WT Forums

I vote for Osprey.

38.1 billlion total program cost for a UNIT COST of 107 million PER aircraft. The worst part....it gives no new capabilities, it offers no unique capabilities, and it will be acquired at so slow a trickle that it will literally be over a decade before they will even be widespread in the fleet.

Did i mention it was defenseless with a lower ingress/egress speed than a helo with an inferior range and payload to a CH-53(an aircraft that is a fraction of the MV-22s cost)?

Pork, pure and simple.

<img src="http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b343/m21sniper/OnTheJobEnhanced.jpg" border=0>
<b>"Excuse me sir, i'm going to require your car keys".</b>

Yep always has been always will be. Havent we been saying this for going on almost twenty years ?

"By this time tomorrow I shall have gained either a peerage or Westminster Abbey !" Nelson the Immortal Memory

_________________
YGBSM !

The AF just got it's first one this week. Check out mil.com.

Fender

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it."
George Bernard Shaw

_________________
????

I think I would roger the Navy A-12. Not only did it cost a fortune but we got absolutly zip for our effort and it had fiscal and political ramifications in the Navy that are still being felt today.

A 45 has a muzzle.
A 9mm has a bullet vent.

_________________
The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire.

I would vote for the joint <b>USN & USAF</b> A-12 program management. Remember that the A-12 was to also replace the F-15E & F-117 as well as the A-6E. The program held promise, but the mismanagement is nothing short of criminal.

And these gents are correct, its shockwave is still stinging the USN today, and for many years to come. I hope the Osprey is cancelled before it reaches these proportions, cause the USMC is betting the farm on it.



Edited by - chadrewsky on Apr 01 2006 3:58 PM

The Oink Strike Fighter, Stress?

And Chad suggests an interesting situation, where you have the potential to both bet the farm AND buy the farm both in one program.

Crushed under his own mental block...

And to comment on the F-111B...It is my favorite bum programs of all time, because it led directly to the development of the greatest Naval Fighter ever.
<img src=icon_smile_approve.gif border=0 align=middle>

I would like to cast my vote for the AGR program.

"GLAD TO HAVE BEEN THERE AND HAVE BEEN PROUD TO HAVE SERVERED"

_________________
????

Well the B-2 IS actually putting bombs on targets and doing a good job of it. I think the recon idea has some good merit and with a palatized refueling kit in one of the bays it would make a nice tanker for certain F-22 missions or even other B-2s. My only real problem with it is in such few numbers one solitary crash will make a big differance in fleet health.

A 45 has a muzzle.
A 9mm has a bullet vent.

_________________
The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire.

_________________
????

_________________
????

<b>"I would have to say that the A-12 is the worst, not because it would have been useless, but because of the mismanagement. Not only did they waste the development money spent on the engineering, they had to spend lawyer fees for more than 10 years and then had to pay fines because the cancellation was not allowable under the contract. Well, I think they had to pay, but it is always under appeal. The lawyers seem to like it that way.

The F111-B is another bad one, but against the A-12 it is no contest.

I would put the F-35 on the watch list. It has shown that has the potential to be the first international pork fest with all the wrangling going on over work share. The sun never sets on the pork opportunities for the F-35. Oink, oink!"</b>

A12......yeah, ouch. That was a bad one.

That you put the F-35 on there hardly surprises me.

<img src="http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b343/m21sniper/OnTheJobEnhanced.jpg" border=0>
<b>"One post, One Kill".</b>

<b>"It still seems like a better place to waste money than the airship project (see the other "Secret" thread) oink, oink."</b>

Heh, i actually like the long term prospects of a gigantic airship. Some of the technological breakthroughs that have been made have the <i>potential</i>(completely unproven as the case may be) to allow for a massive transformation in heavy air transport.

I saw plans for one that could carry 12 Abrams at 80kts. Even if it could carry six at 40 knots it would still hold real advantadges over current air/sea lift platforms.(especially since an airship can theoretically land anywhere).

However i look at that tech as R&D 20 year down the road stuff.

<img src="http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b343/m21sniper/OnTheJobEnhanced.jpg" border=0>
<b>"One post, One Kill".</b>

I said it before, I'll say it again, we need WIGs real bad for some serious FAST sea-lift capability.

A 45 has a muzzle.
A 9mm has a bullet vent.

_________________
The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire.