as an area of improvement. the doctrine of the f-35 is networked with other assets in the area including f-22s.
the f-35 program is for some reason the military's own kind of populism. it's not smooth sailing but the rhetoric and propaganda around it is extreme. If you're assessing the F35 on these grounds, then it is already obsolete to drone technology. drones can't do it alone. f35 can work with drones and command a bunch. if you are looking at drones then it would be in favor of the f35's direction of development. Since when exactly are drones not capable of ground striking targets by themselves?
More importantly, do we need a 1 trillion dollar R&D project to build a plane to assist them?
|
On March 22 2016 11:26 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2016 11:16 m4ini wrote:On March 22 2016 11:08 oneofthem wrote:On March 22 2016 11:02 xDaunt wrote:On March 22 2016 10:59 oneofthem wrote:
stealth isn't the entire package when it comes to f35 air superiority. the avionics and EW, off bore targeting etc, all makes dogfighting minimal impact as an area of improvement. the doctrine of the f-35 is networked with other assets in the area including f-22s.
the f-35 program is for some reason the military's own kind of populism. it's not smooth sailing but the rhetoric and propaganda around it is extreme. If you're assessing the F35 on these grounds, then it is already obsolete to drone technology. drones can't do it alone. f35 can work with drones and command a bunch. if you are looking at drones then it would be in favor of the f35's direction of development. Since when exactly are drones not capable of ground striking targets by themselves? More importantly, do we need a 1 trillion dollar R&D project to build a plane to assist them?
Because all the planes that were lost to enemy fire, in the last 20 years. Obviously.
|
On March 22 2016 11:23 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2016 11:21 ticklishmusic wrote:
I hate, hate, hate when Bernie dismisses the Deep South. Does he have any idea how hard it is to be a progressive here? I'm from Louisiana, a state which had Bobby fucking Jindal as governor. He gutted our education system, our budget and did more damage to our state than fucking Hurricane Katrina. We fight every day against religious freedom acts, creationism and all sorts of dumb shit every day. We work our asses to keep from losing ground, let alone getting ahead. Our small victories are hard won. Revolution looks easy as shit from lily white, ultra blue Vermont I bet. But the crawfish and oysters are fucking awesome!
After Deepwater Horizon not particularly.
I suppose as a conservative in California you're riding the train in the opposite direction. 
|
Its really weird that Kasich is basically just openly saying he's waiting for a convention so that he is granted the nomination without anywhere close to half the votes, lol.
|
|
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
serious chance kasich is a bit crazy with respect to his position.
also lol just lol at thr rest
|
On March 22 2016 12:23 Mohdoo wrote:
Its really weird that Kasich is basically just openly saying he's waiting for a convention so that he is granted the nomination without anywhere close to half the votes, lol.
I mean unless Trump pulls away big in the remaining states whoever gets nominated is only going to have gotten like 40% of the votes, which qualifies as not terribly close in my book. His polling is still not majority level. Even if he clinches it he'll have had the lowest popular vote share of a nominated candidate in primaries for quite some time I think (though some of this is how long it dragged on). In that sense I can't really fault Kasich/Cruz.
On March 22 2016 11:21 ticklishmusic wrote:
I hate, hate, hate when Bernie dismisses the Deep South. Does he have any idea how hard it is to be a progressive here? I'm from Louisiana, a state which had Bobby fucking Jindal as governor. He gutted our education system, our budget and did more damage to our state than fucking Hurricane Katrina. We fight every day against religious freedom acts, creationism and all sorts of dumb shit every day. We work our asses to keep from losing ground, let alone getting ahead. Our small victories are hard won. Revolution looks easy as shit from lily white, ultra blue Vermont I bet.
It honestly made my blood boil when I saw people saying that Hillary's victories in the South were somehow less meaningful because they were red states and thus somehow not real Democrats or should be less influential. Or that she'll win on the back of the South and this somehow makes it less legitimate.
At least Romney was coherent and better able to spin why making jobs was the solution to all America's problems.
|
On March 22 2016 12:32 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2016 12:23 Mohdoo wrote:
Its really weird that Kasich is basically just openly saying he's waiting for a convention so that he is granted the nomination without anywhere close to half the votes, lol. I mean unless Trump pulls away big in the remaining states whoever gets nominated is only going to have gotten like 40% of the votes, which qualifies as not terribly close in my book. His polling is still not majority level. Even if he clinches it he'll have had the lowest popular vote share of a nominated candidate in primaries for quite some time I think (though some of this is how long it dragged on). In that sense I can't really fault Kasich/Cruz. Show nested quote +On March 22 2016 11:21 ticklishmusic wrote:
I hate, hate, hate when Bernie dismisses the Deep South. Does he have any idea how hard it is to be a progressive here? I'm from Louisiana, a state which had Bobby fucking Jindal as governor. He gutted our education system, our budget and did more damage to our state than fucking Hurricane Katrina. We fight every day against religious freedom acts, creationism and all sorts of dumb shit every day. We work our asses to keep from losing ground, let alone getting ahead. Our small victories are hard won. Revolution looks easy as shit from lily white, ultra blue Vermont I bet. It honestly made my blood boil when I saw people saying that Hillary's victories in the South were somehow less meaningful because they were red states and thus somehow not real Democrats or should be less influential. Or that she'll win on the back of the South and this somehow makes it less legitimate.
Seriously? 2008 wasn't that long ago...
The Clinton spin machine has been consistent about this. Nebraska, Idaho and Utah didn't matter because they were deep-red states. South Carolina, Louisiana and Georgia didn't matter because they had large percentages of black voters.
Source
|
It's hard to imagine better evidence that Trump is completely over his head when discussing policy, and that he essentially has no clue whatsoever of what he's talking about. Those answers are as embarrassing as Sarah Palin's 2008 interview with Katie Couric, if not more. He's genuinely incapable of talking about the issues brought up by the Washington Post's editorial board without deflecting. If this was a performance in a movie, you'd think "man, they went too far with this one, it's just not believable". His ignorance is mind-blowing.
|
The FBI says it may have found a way to crack into the iPhone of one of the San Bernardino terrorists without Apple's help. While it explores this option, a federal judge has postponed Tuesday's hearing that would have been the next step in the battle to get Apple to follow a court order to cooperate.
The FBI says that on Sunday, an "outside party" demonstrated to the FBI a "possible method for unlocking" Syed Rizwan Farook's iPhone.
The government's court filing to delay the hearing adds, "Testing is required to determine whether this is a viable method that will not compromise data on Farook's iPhone. If the method is viable, it should eliminate the need for the assistance from Apple Inc."
The FBI is not asking to dismiss the case, just for time to test the new option. The government has been ordered to file a report on the status of the testing by April 5.
Source
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
