Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Not saying that this is the best way to do things, but I think we should just go back to the WW2 mindset...
We come up with plane A to be a fighter, an enemy shoots it down with their fighter, so we engineer a new fighter to defeat their fighter, and in six months time, we have engineered, tested, and built a few thousand of fighter B... rinse and repeat.
Thus far, there really isn't much out there to beat an A-10, so why replace it? Same thing with the F-15.. Just keep the contracts open, so that way we can still manufacture brand new airframes, instead of maintaining old ones... This way, we can still keep a "fresh" fleet of aircraft, and can relegate or properly take care of older systems.
Well, if we're picking our new fighter based on looks, there is only one option:
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2013/03/13 00:02:50
Subject: Re:The F-35 is still a massive clusterfeth
Well in the JSF documentary that I watched (admittedly it was probably biased and I didn't do any homework on their sources) the opinion that one was left with at the end of the film was that the F-35 was chosen over the X-32 just because of it's looks.
The X-32 looks like a big happy puppy of a plane. One that will kill you and all of your friends. Happily.
dogma wrote: What changes would make to the A-10 in order to make it a better CAS platform?
* Apply all of the lessons learned in 40 years of operating the A-10. I'm not an A-10 pilot so I don't know what they would be, but unless your engineers are completely incompetent there's no way you can start from the A-10 plus 40 years of experience and somehow fail to make any improvements. And, unlike a new-production A-10, you aren't stuck with the constraints of having an existing design to modify and you're free to incorporate everything from the beginning.
* Modern engines with better fuel efficiency = longer range and/or loiter time. And who knows, you might even be able to get better thrust out of the deal.
* Modern electronics. Sure, a new-production A-10 might have some of this benefit, but it wouldn't be as well integrated (see the C-130 example where the old hardware had to be replaced by a 500 lb block of dead weight to avoid balance problems) and developing new avionics is going to eat a lot of your cost savings.
* Modern fly-by-wire technology with all those nice things we've learned about automating improvised controls when the main control surfaces have been destroyed (for example, lose your ailerons and the computer will automatically translate stick commands for a turn into differential thrust from the engines to make the turn), a nice benefit for a plane that really cares about durability.
* New airframe designed with all the benefits of modern computer modeling technology and materials science. That probably means some combination of stronger and/or lighter, better handling, better speed/fuel efficiency, some degree of reduced radar cross section (probably going to need external payload so no true stealth), etc.
* Design from the beginning to use modern factory technology (robots, CAD, etc) to bring the per-unit cost down. Of course you could build your new A-10 factory with this in mind, but completely re-inventing the assembly line is going to do a lot to remove the cost savings from starting with an existing design.
In short, unless you believe that the A-10 is a gift from god, the divinely perfect CAS aircraft which can not possibly be improved on, an entirely new design will be better than simply resuming production of the A-10.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2013/03/13 00:26:04
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2013/03/13 03:19:23
Subject: Re:The F-35 is still a massive clusterfeth
Q. Okay, let's pick up where we left off, Kate.
A. Katherine.
Q. Sorry, right. Katherine. I keep forgetting.
A. My husband calls me Kate.
Q. You were telling us of a discussion you allegedly had with Roy Gottlieb of the Justice Bloc.
A. Not allegedly. Had. We've been through this.
Q. It's still just your word against his, Ms. Stone. But please, the discussion.
A. [Sighs] He said my husband's name had come up in their meetings.
Q. The candidate endorsement meetings?
A. Yes. They were going to endorse him. He wouldn't say why, but I know my husband had a regular poker game with some of them, and he'd been on a winning streak lately.
Q. And according to you, what did Mr. Gottlieb offer?
A. He said he could sway his bloc. Prevent the endorsement. But only if I...
Q. Only if you what, Katherine?
A. Only if I...
Q. Only if you performed sexual favors.
A. Yes.
Q. Was this just for Mr. Gottlieb?
A. No. All the bloc leadership. Their friends.
Q. And you agreed.
A. What else could I do? They had a majority.
Q. How long did this go on before the endorsements came out?
A. I don't know. A month, maybe.
Q. And when they came out, and your husband was endorsed despite your supposed agreement, was that when you decided to kill members of the bloc?
A. Yes. I thought, their majority is pretty slim. If I thinned things out a little, especially in the leadership, someone else might get elected.
Q. Assuming you weren't caught.
A. No, Mr. Miles. I expected to be caught. That was my best chance. Now they'll elect me.
Q. A confessed murderer? You think voters would be willing to risk putting you in charge?
A. They have to pick somebody and live with their reasons.
Q. Yes, but-
A. Wait and see.
What is this magnificent thing?
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Peregrine wrote: In short, unless you believe that the A-10 is a gift from god, the divinely perfect CAS aircraft which can not possibly be improved on
I think this is a reasonable summation of the finest aircraft ever built.
I, uh, may be a bit biased on this one though.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/03/13 03:30:47
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2013/03/13 04:14:16
Subject: Re:The F-35 is still a massive clusterfeth
Q. Okay, let's pick up where we left off, Kate.
A. Katherine.
Q. Sorry, right. Katherine. I keep forgetting.
A. My husband calls me Kate.
Q. You were telling us of a discussion you allegedly had with Roy Gottlieb of the Justice Bloc.
A. Not allegedly. Had. We've been through this.
Q. It's still just your word against his, Ms. Stone. But please, the discussion.
A. [Sighs] He said my husband's name had come up in their meetings.
Q. The candidate endorsement meetings?
A. Yes. They were going to endorse him. He wouldn't say why, but I know my husband had a regular poker game with some of them, and he'd been on a winning streak lately.
Q. And according to you, what did Mr. Gottlieb offer?
A. He said he could sway his bloc. Prevent the endorsement. But only if I...
Q. Only if you what, Katherine?
A. Only if I...
Q. Only if you performed sexual favors.
A. Yes.
Q. Was this just for Mr. Gottlieb?
A. No. All the bloc leadership. Their friends.
Q. And you agreed.
A. What else could I do? They had a majority.
Q. How long did this go on before the endorsements came out?
A. I don't know. A month, maybe.
Q. And when they came out, and your husband was endorsed despite your supposed agreement, was that when you decided to kill members of the bloc?
A. Yes. I thought, their majority is pretty slim. If I thinned things out a little, especially in the leadership, someone else might get elected.
Q. Assuming you weren't caught.
A. No, Mr. Miles. I expected to be caught. That was my best chance. Now they'll elect me.
Q. A confessed murderer? You think voters would be willing to risk putting you in charge?
A. They have to pick somebody and live with their reasons.
Q. Yes, but-
A. Wait and see.
What is this magnificent thing?
It's one of the transcripts you find in a Vault in New Vegas. Basically, the Vault in question was a psychotic social experiment that demanded the residents choose one of their own to enter a suicide chamber every year. The first overseer, who had the burden of breaking this news to the residents, was the first chosen as a sacrifice, and so the leadership position became linked traditionally with that of the sacrifice: they'd choose a leader who would then enter the chamber after ruling for a year. The events in the transcript culminated in civil war that all but destroyed the vault's population. What happens next:
Spoiler:
The last four survivors (the leaders of the factions, one of whom was the woman in that transcript) refuse to sacrifice one of their own, deciding to it just wasn't worth living anymore. The computer plays a prerecorded message congratualating them on being shining examples of humanity, and unlocks the door to leave, warning them to "check with your overseer to be sure it's safe to go outside, your safety is our top priority." What happened in the suicide chamber? A swarm of robots shot the sacrifice with machine guns. There are several dozen skeletons in the chambers that held the robots. And people call 40k grimdark.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/03/13 04:20:29
2013/03/13 05:10:44
Subject: Re:The F-35 is still a massive clusterfeth
Q. Okay, let's pick up where we left off, Kate. A. Katherine. Q. Sorry, right. Katherine. I keep forgetting. A. My husband calls me Kate. Q. You were telling us of a discussion you allegedly had with Roy Gottlieb of the Justice Bloc. A. Not allegedly. Had. We've been through this. Q. It's still just your word against his, Ms. Stone. But please, the discussion. A. [Sighs] He said my husband's name had come up in their meetings. Q. The candidate endorsement meetings? A. Yes. They were going to endorse him. He wouldn't say why, but I know my husband had a regular poker game with some of them, and he'd been on a winning streak lately. Q. And according to you, what did Mr. Gottlieb offer? A. He said he could sway his bloc. Prevent the endorsement. But only if I... Q. Only if you what, Katherine? A. Only if I... Q. Only if you performed sexual favors. A. Yes. Q. Was this just for Mr. Gottlieb? A. No. All the bloc leadership. Their friends. Q. And you agreed. A. What else could I do? They had a majority. Q. How long did this go on before the endorsements came out? A. I don't know. A month, maybe. Q. And when they came out, and your husband was endorsed despite your supposed agreement, was that when you decided to kill members of the bloc? A. Yes. I thought, their majority is pretty slim. If I thinned things out a little, especially in the leadership, someone else might get elected. Q. Assuming you weren't caught. A. No, Mr. Miles. I expected to be caught. That was my best chance. Now they'll elect me. Q. A confessed murderer? You think voters would be willing to risk putting you in charge? A. They have to pick somebody and live with their reasons. Q. Yes, but- A. Wait and see.
What is this magnificent thing?
It's one of the transcripts you find in a Vault in New Vegas. Basically, the Vault in question was a psychotic social experiment that demanded the residents choose one of their own to enter a suicide chamber every year. The first overseer, who had the burden of breaking this news to the residents, was the first chosen as a sacrifice, and so the leadership position became linked traditionally with that of the sacrifice: they'd choose a leader who would then enter the chamber after ruling for a year. The events in the transcript culminated in civil war that all but destroyed the vault's population. What happens next:
Spoiler:
The last four survivors (the leaders of the factions, one of whom was the woman in that transcript) refuse to sacrifice one of their own, deciding to it just wasn't worth living anymore. The computer plays a prerecorded message congratualating them on being shining examples of humanity, and unlocks the door to leave, warning them to "check with your overseer to be sure it's safe to go outside, your safety is our top priority." What happened in the suicide chamber? A swarm of robots shot the sacrifice with machine guns. There are several dozen skeletons in the chambers that held the robots. And people call 40k grimdark.
F:NV is just awesome. Just awesome.
What's even better is that you figure it out gradually. At first you find their campaign presentation, and you wonder why the hell they keep telling everyone that they are horrible horrible candidate for the post, that they have no qualification, and that they are just great people who don't deserve to get elected. Then you get this transcript, and then figure it all out a few ones latter.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/03/13 05:14:12
[...] for conflict is the great teacher, and pain, the perfect educator.
In short, unless you believe that the A-10 is a gift from god, the divinely perfect CAS aircraft which can not possibly be improved on, an entirely new design will be better than simply resuming production of the A-10.
You didn't make that case. You explained how you would improve the A-10, which is what I requested, but then you moved into some nonsense about A-10 reproduction.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2013/03/13 05:42:45
Subject: Re:The F-35 is still a massive clusterfeth
Sir Pseudonymous wrote: It's one of the transcripts you find in a Vault in New Vegas. Basically, the Vault in question was a psychotic social experiment that demanded the residents choose one of their own to enter a suicide chamber every year. The first overseer, who had the burden of breaking this news to the residents, was the first chosen as a sacrifice, and so the leadership position became linked traditionally with that of the sacrifice: they'd choose a leader who would then enter the chamber after ruling for a year. The events in the transcript culminated in civil war that all but destroyed the vault's population. What happens next:
Spoiler:
The last four survivors (the leaders of the factions, one of whom was the woman in that transcript) refuse to sacrifice one of their own, deciding to it just wasn't worth living anymore. The computer plays a prerecorded message congratualating them on being shining examples of humanity, and unlocks the door to leave, warning them to "check with your overseer to be sure it's safe to go outside, your safety is our top priority." What happened in the suicide chamber? A swarm of robots shot the sacrifice with machine guns. There are several dozen skeletons in the chambers that held the robots. And people call 40k grimdark.
Cool, thanks. Got that game and never got into it like the previous Fallout. After reading that I'd get right back into it, if I thought I could find the time.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
In short, unless you believe that the A-10 is a gift from god, the divinely perfect CAS aircraft which can not possibly be improved on, an entirely new design will be better than simply resuming production of the A-10.
You didn't make that case. You explained how you would improve the A-10, which is what I requested, but then you moved into some nonsense about A-10 reproduction.
The A-10 cannot be reproduced end of discussion. If it was remotely possible, I fully believe it would have been done 10 years ago. We talked about this several pages ago and it's pretty much settled. Continuing to produce the A-10 is not a possibility. If it were, we would be fine with it for a very long time. Even just the ones we still have could last into the 2030s. That's nearly 60 years for the earliest ones. How crazy is that?
The F35 is bad for reasons unrelated to what we're talking about. It's overdesigned to do too much for too many things.
If one was to sit down and design "A replacement for the role of the A-10, nothing more or less", they would end up with something better than the A-10. The issue with the newer planes is that nobody could stick to the "nothing more or less" part.
One would hope...
* Apply all of the lessons learned in 40 years of operating the A-10. I'm not an A-10 pilot so I don't know what they would be, but unless your engineers are completely incompetent there's no way you can start from the A-10 plus 40 years of experience and somehow fail to make any improvements. And, unlike a new-production A-10, you aren't stuck with the constraints of having an existing design to modify and you're free to incorporate everything from the beginning.
* Modern engines with better fuel efficiency = longer range and/or loiter time. And who knows, you might even be able to get better thrust out of the deal.
* Modern electronics. Sure, a new-production A-10 might have some of this benefit, but it wouldn't be as well integrated (see the C-130 example where the old hardware had to be replaced by a 500 lb block of dead weight to avoid balance problems) and developing new avionics is going to eat a lot of your cost savings.
* Modern fly-by-wire technology with all those nice things we've learned about automating improvised controls when the main control surfaces have been destroyed (for example, lose your ailerons and the computer will automatically translate stick commands for a turn into differential thrust from the engines to make the turn), a nice benefit for a plane that really cares about durability.
* New airframe designed with all the benefits of modern computer modeling technology and materials science. That probably means some combination of stronger and/or lighter, better handling, better speed/fuel efficiency, some degree of reduced radar cross section (probably going to need external payload so no true stealth), etc.
* Design from the beginning to use modern factory technology (robots, CAD, etc) to bring the per-unit cost down. Of course you could build your new A-10 factory with this in mind, but completely re-inventing the assembly line is going to do a lot to remove the cost savings from starting with an existing design.
In short, unless you believe that the A-10 is a gift from god, the divinely perfect CAS aircraft which can not possibly be improved on, an entirely new design will be better than simply resuming production of the A-10.
Thank god you don't design planes... most of what you just listed is heavily superfluous and counter-productive and flat out unnecessary. Basically this is how we ended up with the F-22 and F-35... Incidentally, you'd probably fit right in at the Pentagon ;P
The only improvement, I think, that could be made to the A-10 would be with the cannon. The A-10 wasn't meant so much as a close air support platform as it was a tank-hunter, and thus you have a ridiculously large cannon (around which the rest of the plane was designed) that really isn't necessary for most of the uses we've found for the aircraft the past decade or so. Personally, I'd rather have the current cannon... one of the cool things about the F-35(B only I think) is the ability to mount twin cannons in external pods, .50s IIRC, which makes it great for strafing runs... well, it would be great for strafing runs if it wasn't an F-35 but you know, lol...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/03/13 14:07:08
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
Because we've improved in technology and design knowledge since 1970.
What changes would make to the A-10 in order to make it a better CAS platform?
Update the avionics a bit to take better advantage of new technology and smaller computers. Use new materials to lower weight, which increases payload and range.
EDIT: And once again, I see this has been addressed.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/03/13 16:03:42
Peregrine wrote: In short, unless you believe that the A-10 is a gift from god, the divinely perfect CAS aircraft which can not possibly be improved on
I think this is a reasonable summation of the finest aircraft ever built.
I, uh, may be a bit biased on this one though.
I'll agree with you on this matter. When it comes to CAS, the A-10 is God's personal chariot of war.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote: The Great State of Texas stands ready to correct that error. 2,000 pickup up driving rednecks fueled by cervesas and buckshot are ready to go!
Just make sure you pick your battle. Stick to Quebec, the rest of Canadia is loaded with Northern Rednecks, just as off-putting as you Texans, AND used to the cold.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/03/14 09:24:38
Peregrine wrote: In short, unless you believe that the A-10 is a gift from god, the divinely perfect CAS aircraft which can not possibly be improved on
I think this is a reasonable summation of the finest aircraft ever built.
I, uh, may be a bit biased on this one though.
I'll agree with you on this matter. When it comes to CAS, the A-10 is God's personal chariot of war.
And the AC-130 is the Virgin Mary's second gift to mankind
Frazzled wrote: The Great State of Texas stands ready to correct that error. 2,000 pickup up driving rednecks fueled by cervesas and buckshot are ready to go!
Just make sure you pick your battle. Stick to Quebec, the rest of Canadia is loaded with Northern Rednecks, just as off-putting as you Texans, AND used to the cold.
You're forgetting Toronto, if Texas decided to invade Toronto I don't think the rest of Canada would be that upset. It's pretty much a city of Hipster's and Swag Artists.
Frazzled wrote: The Great State of Texas stands ready to correct that error. 2,000 pickup up driving rednecks fueled by cervesas and buckshot are ready to go!
Just make sure you pick your battle. Stick to Quebec, the rest of Canadia is loaded with Northern Rednecks, just as off-putting as you Texans, AND used to the cold.
You're forgetting Toronto, if Texas decided to invade Toronto I don't think the rest of Canada would be that upset. It's pretty much a city of Hipster's and Swag Artists.
If Texas (and by extension, the US) decided to invade Canada, first thing we'd obviously have to fix (aside from people speaking French), is your football fields
