Sign in to follow this  
Nailing Malarkey Too

Oz gets first F35s and Japan is set to triple its order

Recommended Posts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Germany is next. $80 million for a true stealth fighter or $130 million for a 4th gen Euro fighter AKA Rusian Target Practice drone

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

71OydBFBpJL._SY355_.jpg

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSTl1CKXJ5MesXYkgp-DP_

Let us know when you're done Jack.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As they hang humanity on a cross of iron for filthy lucre 

Malarkey, I hope they test that thing on your house. 

(from an Ike speech)   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

As they hang humanity on a cross of iron for filthy lucre 

Malarkey, I hope they test that thing on your house. 

(from an Ike speech)   

 

I want a strong Military to deter violence. You apparently crave it.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Roman general once declared that "If you want peace, prepare for war." 

But history and the Forever War illustrate it is actually "if you prepare for war, you get war." 

As Ike well knew. 

I'l just wager you have a financial interest here - how about disclosing it? 

Veterans For Peace 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not looking at his posts.  Is he trotting out the infographic bragging from Lockheed again?  The one that shows that only 3 countries who didn't originally invest money in the plane are actually buying them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Grrr, how did your marketing of that S2 7.9 go ? (I tried to help a little bit) 

I see on the class website that there are still several for sale in the metro Detroit area. 

But mostly I wanna hear about Malarkey's conflicts of interest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I've still got it.  I may just decide to keep two boats and race the 7.9 with my boys.   Haven't had time to join a club yet though.  All the cheap paper clubs seem to be disappearing from the DRYA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

A Roman general once declared that "If you want peace, prepare for war." 

But history and the Forever War illustrate it is actually "if you prepare for war, you get war." 

As Ike well knew. 

I'l just wager you have a financial interest here - how about disclosing it? 

Veterans For Peace 

The truth is closer to "There with always be someone preparing for war whether you do or not. Your only choice is to deter or fight and possibly lose.

There is no shortage of very bad people ready and willing to fill a power vacuum if good people don't.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Saorsa said:

We could buy Oz and kick the Ozzies out for the cost of one Obama stimulus package? What was Obama thinking? 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Saorsa said:

How old are those articles? 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Saorsa said:
 

The most current of the articles (2014) Is about 

Government backbencher Dennis Jensen has condemned the Prime Minister’s $12.4 billion plan to buy 58 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets as a “great national scandal” and “worse than a disgrace”. ...

Dr Jensen argued the F-35 was an inferior aircraft to those being developed by “potential threat nations”. 

He said the F-35’s US manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, had misled countries seeking to buy the jets over their cost, capability and readiness. He cited a RAND Corporation assessment of the F-35 as a fighter that “can’t turn, can’t run, can’t climb”.

7 years after that Rand study was performed this idiot backbencher is still citing that RAND study and 4 years after that you are. That study and the “can’t turn, can’t run, can’t climb”  BS just refused to die.  

Even after RAND themselves killed in of 2008 allow me to quote them.

image.thumb.png.8ea719ee4ce343a79e5ec52de4974427.png

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Saorsa said:

The second article you quote makes the argument; when is enough. enough. To quote ...

The world has changed. The odds of great power war have declined dramatically. We still need a deterrent capacity against China and Russia, but how much is enough? In a decade's time, the United States plans to have 15 times as many modern fighters as China, and 20 times as many as Russia.

So what does your vaunted RAND have to say about when enough is enough?

Is the USAF Flying Force Large Enough?

Assessing Capacity Demands in Four Alternative Futures

by Alan J. Vick, Paul Dreyer, John Speed ************

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR2500/RR2500/RAND_RR2500.pdf

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Malarkey - 

Again, do you have a financial or other interest here?  

Disclose it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how can he not? the only reason to create so many different threads on the same topic while waving away all criticism of the product is simple...he's heavily invested and is a m.i.c. shill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how he responds to a post. 

Then, he simmers a bit and responds again.  No edit - new response.

Then, he does it again.

And, again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Australia should build their own fighter jets.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LB 15 said:

Image result for f35 fighter crash

That’s not just unfair, it’s SO unfair...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, J28 said:

Maybe Australia should build their own fighter jets.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Maybe the US should train its own America's Cup sailors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, aA said:

how can he not? the only reason to create so many different threads on the same topic while waving away all criticism of the product is simple...he's heavily invested and is a m.i.c. shill

"heavily invested" in death, how charming. 

And I renew my call for testing the F-35 at or near M's house. Only fair, right? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, J28 said:

Maybe Australia should build their own fighter jets.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

12 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

That’s not just unfair, it’s SO unfair...

You do realise apart from the first couple, we do? Actually,  some of yours even have aussie parts.

Australia is also a regional maintenance depot for f35. So we will be fixing up yours as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

Hey Malarkey - 

Again, do you have a financial or other interest here?  

Disclose it. 

Did you come up with that all by your lonesome? Can you color inside the lines also? Smart lad. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

I like how he responds to a post. 

Then, he simmers a bit and responds again.  No edit - new response.

Then, he does it again.

And, again.

 

Bite-sized portions, a small concession I make just for you. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

I like how he responds to a post. 

Then, he simmers a bit and responds again.  No edit - new response.

Then, he does it again.

And, again.

 

Say. Do you have any thoughts on the facts in my posts or are the messenger attacks already taxing your abilities?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

I like how he responds to a post. 

Then, he simmers a bit and responds again.  No edit - new response.

Then, he does it again.

And, again.

 

Hi there.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I can't make you a deal on a cratered F-35, what will it take for me to get you in this Ridgeline and drive it home today?

6c58ed40-2e73-4adf-b625-b2fbe68ab829.JPG

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, J28 said:

Maybe Australia should build their own fighter jets.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

You mean like the Hobart class destroyers they are hoping will float. 

Hobart is a 48 cell platform while the US. Arleigh Burke flight III is a 96 cell platform.

Aus got 3 Hobart for $9b aus  The US got 10, Arleigh Burkes, $12.6B aus

So sure let them build their own plane. 

 

 image.png.8e78a510a6c556d73218f2b164747c87.png 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

You mean like the Hobart class destroyers they are hoping will float. 

Hobart is a 48 cell platform while the US. Arleigh Burke flight III is a 96 cell platform.

Aus got 3 Hobart for $9b aus  The US got 10, Arleigh Burkes, $12.6B aus

So sure let them build their own plane.  

Jack is a single-cell platform at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aussie dollars. Thats another reason why our balance of trade with china is so much better than America's, and why American destroyers get built with Australian iron ore.

Winning!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

Hey Malarkey - 

Again, do you have a financial or other interest here?  

Disclose it. 

He works for them. Someone has to clean the bathrooms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

You mean like the Hobart class destroyers they are hoping will float. 

Hobart is a 48 cell platform while the US. Arleigh Burke flight III is a 96 cell platform.

Aus got 3 Hobart for $9b aus  The US got 10, Arleigh Burkes, $12.6B aus

So sure let them build their own plane. 

 

 image.png.8e78a510a6c556d73218f2b164747c87.png 

"As of 2017, Canada's navy operates 12 frigates, 4 patrol submarines, 12 coastal defence vessels and 8 unarmed patrol/training vessels, as well as several auxiliary vessels."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Canadian_Navy

You think just taking a test and moving south 1500 or so miles allows you to identify as one of us and boast about it?  What a pitiful self gratuitous fuck you are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, benwynn said:

If I can't make you a deal on a cratered F-35, what will it take for me to get you in this Ridgeline and drive it home today?

6c58ed40-2e73-4adf-b625-b2fbe68ab829.JPG

 

It's perfect - already demented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

It's perfect - already demented.

Not good enough, he needs one with a steering wheel in the middle because he's a centrist.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ishmael said:

Not good enough, he needs one with a steering wheel in the middle because he's a centrist.

 

No. He’s an “independent”.

Just ask him. 

Jack wouldn’t lie. 

(Just got in from a run and my fingers are frozen. Not trying to do “sarcastic font” on my phone)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Hobart class destroyers

AKA Chinese Navy target drones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, J28 said:

AKA Chinese Navy target drones

Well they might but what has this got to do with Destroyers or crappy fighter planes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears all is not well in F-35 land:

 

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/next-f-35-headache-here-38322

What happens next? 

The troubled $1.5 trillion F-35 program is not ready to begin the critical combat-testing phase, the Pentagon’s testing director said in a previously undisclosed August memo obtained by the Center for Defense Information at the Project On Government Oversight (POGO). That decision marks another setback in the development of the Pentagon’s largest acquisition program.

The memo, issued on August 24, 2018, says the program has not met the necessary entry criteria to begin the crucial combat-testing phase called Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E). It comes on the heels  of the revelation , reported first by POGO, that program officials have been trying to make it appear as though the program has completed the development phase, by altering paperwork to reclassify potentially life-threatening design flaws to give the appearance of progress rather than actually fixing them.

 

(This first appeared several months ago.)

IOT&E is the last legal hurdle an acquisition program must surmount before it can enter full-rate production.  Per federal law , this process cannot begin until the director of operational test and evaluation approves in writing that the program has met all the necessary criteria to execute the agreed-upon testing program.

 

Robert Behler, the director of operational test and evaluation, is delaying IOT&E until the program addresses several software issues. Behler writes that operational testing cannot begin until the program updates versions of the F-35’s operating software, mission-data files, Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS), and testing range infrastructure software.

While it is not clear from the memo which specific problems remain to be resolved, previous testing reports found “key technical deficiencies in the ability of the F-35 to employ  the AIM-120 weapons ” (the principle air-to-air missile) and an “uncharacterized  bias toward long and right  of the target” when pilots fire the aircraft’s cannon, resulting in them “consistently missing ground targets  during strafe testing .”

 

The next version of the F-35’s operating software, Behler writes,  should add  to the aircraft’s capabilities to ensure it can perform several key combat missions including strategic attack, air interdiction, offensive counter air, and electronic attack. The aircraft’s Mission Data Loads are large files of maps, threat electronic signals, data on potential enemy weapons, as well as friendly systems to enable the F-35’s sensors to sort friend from foe. ALIS is  the much-troubled  maintenance and logistics network that combines embedded diagnostics functions, supply chain management, and maintenance guidance. Previous testing found that most ALIS functions work only with “ a high level of manual effort  by ALIS administrators and maintenance personnel.”

The services and program officials had previously set September 15, 2018, as the deadline to begin IOT&E. Behler, in the face of undoubtedly enormous pressure to stick to that schedule, has delayed the start date by approximately two months, when the updated software versions are expected to be delivered.

 

This is an example of an important government oversight office working precisely as intended. Congress  created the Pentagon’s operational testing office in 1983  to ensure lawmakers received accurate information about the performance of new weapon systems. Before the creation of the office, any testing data Members of Congress received had been filtered through the very bureaucracies that had vested interests in making sure nothing stood in the way of a weapon system reaching full-rate production.

Decisions about full-rate production and combat testing should be based on performance, not merely predetermined schedules. Testing planes with software and systems that won’t be in the aircraft when it’s delivered to the services would be wasteful, and delivering systems that haven’t been combat-tested would put pilots’ lives at risk. We’re glad to see the director of operational test and evaluation is putting service members ahead of contractors.

Dan Grazier is the Jack Shanahan Military Fellow at the Center for Defense Information at the Project On Government Oversight (where this first appeared).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2018 at 10:10 PM, Ease the sheet. said:

Aussie dollars. Thats another reason why our balance of trade with china is so much better than America's, and why American destroyers get built with Australian iron ore.

Winning!

Let's see .... Hmmmm 

We build 10 larger and better-equipped destroyers for $1.26 billion Aus$ apiece while Aus build 3 smaller less capable Hobarts for $3.0 Billion apiece.

Even if the iron ore was 100% of the cost of building our Burkes and Aus made 100% profit on the sale you still couldn't pay for your 3 Hobarts boondoggles with what we paid for 10 superior ships.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nailing Malarkey Too said:

Let's see .... Hmmmm 

We build 10 larger and better-equipped destroyers for $1.26 billion Aus$ apiece while Aus build 3 smaller less capable Hobarts for $3.0 Billion apiece.

Even if the iron ore was 100% of the cost of building our Burkes and Aus made 100% profit on the sale you still couldn't pay for your 3 Hobarts boondoggles with what we paid for 10 superior ships.  

 

That's what it said, the IOT&E was there, but the problems continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this