Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

TaiidanTomcat

Members
  • Content Count

    8,872
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TaiidanTomcat

  • Rank
    Hopeless Recluse
  • Birthday 02/25/1983

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    the 5 oh fizzle

Recent Profile Visitors

23,460 profile views
  1. TaiidanTomcat

    F-35 news roundup

    Make Vintage fighters great again.
  2. TaiidanTomcat

    F-35 news roundup

    It wasn't meant to hold "LM as a paragon of honesty." Its a contrast because in most peoples mind LM is public enemy number 1, and Saab is white clad goddess. And to add to what Neu said. yes, they have made intensely outragous claims that SMEs, Uniformed personnel, pilots and analysts, must first debunk as "too good to be true." thats the point of it. A Dutch F-35 pilot did a presentation a few years back where he had to "explain to a politician who may have been a school teacher, why the Gripen is not what we think" (I'm paraphrasing) Thats the point. To intice the public. They don't sell to the military. They sell to the public, they appeal to fiscally minded politicians that their airplane will cost a fraction of anything else, while being nearly as good. They lay the groundwork. Again. Superb PR. I mean it as a great compliment. Theres still whole blogs written about "gripens for Canada" most of the information its based on is outright whoppers, exaggerations and large mixes of claims and even outdated info that Saab hasn't even used in years as the Gripen NG has been "evolving" for decades now. There was a while there where Gipen NG stats were changing every 6 months, with not a single actual airplane built.. Canada got caught flatfooted on the exact same trap, Boeing had beating the "65 million dollar super hornet" and "half as much as an F-35" lie so hard in Canada, that it became "truth" and even Trudeau and Co were caught utterly flat footed when they tried their interim Super Hornet scam only to find out when the contract came back, that it was not actually 65 million per. Suddenly the cost was billions more. They actually went into sticker shock to the point they had to make panicky inquiries and clarifications. I applaud Boeing in what might have been one of the most successful "guerrilla marketing" I've seen in a long while. At very little cost, and telling any reporter in earshot that "65 million" was the price of the super hornet, and repeating that number at no additional advertising cost to themselves (reports never checked it, they simply printed it) they saved a small fortune in advertising until it reached it zenith with a near miss sale thanks to the duly brainwashed Canadian gov. Bravo. Small businesses do that around here all the time. They invite the news for a fluff piece and photo op while putting their employees forward as SMEs, soundbytes, qoutes etc. If its on the news it must be true. doesn't cost a dime.
  3. TaiidanTomcat

    F-35 news roundup

    If you got "taken in" initially by the Gripen E, don't feel bad. Saab are masters at PR/Marketing theyre the best in the business because paradoxically people trust them and their word, so they tell some of the biggest whoppers. People who are "in the biz" roll their eyes at Saab claims. Lockheed has to have things etched in stone and confirmed with reviews by a dozen government agencies around the globe and fleet of Alphabet agencies, and people still don't believe any of it. Theyre not trusted at all by the public and yet are the worlds number 1 defense contractor. Saab is highly regarded by the public and yet struggles to sell airplanes. Isn't that interesting? That when it comes to selling to professionals who know what they're talking about they suddenly come up short, but when selling to the everyday man on the street who knows little to none about aircraft they endear themselves? Heres a funny thought. Canada signed onto the JSF before the first prototypes had even flown. Its had Canadian imput, with canadian requirements, with canadian test pilots, with parts actually made in canada by canadians paid for with Canadian money in a partnership. The Gripen has ZERO canadian connections. No canadian parts, pilots, requirements, imput, or partnership. NONE zilch nada. But there are people who can't wait to tell you how the Gripen is "perfect" for Canada and the F-35 is anything but. Just to beat a dead horse, The Gripen E is basically trying to make up for the shortcoming of the last Gripen and get to the F-16s level. It has more gas, it has 2 more pylons (that brings it up to F-16's amount) IF everything goes well. IF. it will be basically an F-16 with better avionics and sensors. not as good as F-16 in some areas, better than an F-16 in others (avioinics, but late model F-16s are going to be about equal) . That's if it goes right. I saw my first gripen NG concept art in 2006. As of 2019 they've built 2 prototypes. Gripen was originally a short ranged point interceptor built to defend a neutral country. If it came between Gripen E and Super Hornet I would take super hornet any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Even if the Super Hornet costs more (and the prices are fairly comparable) The Super hornet is vastly superior platform in terms of all around capability. Not only that but F-35 and Super Hornet are backed by Uncle Sugar, and Uncle Sugar will insure they stay viable for a long time. upgrades and spares will be plentiful. Last I checked, The Gripen E has two orders. Brazil and sweden. Both for under 100 airframes total. No offense to brazil or sweden, but I don't see them spending big bucks 15, or 20 years down the line to keep these spear tips pointy. spares are going to hard to come by. It doesn't get talked about but one of the reasons the Gripen didn't get picked with Norway, was Norway wasn't even sure Saab would be in the airplane business in 10 or 15 years. When the last Gripen E rolls off the line, thats probably it. Leaving Norway to look for parts for the 2nd half of the airplanes lifespan. Where as F-35 was going to sell in thousands, and have backing of the US government.
  4. TaiidanTomcat

    F-35 news roundup

    It's not that there hasn't been mistakes aplenty. But is Boeing so amazeballs and their bid at the JSF contract so impressive they have any room or credibility at all to gripe? The short answer is no, and the long answer is oh god no. It just sounds like sour grapes anyway, and as I pointed out they got plenty of their own problems just like everyone in the biz. It would "catty" if it wasn't so absurd
  5. TaiidanTomcat

    F-35 news roundup

    AWWWW I guess we'll never know 😞 Hows that KC-46 coming along anyway? Seems like a Tanker would be pretty straightforward compared to a Tri service, STOVL/shipboarde capable 5th generation multinational stealth strike fighter...
  6. TaiidanTomcat

    Air Force officially hates F-15s now

    Overplay your hand, you get stung. We basically have to shrink back at some point. "Boots on the ground" in 2/3 of the countries of the world. We have basically shown up everywhere one can. Until they start making new countries this is the high water mark. The issue has been we kept ordering "everything on the menu" and "all of the above" for over a decade. That's not sustainable. If you want endless foriegn wars but the NSA doesn't spy on me, ok. But "all of the above" is endless wars AND spying on me. We keep getting it all, and it's not all good. That's the best way I can put it. If Russia or China or Turkey or Saudi Arabia want to throw blood sweat and treasure at these places, I'm inclined to let them at this point. That's how we beat them back in the old days right?? I was told the Russians trying to have big influence in places like A stan was expensive folly... We basically need to make America choose again. You can have Afghanistan or japan. Not both. You can have a well equipped professional force for conventional war, or keep throwing big money and time at COIN. Or even beyond that Cyber warfare. Guess where you need to be throwing your money these days?? Its not teaching officers how to sit and drink Afghan tea. It's time to go. And no it will not be pretty. It's like a divorce. Rarely is it the "right time" and yes it's often messy. And you can always find some reason or other to put it off a little bit longer... It would be nice to get back to the 80s or 90s level of "isolationism" we arent even programmed for that anymore. Say what you will about Iraq in 2003, people thought it was controversial. These days the US occupies 1/3 of Syria "indefinitely" it doesnt even rate a mention. Interesting "sub factoid" --for as maligned as ACU pattern is. The transition phase to multicam is considered the transition point to the status quo of normalized not winning and just keeping it all bureaucraticly stable within the military force. The end of trying to win
  7. TaiidanTomcat

    Air Force officially hates F-15s now

    Somewhere we went from "we gotta fight over there so we dont fight here, and preserve our freedoms" to "we got to fight them everywhere! and also here too! so give up some of your rights for safety. Individual Freedom is over rated"
  8. TaiidanTomcat

    Air Force officially hates F-15s now

    Agree or not, you explained that well
  9. TaiidanTomcat

    Air Force officially hates F-15s now

    We should not be an empire. Its fundamentally wrong and I wont miss it. We spent 1 trillion dollars in Iraq (before getting into the waste in human capital.) I still dont know what we bought. We spent 20 years patting ourselves on the back about keeping Russia engaged in an expensive boondoggle(s), then spent the next 15 convincing ourselves it was different when we did it. "Surely they're not bleeding us right? No no of course not..." And on the same theme while Russia was bleeding out in " Bush wars" they were falling behind conventionally. They lost the cold war, which as it turn out collapsed their nation, and their empire. In hindsight they traded something really big and important, for something not big and not important. Would you trade Europe or japan for Afghanistan? The answer should be REALLY obvious. Has Afghanistan become more western? Or has the west become more Islamist? The answer is worth noting. Back to the subject at hand tho. And what Murph added. The F-22 was highly symbolic. Again I give all the media click-bait hacks so many of you breathlessly follow (david axe) for setting the narrative that the F-22 was "ZOMG expen$$$ive!!" But also "useless for Afghanistan" (Afghanistan is landlocked, but I dont think the navy should not be allowed new ships since they dont work in A-stan...) the F-22 became the white whale of white elephants. A giant expensive waste that was "unneeded in the current conflict" a symbol of waste. Fine China. Gold plated. Etc. Again there were people here on ARC who were telling us it would not be RPGs and IEDs forever and guess what? they were right then, and they've become even more right with time. The F-22 was not built for Afghanistan and that was a good thing. It was built to secure the wests most valuable military advantage -- airpower--for decades into the future against real actual scary bad guys that can have real actual global influence. 2008 was so bizarre in hindsight. It was insane what people believed back then
  10. TaiidanTomcat

    Air Force officially hates F-15s now

    Hit 300 back in June.
  11. TaiidanTomcat

    Air Force officially hates F-15s now

    Big changes between 1981 and 2004 to say the least. (I don't start counting at the RFI either personally.) False equivalence. Sad. Lol ok. Wow. There were "Customer" control issues, From start to finish right down to the "customer" canceling as the production cost flattened. You know how I know you dont know what you're talking about??
  12. TaiidanTomcat

    Air Force officially hates F-15s now

    It was short sighted. Even back then on this very forum people were saying it was. and time has proven them right as we are onto yet another "we didnt get enough F-22" iteration. This time its F-15x. Weve also seen calls for restarting f-22 production ever since it ceased. We've seen calls for hybrid designs, weve seen calls for snazzier F-22s. Weve seen calls for less snazzy F-22s that could be sold to allies. Even if you see the F-22 at a minimum as an F-15 replacement, it failed to be acquired in the numbers to make that possible. Which is why we are where we are now, not even 10 years later. So yes it was short sighted. It was terribly short sighted and obviously so. We traded "air dominance" for decades for dirt wars that have no relevance 10 years later, and instead cost us more blood sweat and treasure along with opportunity costs in who knows how many areas FOR YEARS. Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires. We suckered the Russians into sticking around until it cost them dearly. I hate to say that pulling out of Afghanistan in 2019 will have the same result as 2009, or 2029. But every year we stay we waste more so that's nice I guess. And we are losing. Believe me. We are losing badly in ways that will be obvious in 10 years. "Short sighted" sounds better than "disastrous" I guess All the brass agitating for F-22s was replaced. Again, long term it looks like they were right. Moseley was booted and replaced with a cargo plane pilot who played ball. The writing was on the wall. Wanting more F-22s was against the secdefs wishes and you would be canned for trying otherwise. We needed enough F-22s to last 50 years. So yes. It was terribly short sighted. It was short sighted In the fact that we are still looking for ways to fill that vacuum. It was short sighted in the fact that there is no winning In Iraq, or Afghanistan and that was before adding Libya and Syria to the list. It was short sighted in the fact that China revealed a stealth aircraft gates said they wouldnt have for years. So the fun question to me is when did the light bulb go on? When did we go "oops!" On canceling the F-22? Comment below It's the same secdef. Gates and no one would have batted an eye had Obama replaced him and kept the F-22 going especially as jobs were a factor. Is that what Obama campaigned on "same" not "change"? "Hope" not "meh"?? Obama dropped a trillion dollars the first year in office. Even at the time political people with Jobs in F-22 districts were using the "shovel ready" mantra to keep F-22 going and people employed. If you're going to drop 1t for "shovel ready jobs" why cant that be for keeping the F-22 line going? But oh well. It's never his fault. In 2008?? Bottom line we can live without enough F-22s (we pretty much have no other option) but it has with time I believe proven to be a mistake. The same click bait people bashing the F-22 10 years ago advocating for F-35, apply the same arguments to the F-35 and then lament not getting enough F-22s...
  13. TaiidanTomcat

    Air Force officially hates F-15s now

    As of right now the F-35 can still go 4 amraam plus two winders on the wings. Im betting The only thing standing in the way of the full amraamer there is the funding to do the weapons testing. Which will be cheaper than buying new F-15s. But whatever. It's all semantics at this point.
  14. TaiidanTomcat

    Air Force officially hates F-15s now

    I said "IF" why?
  15. TaiidanTomcat

    Air Force officially hates F-15s now

    built that way from the start
×