DE-FENSE! (CHA CHA CHA)

User avatar
Friday
Posts: 2016
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 7:40 pm

Re: DE-FENSE! (CHA CHA CHA)

Postby Friday » Tue Jan 06, 2015 9:09 pm

So we've passed the point where the Military Industrial Complex is just making weapons we don't need and won't ever use to the point where they're making weapons we don't need and won't ever use and don't work.
Image

User avatar
Friday
Posts: 2016
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 7:40 pm

Re: DE-FENSE! (CHA CHA CHA)

Postby Friday » Tue Jan 06, 2015 9:09 pm

Haha, just kidding. We passed that point a long time ago.
Image

User avatar
Mongrel
Posts: 8821
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:28 pm
Location: Canadumb

Re: DE-FENSE! (CHA CHA CHA)

Postby Mongrel » Tue Jan 06, 2015 10:17 pm

Up here we're still waffling about buying the F-35. I think at this point even the government wants to drop it, but they're being government about it. For the love of god guys, just get something else.
Image

User avatar
Mothra
Woah Dangsaurus
Posts: 3158
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 7:12 pm
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: DE-FENSE! (CHA CHA CHA)

Postby Mothra » Wed Feb 18, 2015 3:36 pm

A research team from Stamford just finished developing an amphibious drone for the Marines:



As far I can tell, it doesn't really do anything but roll around and point cameras at things.

Muhlrad designed the system primarily for surveillance and object inspection. It’s capable of 360 degree turns so its somewhat more maneuverable than other ground robots. In tests with Smith Detection’s raman laser spectroscope in the payload (the two small transparent half-spheres on the side of the bot) it was able to detect explosive chemicals from about 2 inches away.

Pretty weird!

User avatar
Mothra
Woah Dangsaurus
Posts: 3158
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 7:12 pm
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: DE-FENSE! (CHA CHA CHA)

Postby Mothra » Thu Aug 13, 2015 10:33 am

More on how god-awful the F-35 is from War is Boring. Basically, since it's practically a bomber, it can't dogfight:

The [F-35 and an F-16] would be playing the roles of opposing fighters in a pretend air battle, which the Air Force organized specifically to test out the F-35’s prowess as a close-range dogfighter in an air-to-air tangle involving high “angles of attack,” or AoA, and “aggressive stick/pedal inputs.”

The F-35 was flying “clean,” with no weapons in its bomb bay or under its wings and fuselage. The F-16, by contrast, was hauling two bulky underwing drop tanks, putting the older jet at an aerodynamic disadvantage.

But the JSF’s advantage didn’t actually help in the end. The stealth fighter proved too sluggish to reliably defeat the F-16, even with the F-16 lugging extra fuel tanks. “Even with the limited F-16 target configuration, the F-35A remained at a distinct energy disadvantage for every engagement,” the pilot reported.

“Insufficient pitch rate.” “Energy deficit to the bandit would increase over time.” “The flying qualities in the blended region (20–26 degrees AoA) were not intuitive or favorable.”

The F-35 jockey tried to target the F-16 with the stealth jet’s 25-millimeter cannon, but the smaller F-16 easily dodged. “Instead of catching the bandit off-guard by rapidly pull aft to achieve lead, the nose rate was slow, allowing him to easily time his jink prior to a gun solution,” the JSF pilot complained.

And when the pilot of the F-16 turned the tables on the F-35, maneuvering to put the stealth plane in his own gunsight, the JSF jockey found he couldn’t maneuver out of the way, owing to a “lack of nose rate.”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests