Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Lockheed Martin Wins 200billion Contract!!!!!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter ~HOUNDOG~
  • Start date Start date
H

~HOUNDOG~

Guest
Fuck that is alot of money.
Boeing got shut out of the jsf program.(joint strike fighter).
If you dont know about this,the JSF is the most high-tech fighter aircraft to ever be built. The US paid 200billion dollars for 3000 of them,that is alot of aircraft.I don't even think there is that many f-15 eagles and f-16's falcons combined.
The JSF will be the F-35. It has vertical taking off and landing,like the harrier but this is the new generation of that idea.
The F-35 (jsf) will also have thrust-vectoring and will have a TINY radar silhoutte,being a very stealthy aircrafrt.
This first delivery is for 2008.Looks like we are getting ready for the chinese.
 
Yes, that is a nice contract! But for my own personal Airforce I still enjoy the Aurora over the F-22 and JSF.
 
I picked up 500 shares at 48 before market close on the word of a marine buddy of mine.
Looks like drinks are on me tonite!!!
 
This is good news

Britain has also bought some of these aircraft

its about time, our air force was vastly outdated

what happened to the Euro Fighter??! that was supposed to be going into service during 2001, money well wasted
 
eurofighters still pretty damn good

a lot ofthe other european countries paid development and then oulled out, but they knew about a JSF for carriers when eurofighter was being built.

lord knows we need something to replace our tornado's

but what fraked me out the most about the eurofighter is without constant comouter control the plane would just pull up and the pilot would be able to do nothing :o
 
danielson said:
eurofighters still pretty damn good

a lot ofthe other european countries paid development and then oulled out, but they knew about a JSF for carriers when eurofighter was being built.

lord knows we need something to replace our tornado's

but what fraked me out the most about the eurofighter is without constant comouter control the plane would just pull up and the pilot would be able to do nothing :o
Click to expand...

most new fighter aircraft and stealth aircraft are unstable forms, even the F16 cannot fly without "fly by wire"

they had big problems with the F22 initially, do you remember the first test flight when it crashed?
 
Liberator said:


most new fighter aircraft and stealth aircraft are unstable forms, even the F16 cannot fly without "fly by wire"

they had big problems with the F22 initially, do you remember the first test flight when it crashed?
Click to expand...

no i didnt see it

but the eurofighter is maneuverable, has the best missles money can buy (can hit the target before you see it), has voice recognition (i REALLY hope that works) its basically kick ass....so a mix of tht and the JSF should keep our fighters nicely updated

maybe afterwards we can fix our rifles and helicopters :xeye:
 
This is a good news for 2 reasons: first this means thousands of jobs here in my area and second, since jobs are created here in Canada then the Canadian Gov will have no choice but to change their shitty-old F-18 for these new fighters.....
 
That is suck buillshit...Boeing was ahead of schedule...they were also under budget. Made several successful test flights and were doing everything right.
My understanding was Martin had yet to even make some of the needed test flights.

Things in St. Louis just got a lot worse!
 
F/A-18 shitty huh?
Well I tell you what, why don't you build a better one?

As far as the eurofighter being as nimble as the f-16.
http://www.eurofighter.com/home.asp
Sounds like it has a few good point to its design, still.
I hardly call that an improvement over any U.S. war birds considering the F14, F15, F16, and F18 were all in some developement stages dating back to the late 60's. The "latest and greatest" F117, and the B2 are not far behind in that respect. So you can deduct that there is without doubt some bone crunching evil shit just around the corner.
http://aurorapage.tripod.com/images/conceptpics.html
Hell people have been reporting sightings of the Aurora since 92'.
 
It IS a bold statement. And I stand by it. ;) Maneuverability and expensive missiles does not a great fighter make.
 
Belial said:
It IS a bold statement. And I stand by it. ;) Maneuverability and expensive missiles does not a great fighter make.
Click to expand...

So what makes a great multi role fighter aircraft in your opinion?
 
minion said:
F/A-18 shitty huh?
Well I tell you what, why don't you build a better one?

As far as the eurofighter being as nimble as the f-16.
http://www.eurofighter.com/home.asp
Sounds like it has a few good point to its design, still.
I hardly call that an improvement over any U.S. war birds considering the F14, F15, F16, and F18 were all in some developement stages dating back to the late 60's. The "latest and greatest" F117, and the B2 are not far behind in that respect. So you can deduct that there is without doubt some bone crunching evil shit just around the corner.
http://aurorapage.tripod.com/images/conceptpics.html
Hell people have been reporting sightings of the Aurora since 92'.
Click to expand...

Your definately right about the EFA not offering anything new, but weve needed an aircraft of its kind for a long time now.

Does the Aurora actually exist??? I read somewhere it was supposebly a direct replacement for the SR71:
sr71.gif


and that the engines had somekind of high tech air conditioning/liquid cooling system because they got so hot

Crazy stuff anyway,cant remember the exact details
 
Last edited:
Speed, payload, range.
Manuverability hasn't been an issue since the "Red Baron Days". Considering the technological innovation of missles. You can be as manuverable as you want or as fast has the human body will tolerate. Even the SR-71 can't out run a missle. Once you run out of flares or decoys your pretty much screwd.

The best bet is to just not be seen at all.
http://www.janes.com/defence/gallery/defgal_010905.shtml
 
Liberator: In modern warfare:

Low radar cross section, advanced avionics, speed, range, supercruise capability, payload, multi-mission capability (versatility), low pilot workload, high thrust to weight ratio....
 
"Your definately right about the EFA not offering anything new, but weve needed an aircraft of its kind for a long time now.

Does the Aurora actually exist??? I read somewhere it was supposebly a direct replacement for the SR71:
http://www.rmititanium.com/50th/art/sr71.gif

and that the engines had somekind of high tech air conditioning/liquid cooling system because they got so hot

Crazy stuff anyway,cant remember the exact details"

It's gone dark like the B-2, F-117A Nighthawk were in the 80's.

http://www.fas.org/irp/mystery/aurora.htm
 
i thought the blackbird was fastenough to out run any missle (+mach 3)

anyhows the eurofighter might not be anything amazingly new but looking at its stats it puts it above anything out there at the moment
 
so what happens to boeings plane....it looked much more funky
 
danielson said:


no i didnt see it

but the eurofighter is maneuverable, has the best missles money can buy (can hit the target before you see it), has voice recognition (i REALLY hope that works) its basically kick ass....so a mix of tht and the JSF should keep our fighters nicely updated

maybe afterwards we can fix our rifles and helicopters :xeye:
Click to expand...

This is so my field.......LOL

Anyways, your missile statement is incorrect.

The most advanced missile in the world today is the american
PHOENIX long-range guided air-to-air missile.

It has a range of 100 miles, and has its own internal
X-band targeting radar(which is also heta-seeking), which makes
it almost IMPOSSIBLE to evade once its locked on target.
Its top cruise velocity is also Mach 5, well above ANY
fighter aircraft.
As an example:

F-111 Aardvark: Mach 2.5
Mig-29 Foxbat: mach 2.5
F-15,16: Circa Mach 2.3
F-18: Mach 2
F-14: Mach 2
Mirage F-1's, Mirage 200: Mach 2
Lockheed's SR71-Blackbird: Mach 3.2

Stealth(F-117)(Get this) Mach 0.9

Why? Because if the F-117 were to go past the speed
of sound(V= 332m/s+ 0.6*outside temp in celsuis)
it would create a sonic boom which would make it
visible to frequency-oscillating targeting systems(
similiar to radio traffic triangulation using vectors except
much more complicated due to the speed of
the targeted object)

The only plane to my know;ledge that could out-run it would be the
X-1 experimental ROCKET plane with variable-geometry wings
and ONE HELL of an aerodynamic co-efficient.
The thing was measured at Mach 7.1

It coudn't go any faster because the pilot almost always kept
losing conciousness every time it attempted
a manouver at Mach 7.

Just imagine a gravimetric shear force of 10g's acting on your
chest/arms/head....LOL

And I have to say that the new F35 "suppossed" VSTOL
capabilities and Mach 2+ cruising speed capabilities
are VERY HARD to believe.

It would take too long to explain, but it has to do with
the design of the wings. VSTOL wing design
severely limits a high cruising speed velocity.
Just look at the Harrier, it can't even go Mach 1.


Fonz
 
Fonz said:


And I have to say that the new F35 "suppossed" VSTOL
capabilities and Mach 2+ cruising speed capabilities
are VERY HARD to believe.

It would take too long to explain, but it has to do with
the design of the wings. VSTOL wing design
severely limits a high cruising speed velocity.
Just look at the Harrier, it can't even go Mach 1.


Fonz
Click to expand...

never knew about that missle....still i doubt its standrard issue on most american planes due to the cost...this missle will be on eurofighters...its what i saw on the news a while back. still nice info though :) i had no idea missles were that good

one thing thats really ALWAYS puzzled me (and im sure you're more likely to know than me)

the americans kept blackbirds top speed a secret they only now revealed it to be mach 3.2 .....the wings actually leak fuel while stationary such is the hardcore design of the plane. very few built.
HOWEVER
a MIG-25 foxbat can do mach 3.1 flying barebones (i.e. camera and ECM pod).......why did the americans go to all that shit justto get 0.1 mach more.....did the aircraft have a longer range or someting?

the harrier could do mach one if it flew directly towards the earth, no? :D still thats one thing i thought was damn cool whn iwas lookig at the stats of this thing, the fact it was supersonic
 
I believe I know to what you're referring to in
regard to the Foxbat.

It was actually Mach 3.2 :) (The claim made by the
russinas anyways)

However, it was NOT independently verified so I wouldn't
place to much credibility on it.

Also, when in full throttle, the SR-71's nozzle(in between
the dual exhaust ports), glows cherry-red because
the titanium fuselage is being MELTED by the
air friction+the energy coming from the exothermic
chemical reaction in the engines/turbines.

Fact is, they can't be kept up in the air for long because
the plane would literally MELT......LOL

I didn't know about the dripping part though.

The Harrier is NOT supersonic in self-powered flight BUT
if it were to dive it would probably surpass Mach 1.
(So would the Stealth for that matter).

Phoenix missiles cost $1 million a POP and are
standard armament for F-16's, F-15's and some
F-18's.

Then there's the short-range Sidewinders, exocets(air-to
-ground anti-ship missiles), the HARM'S(radar killers)
and a whole host of other exotic ones.

Fonz
 
Fonz said:
I believe I know to what you're referring to in
regard to the Foxbat.

It was actually Mach 3.2 :) (The claim made by the
russinas anyways)

However, it was NOT independently verified so I wouldn't
place to much credibility on it.

Also, when in full throttle, the SR-71's nozzle(in between
the dual exhaust ports), glows cherry-red because
the titanium fuselage is being MELTED by the
air friction+the energy coming from the exothermic
chemical reaction in the engines/turbines.

Fact is, they can't be kept up in the air for long because
the plane would literally MELT......LOL

Fonz
Click to expand...

see heres why i have always wonderd about this

the foxbats engine parts were made out of steel for that very reason, and titanium wasnt used as in all the other tumanskii engines because of the melting. apparently the steel could withstand temps of 3000*c, whereas the titanium only 2000*C (my memory of this aintgreat)

also with a light armament the plane (and the mig 31 which is an advanced foxbat) could do mach 2.8

its always perplexed me...i used to be interested in planes but i couldnt get anyone who knew enough about planes to ask. thats the reason i asked btw :)

dang...that missle sounds too damn cool!
 
minion said:
Speed, payload, range.
Manuverability hasn't been an issue since the "Red Baron Days". Considering the technological innovation of missles. You can be as manuverable as you want or as fast has the human body will tolerate. Even the SR-71 can't out run a missle. Once you run out of flares or decoys your pretty much screwd.

The best bet is to just not be seen at all.
http://www.janes.com/defence/gallery/defgal_010905.shtml
Click to expand...

0-Mach 5 in 1 sec

Fuck!!
 
The foxbat is the worst soviet aircraft ever designed and built.
It's turn radius is horrifyingly shitty.
It may be fast but it's radar signature appears HUGE!
I would never want to fly a foxbat in combat.
I think a mig-17 could take it out,why?
Te avionic systems are so old,it's missiles wouldn't hit the mig-17.
Now the mig-17 is even older,but at least it could burn the hell out of the foxbat in a dogfight.

The best fighter ever built is the F-15,it has a 73-1 kill ratio.
Fucking beat that.It has had the least crashes per any fighter ever built.The most advanced weapons systems of any fighter flying today,and it has huge range,altitude and speed.
It is THE air superiority fighter.
 
maybe....but the foxbat would be a good interceptor in that its fast, and ive seen the missles it carries for interceting andthey are HUGE....still they aint really contunued it so it cant of been amazing

plus it would be good for recon ;)

still theyd probably hear it a mile off ;)


whats everyones favourite plane

mines the Su-27......always liked that plane :)
 
Fonz said:


Phoenix missiles cost $1 million a POP and are
standard armament for F-16's, F-15's and some
F-18's.
Fonz
Click to expand...

That is incorrect.Phoenix missiles are only loaded on F-14 tomcats.The missile was designed for the tomcat program.
Standard air-air armament on f-16's,f-18's and f-15's is
the sidewinder infrared short-range aam,sparrow semi-active radar homing missiles and "fire and forget" amraams.
 
dan,
the su-27 is a very beautifull plane.
As for the mig-29,beautifull plane also.
Unfortunately,it's beauty doesn't match it's systems.
The iraqi's had numerous mig-29's shot down in air-air combat with f-15's.F-15's had a 100% kill ratio to the mig-29's.
#1 lesson the next time russians design combat aircraft,combat first,looks last.
 
The foxbat was definately fast but its range was poor, pretty limited if its turning ratio was also poor

I gotta agree with Danielson, the SU-27 looks cool, but the SR71 is my out and out favourite along with the B-1

I have never seen a B1 in the flesh, but Ive heard that they are supposed to be deafening when flying over head

Ive seen the Blackbird though, awesome plane

I also used to think the FIREFOX plane in the old Clint Eastwood movie was cool too!!

Did you know that in the 80's America claimed that the airspace covering the white house was un-penetrable by any aircraft, well the British sent over a Vulcan bomber and proved them wrong by dropping flower on it

tis true dat
 
well dont forget they were using mig29 A's...an ageing fleet

plus they were going against v.well trained pilots :D



w8hat isn't so well known is when the soviets left east germany, they left their aircraft and the E.german pilots.

when the americans decided to mock dogfight the e.germans they found a helmet linked missle direction system the commies had actually beat them hands down. it took them months before they figured how to beat it.

had the soviets gone to war with the allies, in the air at least they would have been winning

their airforce used to be spectacularly engineered, yours had nice avionics....now its all redundant as all their planes are old and rusty :)

F-15's a nice plane though. nly one to have shot down a sattelite. why dont they send one after al-jezeera ;)
 
The americans have "Accidently" bombed red cross wharehouses twice. That is no mistake bro's.
Where would the best place to hide weapons be?
A place where when the americans bomb it,they get criticized.
Those wharehouses were filled with ammunition and weaponry.
 
well the buildings were white with huge red crosses painted on them....its just asking for trouble if u ask me ;)

thats too damn funny about the flower liberator :lmao:
 
Actually,about flying over the white-house,that is just sad.
They should have 2 f-15's devoted to that airspace 24/7.
 
LOL.......a plane thread..cool

Hounddog, a "fire and forget" missile has only HEAT-SEEKING
capabilities. You fire it and it goes for a the centroid of the closest
infra-red source, regardless of the type of plane(civilian/military).
They are a BAD choice for armament.
AMRAAMS plain SUCK for air-to-air combat.


The Phoenix is NOT "fire and forget". After it is fired its internal
radar acquires the target(at 100+ miles)(This radar is also
able to BEND its radar beam for extra stealth/surprise) and
zeros in on the target at Mach 5. Then, at close range it can:
either:

1. Go infra-red if the aircraft throws off "chaff" or tries to "jam"
the missiles radar.

2. Just target the aircraft with its radar if the aircraft has
any heat-suppresion technology.(Used in Blackhawk helicopters)

Also, the phoenix is not just Navy, it is also army. The problem
is that since its so big, it takes up two weapons pods on
the F-15's wing, so its only used if missions require
an LR missile. But, since the F-15 is primarily a "dog-fight"
fighter because of its manouverability, those two pods
are occupied by 2 sidewinders.(more missile=more kills)


Next point, is that the Foxbat was exclusively built to
be a VERY high SPEED INTERCEPTOR. The
russians just wanted it to get to the american planes as fast
as possible. They really didn't care about manouvering.


lastly, the reason the F-15 is so manouverable is because of its
variable-geometry wings which essentially adjust to the
situation via computer control.
If the situation requires speed, the sweep angle is decreased.
if the situation requires superior manouverability, the
wing sweep is drastically increased so that you have
a greater air flow around the cambered wings.

Damn, I could go on and on and on.......

Fonz
 
~HOUNDOG~ said:
Actually,about flying over the white-house,that is just sad.
They should have 2 f-15's devoted to that airspace 24/7.
Click to expand...

or have a SAM site nearby...that would be fun :)

no doubt its bad PR.....but they have a FAT buker underneath to withstand that kinda punishment
 
I have never heard of an F-15 being equipped with the AN/AWG-9 radar that is necessary to operate the AIM-54 Phoenix. That's because no F-15 ever has been

And the AMRAAM IS an awesome (radar guided) missile, it is also technically fire and forget, so is the phoenix. Fire and forget is a term that contrasts to semi-active (Like the SARH of the AIM-7 Sparrow, which requires a radar lock from the firing plane until impact. This sucks.

The F-15 does NOT have variable geometry wings. The f-14 tomcat DOES, but the F-15 is fixed wing.

F-15 is USAF, not army. ;) And it's no dogfighter. its thrust to weight ratio is great (The first plane ever to have a combat thrust:weight greater than 1), but it lacks the knife-fighting capabilities of the F-16, or even the F-18. Its flight characteristics at high AoA are not stellar; the plane is meant to do too many things for it to specialize in only one part of air combat. Not that it's not a force to be reckoned with when it comes to guns....

And although an SR-71 may be slower than the phoenix, it has the advantage of constant thrust. No missile burns through its entire flight; an SR-71 fired on at 40 miles can turn tail and run (Though "turning tail" is a bit of a stretch for such a clunker), fire its burners, climb to 80,000, and outlast the missile. The Phoenix will get close, but it simply won't have the power to catch it.

It's an interceptor missile, designed to take out incoming missiles, attack aircraft, and bombers at long range.
 
Last edited:
I love Russian Jets.....they build them like tanks.

They kill me......The US has great plans the best.
We just like to make them like a fine swiss watch.
 
AMRAAM is a fire and forget missile.
It is NOT all infra-red! It is also a VERY GOOD aam.
It has active radar inside the missile.
Aswell as an IR seeker.
 
why does the airforce need the jsf??? The F-22 comes online in a year or two, and thats the baddest jet on the planet.......I can see the Navy though, they've long been in need of a new fighter.
 
BigPhysicsBastard said:
why does the airforce need the jsf??? The F-22 comes online in a year or two, and thats the baddest jet on the planet.......I can see the Navy though, they've long been in need of a new fighter.
Click to expand...

they want something to relace the harrier as its been around since the 70's

its very good but can only do mach 0.96.....im not sure how long it can stay in their air but ht has separate VTOL enginesso i would imagne a fiar amount of time

this JSF is supposed to be supersonic, and can VTOL for short periods of time....i hope its better, we're buying 60, basically just to use on our carriers id guess
 
F-22 = ~F-15 replacement. Expensive, not as many squadrons. Primarily for air superiority.

JSF = ~F-16 replacement. It's actually meant to fill the position of a cheaper, multi-role fighter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

hanselthecaretaker
You thought Bush's military spending was outrageous?
Replies
11
Views
3K
mrplunkey
mrplunkey
Y_lifter
Airplane peeps.... - F-35 Lightning II
Replies
20
Views
988
Y_lifter
Y_lifter
javaguru
The Greatest German General You've Never Heard of...
Replies
46
Views
11K
Spartacus
S
Doktor Bollix
America is the #1 Terrorist Training Camp in the world?
Replies
26
Views
2K
aurelius
aurelius
p0ink
Detailed Outline of All The LIES in Farenheiht 9/11
Replies
18
Views
5K
Burning_Inside
Burning_Inside
Top Bottom