the white drew carey Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/02/23/helicopte...l.ap/index.html Quote
bsu legato Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 Ah well, it was only $10 Billion dollars. There's plenty more where that came from. Quote
Angel's Fury Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 (edited) Could've used the money in solving the Patriot Missile Battery problem. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/19/...ain601241.shtml Edited February 23, 2004 by Angel's Fury Quote
the white drew carey Posted February 23, 2004 Author Posted February 23, 2004 Could've used the money in solving the Patriot Missile Battery problem.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/19/...ain601241.shtml Interesting read. Thanks a bunch! Hey, there's a Raytheon complex just down the street from where I work. Maybe I should have "words" with them? Quote
Angel's Fury Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 And then they planned a missile defense program and installed a missile base in Alaska? Fix that problem first then proceed with others. Quote
Anubis Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 They want to save money cancel the missle shield. That is a waste of money. We have other worries than enemy ICBM launches, which have other intercept means anyway. North Korea is the only one with the possible balls to attempt it, but wouldn't dare with the (at least one) nuclear attack sub we have parked off their coast. We need a helicopter that won't be shot down as easily. I'm no commanche expert, but was this the type of helicopter for that? If not then let it die and make a better one. Quote
Angel's Fury Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 They want to save money cancel the missle shield. That is a waste of money. We have other worries than enemy ICBM launches, which have other intercept means anyway. North Korea is the only one with the possible balls to attempt it, but wouldn't dare with the (at least one) nuclear attack sub we have parked off their coast.We need a helicopter that won't be shot down as easily. I'm no commanche expert, but was this the type of helicopter for that? If not then let it die and make a better one. You got that right! It's as if they're gonna make the Earth's Space Defence Grid a la Macross Plus a reality! Quote
Anubis Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 (edited) I still think we have some form of space born laser up there. Even if we don't it's still in the books somewhere. So is a "Directed Energy Weapon" for the F-22. Two under wing pods, one marked power, one targeting, that was all the info on the page of ammo dump's weapons book my roommate brought from work. I've seen it mentioned elsewhere as well I think. There's all kinds of good weapons on the way. Edited February 23, 2004 by Anubis Quote
Mislovrit Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 Could've used the money in solving the Patriot Missile Battery problem.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/19/...ain601241.shtml Read elsewhere the Patriot Missile Battery system haves no real problem it is manned. The friendly fire incident happened when the batteries were set on auto while crews were taking cover when they're being attacked by nearby Iraqi artillery. Quote
Angel's Fury Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 Could've used the money in solving the Patriot Missile Battery problem.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/19/...ain601241.shtml Read elsewhere the Patriot Missile Battery system haves no real problem it is manned. The friendly fire incident happened when the batteries were set on auto while crews were taking cover when they're being attacked by nearby Iraqi artillery. Exactly. Must be the program it uses when in auto. Quote
ogami Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 OK, NO Comanche helicopters... so what is the next-gen helicopters? or no more helicopters? Quote
the white drew carey Posted February 23, 2004 Author Posted February 23, 2004 (edited) Well, from what I've read of the system, I'd assumed that it almost completely independent of human control and, like the article stated, that once it acquires a target, the operators only have a few seconds to abort the launch. IIRC- the whole point of the Patriot was to remove the delay that human decision-making caused during times when milli-seconds count. I think that even the "manned" mode of the Patriot is still about 99% free of human control. edit- spelling... it's been a long day. Edited February 23, 2004 by the white drew carey Quote
Angel's Fury Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 Well, from what I've read of the system, I'd assumed that it almost completely independent of human control and, like the article stated, that once it acquires a target, the operators only have a few seconds to abort the launch.IIRC- the whole point of the Patriot was to remove the delay that human decision-making caused during times when milli-seconds count. I think that even the "manned" mode of the Patriot is still about 99% free of human control. edit- spelling... it's been a long day. At least 4 seconds. Quote
buddhafabio Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 Could've used the money in solving the Patriot Missile Battery problem.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/02/19/...ain601241.shtml Does any body read Dale Brown beside me? he is a former Airforce navigator. Any way in his books he mainly writes about the exotic aircraft from area 51. B-52s that are hybrid fighter bombers. nuclear missle defence systems, enhanced b-1 and b-2 bombers, super f-15 fighters. But any way his nuclear missle defence systems were intresting. He had plasma yield warheads that vaporized matter to gass based on current devlopmental theory. and the higher up in the atmosphere you got the bigger the plasma explosion got. because of the lesser dense air. So i feel that if any of that is true it could be a good defensive system. Quote
F-ZeroOne Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 They'll probably now spend ten years trying to buy something else that will turn out to be just as problem plagued or not nearly as capable... e.g. RAF = F-111 instead of TSR-2 ( that never came through )... Quote
Godzilla Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 Oh well. I thought the F-22 Raptor got da boot. They lookiing to kill the JSF too? I am thinking maybe the got something else in mind for recon helos. Quote
Daishi3500 Posted February 23, 2004 Posted February 23, 2004 cancelling the comanche, thats what they want you to think... Its all a conspiracy, maaaaaaaaan. Quote
Mislovrit Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 Well, from what I've read of the system, I'd assumed that it almost completely independent of human control and, like the article stated, that once it acquires a target, the operators only have a few seconds to abort the launch.IIRC- the whole point of the Patriot was to remove the delay that human decision-making caused during times when milli-seconds count. I think that even the "manned" mode of the Patriot is still about 99% free of human control. From http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/patriot.htm . Engagement Control Station (ECS). Where the computer and the operators fight the air battle. Man-machine interaction options here can range from letting the computer assist in target identification and prioritization to leaving the ECS and letting the computer fight the entire air battle itself. Quote
Warmaker Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 Well, the knowledge and experience gained from the Comanche can still be used in other future applications. I'm not an engineer or anything but the experience from this program isn't simply deleted or something. All the talk of fancy weaponry like the F-22, Cobra Rattlers, and Death Star Lasers is fine and dandy. How about all this big money do something tangible for the ground pounders: * MORE body armor/SAPI protection available. Currently the infantrymen get the priority on the inadequate amount of body armor, and rightly so. But the support troops need this too with the blur in what's supposed to be a frontline area or the rear. Flak jackets are available for all and they're decent against fragments. But catch a round and you've got trouble. * MORE infantrymen and ensuring their thorough training and proper equipment. The quality of our infantrymen is currently great and I have no problem with that. A bunch of our problems in the Sunni Triangle could use a good dose of more boots on the ground for constant patrols. There's just not enough infantrymen and we've become too dependent on mechanized and armored formations. * Make sure the next service rifle is up to snuff and we get alot of it quickly. The Army has already been field testing Heckler & Koch's XM-8 which itself is based on the German G-36. I've read the soldiers really like the rifle out there. The Army has also given the XM-8 for testing with the other services. After all, we don't need 2-3 different service rifles running around. ** I really do hope the 6.8mm round replaces the 5.56mm. The military's actually considering dropping the 5.56 for the 6.8. Sounds like a good balance between the miniscule 5.56 and the overkill NATO 7.62 as the round for our next service rifle. * The USMC's fleet of CH-46's are older than most of the experienced SNCO's in their commands. The CH-53's aren't that far behind but are pushing along pretty good for now. Now, the Osprey is supposed to do the job, but well, that's another bedtime story Quote
Southcross Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/02/23/helicopte...l.ap/index.html wait I'm confused??? this administration deciding against spending upteen billion on some piece of war machinery??? WTF! The economy has gone to crap, at the very least they could spend money we don't have on something that looks kewl. 12 billion for a stealth helecopter vs 50 billion for Oil wells... I'd rather have the damn helecopter... but that my Opinion can't wait for election time Quote
bsu legato Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 * Make sure the next service rifle is up to snuff and we get alot of it quickly. The Army has already been field testing Heckler & Koch's XM-8 which itself is based on the German G-36. I've read the soldiers really like the rifle out there. The Army has also given the XM-8 for testing with the other services. After all, we don't need 2-3 different service rifles running around.** I really do hope the 6.8mm round replaces the 5.56mm. The military's actually considering dropping the 5.56 for the 6.8. Sounds like a good balance between the miniscule 5.56 and the overkill NATO 7.62 as the round for our next service rifle. You know....in a world with common sense, these two would go hand in hand without question. Both the M16 and the 5.56 have had "issues" over their service life, and it would only be logical to look at replacing BOTH at the same time. Start over with a clean slate, so to speak. But of course, here on planet earth things don't work that way... Quote
Godzilla Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 can't wait for election time I can. Not much to choose from. I hate Kerry and Bush is really pissing me off. Quote
Southcross Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 can't wait for election time I can. Not much to choose from. I hate Kerry and Bush is really pissing me off. reminds me of an old Richard Prior movie (think it was called "millionare")... vote "none of the above" Quote
Pat Payne Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 I'm probably gonna vote for Cthulu... I'm sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils! (proudly stolen from a bumper sticker ) Quote
Britai 7018 Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 maybe they'll put the money they save and put it towards a better option... Gerwalk mode on the valkyrie they're sercretly developing... Quote
Angel's Fury Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/02/23/helicopte...l.ap/index.html wait I'm confused??? this administration deciding against spending upteen billion on some piece of war machinery??? WTF! The economy has gone to crap, at the very least they could spend money we don't have on something that looks kewl. 12 billion for a stealth helecopter vs 50 billion for Oil wells... I'd rather have the damn helecopter... but that my Opinion can't wait for election time What do you expect! For Americans, national security is a top prioty. Quote
Angel's Fury Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 Well, from what I've read of the system, I'd assumed that it almost completely independent of human control and, like the article stated, that once it acquires a target, the operators only have a few seconds to abort the launch.IIRC- the whole point of the Patriot was to remove the delay that human decision-making caused during times when milli-seconds count. I think that even the "manned" mode of the Patriot is still about 99% free of human control. From http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/patriot.htm . Engagement Control Station (ECS). Where the computer and the operators fight the air battle. Man-machine interaction options here can range from letting the computer assist in target identification and prioritization to leaving the ECS and letting the computer fight the entire air battle itself. That still doesn't explain why a system would mistaken a friendly aircraft for a TBM. Why do you think fighters don't fly near it's range? Better yet, why is the Army still saying there's no problem with it when these incidences have been cleary documented? It's probably a problem in the system, a program, especially in it's targeting system. Probably a line or two dealing with the identification of the target. It should not mistaken a friendy fighter for a TBM. Quote
Agent ONE Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 can't wait for election time I can. Not much to choose from. I hate Kerry and Bush is really pissing me off. Thats why you should vote for Nader. Quote
Angel's Fury Posted February 24, 2004 Posted February 24, 2004 Nader? Kerry seems like a much better fit, coming from an outsider. Quote
Agent ONE Posted February 25, 2004 Posted February 25, 2004 Nader? Kerry seems like a much better fit, coming from an outsider. Kerry changes his mind on every issue depending which audience he is talking to. Total liar... Im supporting Nader. Quote
the white drew carey Posted February 25, 2004 Author Posted February 25, 2004 C'mon guys!!! Talking about political agendas in relation to our military is skimming pretty close to politics, but you's are now crossing the line. Quote
Agent ONE Posted February 25, 2004 Posted February 25, 2004 C'mon guys!!! Talking about political agendas in relation to our military is skimming pretty close to politics, but you's are now crossing the line. LOL, ya think? Ok no more politics. Quote
GreenGuy42 Posted February 25, 2004 Posted February 25, 2004 I'm probably gonna vote for Cthulu... I'm sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils! (proudly stolen from a bumper sticker ) You know, someone released a campaign pack for Cthulhu not too long ago.. Kanata has one.... Quote
myk Posted February 25, 2004 Posted February 25, 2004 They haven't officially killed that project yet, as there are still a few more congressional or political or whatever you wanna' call them-steps to take... Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.