The Republican Thread

[southsider2k5]

[Cknolls]

OOPS!!

 

 

 

http://www.rollcall.com/news/-201012-1.html

 

[mr_genius]

 

haha

[Balta1701]

Something I'm going to be keeping an eye on...here's our first potential tea party supported challenger for Senator Lugar in 2012, IN state senator Mike Delph.

[NorthSideSox72]

Didn't know where to put this, but found it very interesting. China is now making their own versions of Soviet-built military high end hardware, including their prized Su-27 fighter jets. Even worse for Russia, China is now selling those jets and other advanced weaponry around the globe, undercutting Russia in that space. And oh BTW, China is also nearing completion of its first aircraft carrier.

 

Linky to the current state of China's military extension capabilities.

 

[mr_genius]

Didn't know where to put this, but found it very interesting. China is now making their own versions of Soviet-built military high end hardware, including their prized Su-27 fighter jets. Even worse for Russia, China is now selling those jets and other advanced weaponry around the globe, undercutting Russia in that space. And oh BTW, China is also nearing completion of its first aircraft carrier.

 

Linky to the current state of China's military extension capabilities.

 

They got a lot of money now. They also build their own super computers. Actually, they built the world's fastest super computer.

Edited December 13, 2010 by mr_genius

[kapkomet]

Didn't know where to put this, but found it very interesting. China is now making their own versions of Soviet-built military high end hardware, including their prized Su-27 fighter jets. Even worse for Russia, China is now selling those jets and other advanced weaponry around the globe, undercutting Russia in that space. And oh BTW, China is also nearing completion of its first aircraft carrier.

 

Linky to the current state of China's military extension capabilities.

 

There's a lot of bad assumptions in this article. And some, I probably shouldn't talk about, . I mean it's not like I'm DoD clearance or anything but I do know some things that make some of what the Chinese are doing sort of a moot point.

[Jenksismyhero]

I was really impressed with this Boehner piece 60 minutes did yesterday. Seems like he could be a really good house speaker.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7143552n

Edited December 13, 2010 by Jenksismybitch

[HuskyCaucasian]

I was really impressed with this Boehner piece 60 minutes did yesterday. Seems like he could be a really good house speaker.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7143552n

Except the part where he flat out said he will refuse to compromise.

[Jenksismyhero]

Except the part where he flat out said he will refuse to compromise.

 

Semantics. He doesn't want to compromise his principles, but he wants to seek out middle ground. To me that's the same thing, but I get the slight distinction.

[Cknolls]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101213/ap_on_...erhaul_virginia

 

 

[Cknolls]

CBOE floor rockin right now. Medal of Honor winner SGT. Giunta ringing closing bell. Pretty cool.

[southsideirish71]

Well thank god we don't need those F-22s anymore.

 

 

Our secrets are helping fuel the Chinese military machine.

 

 

[kapkomet]

I think the elimination of the F-22 program is the biggest mistake the military has made in a long, long time. That is one bad ass plane... and it was a big part of the business I work at now. The technology is phenominal.

[Balta1701]

I think the elimination of the F-22 program is the biggest mistake the military has made in a long, long time. That is one bad ass plane... and it was a big part of the business I work at now. The technology is phenominal.

Aside from keeping you employed, what exactly is the F-22 useful for? It's an expensive air superiority fighter that has zero role right now in maintaining air superiority because even the best the rest of the world has can't challenge the last generation of U.S. fighters. On top of that, it's so expensive that at a shootdown rate of 15:1 enemy:us, the fighter still remains impractical; you need about 30:1 or 40:1 for the costs to even come out close to equal.

[NorthSideSox72]

Aside from keeping you employed, what exactly is the F-22 useful for? It's an expensive air superiority fighter that has zero role right now in maintaining air superiority because even the best the rest of the world has can't challenge the last generation of U.S. fighters. On top of that, it's so expensive that at a shootdown rate of 15:1 enemy:us, the fighter still remains impractical; you need about 30:1 or 40:1 for the costs to even come out close to equal.

I'd like to see them pursue projects like this in very small scale. Build 1 or 2 squadrons of them at most, then move onto the next project. Keep maintaining previous technologies, because as you said, they do more than fine... but still put out a small generation every so often to keep that cutting edge. Its slightly more expensive from an R&D cost spread perspective, but the overall cost is much lower, you keep your tech edge, and you maintain a force that's cheaper to run and cheaper to train on.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

I'd like to see them pursue projects like this in very small scale. Build 1 or 2 squadrons of them at most, then move onto the next project. Keep maintaining previous technologies, because as you said, they do more than fine... but still put out a small generation every so often to keep that cutting edge. Its slightly more expensive from an R&D cost spread perspective, but the overall cost is much lower, you keep your tech edge, and you maintain a force that's cheaper to run and cheaper to train on.

Also should have added, this method allows you to quickly ramp up into more recent technologies if or when the need arrives, because you already have a fully designed, vetted and tested platform - just need to rebuild the assembly lines, which is relatively easy (compared to the early development and testing phases).

 

[Balta1701]

Currently, there are 187 F-22's in service according to the military, filling up only a handful of squadrons, none of which have ever been used in combat. The total cost at present of the program is about $35 billion.

[NorthSideSox72]

Currently, there are 187 F-22's in service according to the military, filling up only a handful of squadrons, none of which have ever been used in combat. The total cost at present of the program is about $35 billion.

Then in my view, its time to kill it, file the design docs, and start a new skunk works for the next thing. Build 2 squads of those, then move on again. Repeat, unless or until the air superiority game changes significantly.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

Aside from keeping you employed, what exactly is the F-22 useful for? It's an expensive air superiority fighter that has zero role right now in maintaining air superiority because even the best the rest of the world has can't challenge the last generation of U.S. fighters. On top of that, it's so expensive that at a shootdown rate of 15:1 enemy:us, the fighter still remains impractical; you need about 30:1 or 40:1 for the costs to even come out close to equal.

 

Balta, given our clear intelligence failures the last 10-15 years, how do you know this is true? How can we know for sure we not only have the best, but a generation lead, in cutting edge technology?

 

Also, IMO the same reasoning behind your view on civil scientific research spending (every dollar spent on science is a benefit) should be applied to spending on defense technology and research.

[southsider2k5]

Also should have added, this method allows you to quickly ramp up into more recent technologies if or when the need arrives, because you already have a fully designed, vetted and tested platform - just need to rebuild the assembly lines, which is relatively easy (compared to the early development and testing phases).

 

Exactly how long does it take to "ramp up" an F-22 building program? Just watching how long it has taken to get 787 rolling off of an assembly room floor has been a horrifying site.

[NorthSideSox72]

Balta, given our clear intelligence failures the last 10-15 years, how do you know this is true? How can we know for sure we not only have the best, but a generation lead, in cutting edge technology?

 

Also, IMO the same reasoning behind your view on civil scientific research spending (every dollar spent on science is a benefit) should be applied to spending on defense technology and research.

When the US is multiple generations ahead of the rest of the world in alternate energy, then we should talk about cutting that back too.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Exactly how long does it take to "ramp up" an F-22 building program? Just watching how long it has taken to get 787 rolling off of an assembly room floor has been a horrifying site.

That was my entire point in my plan - read what I posted, and then look at the 787. The great, great majority of time and effort goes into just getting them into production. After that, its quite easy, relatively.

 

For example, look at the extended 747's they are pumping out. That was a pretty quick turn to get those going, and that required airframe changes. If you are just going with existing design, the ramp time is miniscule compared to starting from the drawing board (literally).

 

[southsider2k5]

That was my entire point in my plan - read what I posted, and then look at the 787. The great, great majority of time and effort goes into just getting them into production. After that, its quite easy, relatively.

 

For example, look at the extended 747's they are pumping out. That was a pretty quick turn to get those going, and that required airframe changes. If you are just going with existing design, the ramp time is miniscule compared to starting from the drawing board (literally).

 

So who exactly is going to leave a production line sit at all of these different defense companies on the off chance that we need more after the program is mothballed? Otherwise, you are starting over again.

[Balta1701]

So who exactly is going to leave a production line sit at all of these different defense companies on the off chance that we need more after the program is mothballed? Otherwise, you are starting over again.

You're half-way to the flaw in NSS's logic. If there's money available to build a line, then someone will keep it up and running. The problem is that building the lines, completing all the tests and designs, figuring out all the flaws, losing a couple test pilots, etc., is the expensive part; building the planes is the cheap part.

 

Of that $35 billion price, probably the first $25 billion was spent setting up the system and design. Once you get the design, producing the planes becomes the cheaper part. Running the line from here they estimate costs about $100 million or so a plane, while the first hundred on average came out at about $250 million a plane.