DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Av Week Extra » Israel Wants JSF As Soon As Possible

Israel Wants JSF As Soon As Possible

jsf-air.jpg

Israel plans to keep its aer­ial dom­i­na­tion of the Middle East intact, and that includes buy­ing Lockheed Martin’s F-​​35 Joint Strike Fighter, accel­er­at­ing its first deliv­er­ies, and decid­ing whose advanced equip­ment will be packed into the stealthy strike aircraft.

A senior Israeli air force (IAF) offi­cial says those major areas of con­cern appear to be on the right track because of an “under­stand­ing” with the U.S. offi­cials. Washington’s rep­re­sen­ta­tives are more ambigu­ous, say­ing that there has been no offi­cial change to Israel’s F-​​35 program.

“The plan is that we will get the F-​​35 as soon as it’s pos­si­ble,” the senior IAF offi­cial says. He says the ser­vice will end up with more than 100 F-​​35s, but he would not con­firm the size of the pur­chase or that Israel is ask­ing that the ini­tial deliv­ery date be accel­er­ated by two years to 2012. The IAF wants the JSF “the minute it is available.”

“Israel has a unique require­ment, it doesn’t oper­ate in a coali­tion, [and it has a] dif­fer­ent kind of strate­gic rela­tion­ship” with the U.S. than the other F-​​35 part­ners,” says Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin’s vice pres­i­dent and gen­eral man­ager for the F-​​35. However, he says the over­seas release of the first export air­craft will be no sooner than 2014.

The pur­chase, which could include an ini­tial batch of 25 air­craft, is still being nego­ti­ated. Brig. Gen. Johanan Locker, head of the IAF’s air divi­sion, was in Fort Worth as recently as late November.

Israel’s ambi­tions to inte­grate indige­nous weaponry also pose some prob­lems for the pro­gram. The weapons road map for the Blocks 1–3 F-​​35 stan­dards has already been drawn up with no Israeli weaponry on the list. Partner nations are cur­rently work­ing on a list for Block 4, but there’s pres­sure to cut weapons from the process rather than add them. Israel undoubt­edly will want its F‑35s to carry the Rafael Python 5 air-​​to-​​air mis­sile and pos­si­bly its suc­ces­sor, as well as the Rafael Spice fam­ily of precision-​​guided weapons.

Moreover, an influ­en­tial retired IAF gen­eral says total sales will be lim­ited by the JSF’s dis­ad­van­tages. He points to its overde­pen­dence on stealth, a sin­gle crew­man and what could be pro­pri­etary U.S. avionics.

“Eventually some­body will come up with a way to detect it,” he says. “A stealthy con­fig­u­ra­tion also means you can’t carry addi­tional weaponry on the exte­rior. The weapons sys­tem is more impor­tant than stealth. Israel will have F-​​35s, but not as many as we once thought.”

Smaller num­bers won’t detract from the aircraft’s deter­rence value, he con­cedes. Even a small fleet will ensure a first-​​day-​​of-​​war, surprise-​​strike capa­bil­ity. But once daily com­bat oper­a­tions esca­late, non­stealthy air­craft aided by stand­off weapons, escort jam­mers and infor­ma­tion oper­a­tions will sus­tain air operations.

Nonetheless, he wor­ries that the JSF will start show­ing its lim­i­ta­tions within five years. Among the draw­backs will be its one-​​person crew. As a result, “we can’t oper­ate the F-​​35 by itself,” the retired gen­eral says. “We really need two-​​seaters, with one per­son con­cen­trat­ing on fly­ing and some­one else focused on the strike mis­sion. One man can’t take advan­tage of all the options,” par­tic­u­larly since JSF capa­bil­i­ties will include jam­ming, infor­ma­tion war­fare and net­work attack.

Inevitably, the avion­ics will present an area of con­tention. For exam­ple, Israeli aero­space offi­cials say they can offer a tai­lored, active, elec­tron­i­cally scanned array radar for less money than an AESA bought from the U.S. However, many of the elec­tronic war­fare and attack tech­niques are routed through the radar to pro­duce jam­ming, false-​​target and other effects at ranges of 125 mi. or more. As a result, inte­gra­tion could be dif­fi­cult and expensive.

Elta, the elec­tron­ics divi­sion of Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), has a ver­sion of the AESA, accord­ing to the retired gen­eral. “We need our own radar that we don’t share with oth­ers. We also need our own advanced radar warn­ing and active jam­ming.” The Israeli AESA was flown last year; but for now it remains a generic sys­tem, not tai­lored to any spe­cific aircraft?although it’s sized for an F-​​16, an Elta offi­cial says. Flight tri­als are continuing.

For more on Israel’s request for the JSF from our friends at Aviation Week, please visit the full story on Military​.com.

– Christian

Share |

December 18th, 2007 | Av Week Extra | 271833 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2007/12/18/israel-wants-jsf-as-soon-as-possible/Israel+Wants+JSF+As+Soon+As+Possible2007-12-18+15%3A49%3A02Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « …And Here’s the Rest of the M4 Story… | Army M4 Response… » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Sam says:
    December 18, 2007 at 12:39 pm

    More weapons for Israel so they can mur­der more civil­ians. Repulsive.

    Reply
  2. irtusk says:
    December 18, 2007 at 1:14 pm

    > More weapons for Israel so they can mur­der more civil­ians. Repulsive.
    yes, if we just com­pletely dis­armed israel i’m sure peace would break out all over the mid­dle east
    (not to men­tion using an F-​​35 to kill civil­ians just isn’t very effec­tive on the cost-​​benefit scale)

    Reply
  3. Takeo says:
    December 18, 2007 at 1:31 pm

    So, Sam you’d like to every­one around them to get the F-​​35? I think it’s a fan­tas­tic bal­ance of ter­ror to have Israel more pow­er­ful in Aerospace than it’s neigh­bors.
    Oh and by the way, you’re utterly ignor­ing the fact that Israel’s oppo­nents mur­der civil­lians on a reg­u­lar basis.
    Moron.

    Reply
  4. Jack D. Ripper says:
    December 18, 2007 at 2:03 pm

    Sam, I think that if Israelis were the mur­der­ing thugs, you and many of your mind­set believe, then there would be no pales­tini­ans at all.

    Reply
  5. frankie says:
    December 18, 2007 at 3:11 pm

    “Sam, I think that if Israelis were the mur­der­ing thugs, you and many of your mind­set believe, then there would be no pales­tini­ans at all. “
    LOL. Good point.

    Reply
  6. Chris says:
    December 18, 2007 at 3:43 pm

    Sam’s off topic and irra­tional first com­ment aside, I think if Israel is going to pay up for them and is will­ing to absorb the cost of modification(s), then they can ask for what­ever they want. It also doesn’t much mat­ter what their opin­ion is of the air frame. If it’s so bad they can fig­ure out one of these on their own.
    The IAF won’t be the first to get the F-35’s, par­tic­i­pat­ing nations that have paid will get them long before the IAF.
    Recent events have shown the air force they have is get­ting the job done.

    Reply
  7. Mitch S. says:
    December 18, 2007 at 4:18 pm

    With all the bad press the JSF’s been get­ting I won­der if Loch-​​Mart cut a deal with the Israelies. Nothing can pol­ish the JSF’s image more then hav­ing the Israelis clam­or­ing for it — “the IAF that just defeated a sophis­ti­cated air defense with non-​​stealth air­craft is still so anx­ious for the JSF, gee that plane must be spe­cial”.
    “IAF arro­gance is pretty amaz­ing “
    You mean their chutz­pah? — they invented the word!

    Reply
  8. jack says:
    December 18, 2007 at 4:40 pm

    The war in Lebanon shat­tered the myth regard­ing the qual­ity of the Israeli army. Once feared now more of a joke in the region. But so are most other con­script armies. Hard to be a tough, pro­fes­sional army when most of your pri­vates don’t want to be there in the first place. The Israeli AF is the only thing that keeps that state alive.
    J

    Reply
  9. Roy Smith says:
    December 18, 2007 at 4:50 pm

    “Among the draw­backs will be its one-​​person crew. As a result, ‘we can’t oper­ate the F-​​35 by itself,’ the retired gen­eral says. ‘We really need two-​​seaters, with one per­son con­cen­trat­ing on fly­ing and some­one else focused on the strike mis­sion. One man can’t take advan­tage of all the options,’ par­tic­u­larly since JSF capa­bil­i­ties will include jam­ming, infor­ma­tion war­fare and net­work attack.“
    So he’s just say­ing that until Lockheed Martin invents R2D2 to go along with the JSF,Israel needs two man JSFs.Whats the prob­lem with that? Lockheed Martin is going to have to build two seat train­ers for the JSF,right?
    “Smaller num­bers won’t detract from the aircraft’s deter­rence value, he con­cedes. Even a small fleet will ensure a first-​​day-​​of-​​war, surprise-​​strike capa­bil­ity. But once daily com­bat oper­a­tions esca­late, non­stealthy air­craft aided by stand­off weapons, escort jam­mers and infor­ma­tion oper­a­tions will sus­tain air oper­a­tions.“
    This is what a lot of us have been say­ing about “not putting all of your eggs in one bas­ket.“
    Sure,the F-​​22 relies on stealth,but does it also have thrust-​​vectoring to out maneu­ver the oppo­nent if it does get caught(sighted) by the enemy? The line that the F-​​22 will shot the oppo­nent out of the sky before the enemy sees it is bulls**t.On top of that,its the arro­gant bulls**t that will get the F-​​22 pilot killed because arro­gant assholes(cut from the same short-​​sighted cloth that said that the Iraqis would wel­come us with flow­ers in the streets) told him that he’ll be invincible.Go to this web­site to see how South African Afrikaners have come up with a plau­si­ble way to defeat our stealth(because the Afrikaners are afraid that the U.S. Air Force will bomb them into extinc­tion on behalf of the ANC).
    http://​www​.african​cri​sis​.co​.za/​A​r​t​i​c​l​e​.​p​h​p​?​I​D​=​2​0​669&
    Considering the fact that it is the Afrikaner who runs BAE Land Systems South Africa,they might be on to something.

    Reply
  10. irtusk says:
    December 18, 2007 at 5:02 pm

    > Lockheed Martin is going to have to build two seat train­ers for the JSF,right?
    no they don’t and no they aren’t
    > Go to this web­site to see how South African Afrikaners have come up with a plau­si­ble way to defeat our stealth
    1. he’s a crack­pot
    2. no it’s not plau­si­ble
    > (because the Afrikaners are afraid that the U.S. Air Force will bomb them into extinc­tion on behalf of the ANC).
    fur­ther con­firm­ing his crack­pot­ted­ness
    > The war in Lebanon shat­tered the myth regard­ing the qual­ity of the Israeli army. Once feared now more of a joke in the region.
    nice try troll

    Reply
  11. Roy Smith says:
    December 18, 2007 at 5:20 pm

    irtusk,
    I’m glad you found the web­site that I was talk­ing about,because I can’t pull it up anymore.I won­der if its under “cyber attack?” Hahaha.
    Anyway,how do you expect pilots to learn how to han­dle the JSF with­out two seat train​ers​.It seems like com­mon sense.
    Also,concerning the war in Lebanon,I don’t believe that the Israelis gave it their best shot.They didn’t show the “out of the box” think­ing that they are known for(Personally,I thought that they should have dropped para­troop­ers way behind enemy lines & then have them meet up with their armored units in the South,squeezing Hezbollah in a vise in the process).They weren’t in it to win it for what­ever tac­ti­cal reason.Maybe they’ll play this los­ing game with Hezbollah & Hamas next time & then lure them into a trap(read the bible about the bat­tle of Ai in the Book of Joshua to under­stand what I mean).There is a school of thought that Israel is try­ing to lure the Palestinians & the rest of the Arabs in a trap by feign­ing weakness,severe weak­ness & lack of will at that.

    Reply
  12. ajs says:
    December 18, 2007 at 5:33 pm

    Lockheed doesn’t need to build 2-​​seat train­ers because almost all flight train­ing is done through sim­u­la­tors now.

    Reply
  13. irtusk says:
    December 18, 2007 at 6:12 pm

    > Also,concerning the war in Lebanon,I don’t believe that the Israelis gave it their best shot.
    i dis­agree with this too
    Israel wasn’t feign­ing weak­ness it’s just that their (poor) tac­tics and hezbollah’s tac­tics and the need to limit civil­ian casu­al­ties lim­ited what they could do
    how­ever do not con­fuse their lack of effec­tive rocket coun­ter­mea­sures with being weak. If some­one tried to gather enough forces for a proper inva­sion they would get squashed flat

    Reply
  14. mark says:
    December 18, 2007 at 7:26 pm

    More weapons for Israel so they can mur­der more civil­ians. Repulsive. –Sam
    Great state­ment Sam. What about blow­ing up pub­lic trans­porta­tion and shop­ping malls is that not repul­sive to you. The IDF goes into areas where attacks are com­ing from. Not buses and malls. Maybe the local pop­u­lace could do some­thing for exam­ple the Anbar Awakening.
    Furthermore if the israelis wanted too they could have clus­ter and fire bombed the occu­pied lands, a long time ago. That might be Repulsive and the rea­son they haven’t done it yet.

    Reply
  15. murc says:
    December 18, 2007 at 7:31 pm

    Israel is dream­ing.
    The first for­eign coun­try to recieve a F-​​35 will likely be The UK. because they are the US’s closes ally ans have spent the most out off all the other for­eign nations on its R&D.
    Israel isn’t even a par­tic­i­pat­ing nation.…If they are soo inter­ested in it.…why would they con­tribute money for the R&D?

    Reply
  16. irtusk says:
    December 18, 2007 at 7:48 pm

    F-​​35B roll­out today
    http://​www​.chron​.com/​d​i​s​p​/​s​t​o​r​y​.​m​p​l​/​a​p​/​f​n​/​5​3​8​7​8​6​5​.​h​tml
    http://​www​.fwbusi​ness​press​.com/​d​i​s​p​l​a​y​.​p​h​p​?​i​d​=​6​817
    http://​www​.lock​heed​martin​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​r​e​s​s​_​r​e​l​e​a​s​e​s​/​2​0​0​7​/​1​2​1​8​a​e​_​f​3​5​b​_​r​o​l​l​o​u​t​.​h​tml
    http://​images​.teamjsf​.com/​m​a​i​n​.​p​h​p​?​g​2​_​i​t​e​m​I​d​=​4​024

    Reply
  17. A. Nony says:
    December 18, 2007 at 9:06 pm

    “Sam, I think that if Israelis were the mur­der­ing thugs, you and many of your mind­set believe, then there would be no pales­tini­ans at all.“
    Oh really?
    Let’s check the valid­ity of that argu­ment by flip­ping it:
    “Sam, I think that if Nazis were the mur­der­ing thugs, you and many of your mind­set believe, then there would be no jews at all.“
    There’s plenty of jews in the world. Hell, a whole coun­try full of them, so obvi­ously the fact that a belief sys­tem hasn’t killed their ene­mies into extinc­tion doesn’t pre­clude them from being mur­der­ers.
    It’s not about sim­ple killing. It’s about humil­i­a­tion and sub­ju­ga­tion. Why kill your ene­mies quick when you can make them your slaves, as per the torah?
    I love their arro­gance. They con­tributed noth­ing to the devel­op­ment, yet they want first pick. And once they get it, they’ll change it to their own avion­ics because ours isn’t good enough (trusted, actu­ally).
    Oh, and the ‘pay­ment’ money will actu­ally be from the tax-​​payer sub­si­dized bil­lions of mil­i­tary aid that the con­gress votes for israel every year, at the prod­ding of the over­whelm­ing jew­ish lobby, like AIPAC.

    Reply
  18. irtusk says:
    December 19, 2007 at 9:34 am

    > The Israelis though used elec­tronic coun­ter­mea­sures & had no stealth air­craft.
    yes, they exploited a spe­cific weak­ness which may be fixed and not exist next time
    > The idea is to “tag” the stealth air­craft so that radar can pick it up & then fire the mis­siles.
    it’s not prac­ti­cal to shoot up a large enough vol­ume that would actu­ally cause any degra­da­tion of the coat­ings
    it would be more cost effec­tive to just sat­u­rate the sky with AAA and hope you get lucky
    > Ok,that makes me won­der about mis­siles tied into the pilot’s hel­met like what the MiG-​​29 pilots are sup­posed to have.I’m talk­ing about mis­siles that go where the pilot is look­ing.
    hel­met cue­ing merely expands the cone of engage­ment. if the radar can’t get a lock directly in front, it’s not going to get it to the side either
    > does the F-​​22 have thrust-​​vectoring maneu­ver­ing in addi­tion to stealth?
    thrust vec­tor­ing (super manouev­er­abil­ity) is one of the key attrib­utes of the F-​​22 that is always touted
    > I also hope it has a 20-​​30mm can­non & doesn’t solely rely on air-​​to-​​air mis­siles.
    you should at least read the wikipedia arti­cle on it so you have some idea what you’re talk­ing about

    Reply
  19. Rhyno327/lrsd says:
    December 19, 2007 at 11:39 am

    Repulsive? that is wat blow­ing up inno­cent civil­ians, ram­ming jet­lin­ers into build­ings, and hack­ing off the heads of Christians and Jews. The Israeli Army a joke? When they really want, and need to turn up the heat, those rags have no chance. As long as they con­tinue to seek the destruc­tion of Israel, there will be NO peace. Comparing the Israeli’s to a nation of ter­ror­ists is laugh­able. I bet in the end, they will be one of only a hand­full of nations that stand with us against the devel­op­ing Arab-​​Russian alliance. NATO? Forget it. We are on our own. The UK/​US alliance is the only REAL alliance in NATO. A-​​stan has been a glimpse of wat is to come. 4 mem­bers fight­ing, 4 stan­didng by watch­ing. DISGRACE.

    Reply
  20. The Cenobyte says:
    December 19, 2007 at 11:57 am

    I thought they had a sys­tem to allow weapons to be slung under the wings when you don’t need it to be a super stealth air­craft. Like after you have air supriority.

    Reply
  21. Wes says:
    December 19, 2007 at 11:59 am

    Don’t feed the trolls. Ron Paul for President, LOL
    > F-​​35B roll­out today
    Some roll­out! They need to send it to the paint shop first!

    Reply
  22. Wes says:
    December 19, 2007 at 12:01 pm

    > I thought they had a sys­tem to allow weapons to be slung under the wings when you don’t need it to be a super stealth air­craft. Like after you have air supri­or­ity.
    Thjat is how it will work, cenobite.

    Reply
  23. sglover says:
    December 19, 2007 at 2:18 pm

    I love their arro­gance. They con­tributed noth­ing to the devel­op­ment, yet they want first pick. And once they get it, they’ll change it to their own avion­ics because ours isn’t good enough (trusted, actu­ally).
    Oh, and the ‘pay­ment’ money will actu­ally be from the tax-​​payer sub­si­dized bil­lions of mil­i­tary aid that the con­gress votes for israel every year, at the prod­ding of the over­whelm­ing jew­ish lobby, like AIPAC.
    Yep. Business as usual.

    Reply
  24. Brian says:
    December 19, 2007 at 2:29 pm

    Roy, you mean you don’t know the F-​​22 has thrust vec­tor­ing and a gun? Jeez, man, that’s com­mon knowl­edge. How can you so roundly crit­i­cize stealth tech­nol­ogy when you don’t even know the basic equip­ment on the most high-​​profile stealth air­craft in the world?
    The prob­lem with shoot­ing up dust bombs is that you’d need to time it too pre­cisely. How high are the fly­ers com­ing in? 10,000 feet? 50,000 feet? 50 feet? You don’t know. From which direc­tion are they com­ing? Are they going to hit you from the north? The north­east? The west? You don’t know. WHEN are they com­ing? Now? In 15 min­utes? In two hours? Tomorrow? The F-​​22 can move at such a high speed and at such a high alti­tude that it can lit­er­ally drop bombs while still miles away from its tar­get, and the momen­tum will carry the bombs to their tar­get. So he doesn’t need to be directly overhead–he can be 10 miles away and still hit the tar­get.
    You’d have to keep a dust cloud in the air that was 10–15 miles high and com­pletely encir­cled the prospec­tive tar­get. It would have to stretch out 10–15 miles from your tar­get to pre­vent the F-​​22 from sim­ply drop­ping a bomb at Mach 2 from 70,000 feet. And you’d have to keep a large amount of dust in the air for a long period of time, which will be dif­fi­cult at higher ele­va­tions because the wind is blow­ing hard up at those heights. So… it needs work.

    Reply
  25. Roy Smith says:
    December 19, 2007 at 6:40 pm

    Sure,shooting dust & or sand up in the air has as much like­li­hood of suc­cess as play­ing the slot machines in Vegas or win­ning the Publishers Clearing House,& it will no doubt leave the peo­ple doing it look­ing foolish…until that lucky strike comes along.
    As far as the F-​​22 hav­ing thrust vec­tor­ing & yes,even an M61A2 Vulcan 20mm Rotary Cannon(thanks much maligned Wikipedia for the information),I say thank God,goodness,or the deity of your choice.I was afraid that the build­ing of the F-​​22 was based on the arro­gance that stealth was all we needed & we’d shoot the other guy out of the sky(with mis­siles of course) before he knew what hit him.You know,the atti­tude that Jeff Goldblum’s char­ac­ter had in the movie “Independence Day” when he told his ex-wife,“Oh we’ll be in & out of there.…”,just like the atti­tude that a lot of peo­ple seem to have or show on these boards con­cern­ing the F-​​22.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "And no, the Koran does not say anything about killing...
      bdwilcox
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Fascism? Last time I heard, the fascists promoted christianity. Or,...
      DualityOfMan
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      I see an M16 firing, and I see a 40 mm grenade launcher...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "I'd say go read some history on fascist ideology and then compare...
      Sam
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      No. I am not saying a grenade launcher on a rifle is a hoax. I...
      Zandor
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      For someone who trashes all the readers of the blog you sure do...
      a1189
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
      These devices vibrate tissue and bone not just...
      WJS
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      So are you saying the grenade launcher is a hoax or the M-16?...
      WJS
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Dear Cannon Fodder; Only politically correct patriots should be accepted...
      Zandor
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage