![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() The U.S. General Accounting Office raised concerns about LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP.'s F/A-22 fighter jet, saying the Pentagon should weigh the high risk of future cost increases and program delays before deciding in December to start full production. The investigative arm of Congress said costs for the program that began during the Cold War era were expected to grow to $80 billion from an Air Force estimate of $72 billion, and the Pentagon had not explained why it still needed the fighter in a changed military environment. In an annual report to Congress, GAO said the Pentagon estimated it would cost $11.7 billion to expand the air-to-ground attack capability of the F/A-22, which some critics decry as a Cold War relic, a stealthy jet initially designed for air-to-air combat with Soviet MiGs. (Reuters 03:06 PM ET 03/15/2004) Mo http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=248&a=936...a&s=rb0403 15 ================================================== ============== |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Larry Dighera" wrote in message ... The U.S. General Accounting Office raised concerns about LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP.'s F/A-22 fighter jet, saying the Pentagon should Yadda-yadda-yadda... First, this is already the subject of another current thread in this NG. Second, if the GAO is claiming that the cost of turning the F-22 into the F/A-22 is $11.7 billion, then the GAO is lying, as their own report indicates that the $11.7 billion is actually for *all* spiral development costs related to the F/A-22, to include future upgrades of the air-to-air and ISR capabilities. Thirdly, why do you persist in posting nothing but excerpts of press reports/releases? You are beginning to sound like the infamous "Otis Willie"... Brooks snip |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Kevin Brooks wrote:
Yadda-yadda-yadda... First, this is already the subject of another current thread in this NG. Second, if the GAO is claiming that the cost of turning the F-22 into the F/A-22 is $11.7 billion, then the GAO is lying, as their own report indicates that the $11.7 billion is actually for *all* spiral development costs related to the F/A-22, to include future upgrades of the air-to-air and ISR capabilities. Thirdly, why do you persist in posting nothing but excerpts of press reports/releases? You are beginning to sound like the infamous "Otis Willie"... Yes you are correct. It's also to fix the software so that it runs for at least five hours every once in a while before crashing. -HJC |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... Kevin Brooks wrote: Yadda-yadda-yadda... First, this is already the subject of another current thread in this NG. Second, if the GAO is claiming that the cost of turning the F-22 into the F/A-22 is $11.7 billion, then the GAO is lying, as their own report indicates that the $11.7 billion is actually for *all* spiral development costs related to the F/A-22, to include future upgrades of the air-to-air and ISR capabilities. Thirdly, why do you persist in posting nothing but excerpts of press reports/releases? You are beginning to sound like the infamous "Otis Willie"... Yes you are correct. It's also to fix the software so that it runs for at least five hours every once in a while before crashing. Zzzzz...oops, excuse me; were you offering something of relevance to the discussion at hand, Henry? No? Figures. You really need to get back to untangling that whole construction of your's that has Okinawa being a day's flight away from Taiwan, and how the Su-30 is only a potential threat if it is being operated by PLAAF or Russian pilots; you don't have time for side-discussions. Back to the grindstone, Henry! Brooks -HJC |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
the great advantage of the F-22 is that it's stealth alows us to fight in
someone elses backyard with MUCH less chance of SAMs busting up a perfectly good "clubbing baby seals" session lol. -- Curiosity killed the cat, and I'm gonna find out why! "Kevin Brooks" wrote in message ... "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... Kevin Brooks wrote: Yadda-yadda-yadda... First, this is already the subject of another current thread in this NG. Second, if the GAO is claiming that the cost of turning the F-22 into the F/A-22 is $11.7 billion, then the GAO is lying, as their own report indicates that the $11.7 billion is actually for *all* spiral development costs related to the F/A-22, to include future upgrades of the air-to-air and ISR capabilities. Thirdly, why do you persist in posting nothing but excerpts of press reports/releases? You are beginning to sound like the infamous "Otis Willie"... Yes you are correct. It's also to fix the software so that it runs for at least five hours every once in a while before crashing. Zzzzz...oops, excuse me; were you offering something of relevance to the discussion at hand, Henry? No? Figures. You really need to get back to untangling that whole construction of your's that has Okinawa being a day's flight away from Taiwan, and how the Su-30 is only a potential threat if it is being operated by PLAAF or Russian pilots; you don't have time for side-discussions. Back to the grindstone, Henry! Brooks -HJC |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Kevin Brooks wrote:
"Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... It's also to fix the software so that it runs for at least five hours every once in a while before crashing. Zzzzz...oops, excuse me; were you offering something of relevance to the discussion at hand, Henry? No? Figures. Nope, lots of development effort is needed to fix the software. http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswi...tr1302919.html But several software headaches remain "as well as numerous deficiencies in functionality that will potentially affect mission performance," Christie wrote at the time. -HJC |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... Kevin Brooks wrote: "Henry J Cobb" wrote in message ... It's also to fix the software so that it runs for at least five hours every once in a while before crashing. Zzzzz...oops, excuse me; were you offering something of relevance to the discussion at hand, Henry? No? Figures. Nope, lots of development effort is needed to fix the software. http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswi...tr1302919.html But several software headaches remain "as well as numerous deficiencies in functionality that will potentially affect mission performance," Christie wrote at the time. Again, were you offering anything relevant to the discussion then at hand? The above is not. Brooks -HJC |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 17:51:23 -0800, Henry J Cobb wrote
in Message-Id: : Nope, lots of development effort is needed to fix the software. http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswi...tr1302919.html But several software headaches remain "as well as numerous deficiencies in functionality that will potentially affect mission performance," Christie wrote at the time. LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP.'s $71 billion F/A-22 fighter jet program has failed to meet important reliability goals and could face new price hikes and schedule slips, congressional auditors said in a big weapons review late Wednesday. The Air Force has not demonstrated the aircraft "can achieve its reliability goal of three hours' mean time between maintenance," said the General Accounting Office, Congress' investigative arm. The Air Force does not expect to achieve this goal until 2008, by which time most of the aircraft will have been bought, GAO said. In its report, the auditors assessed 51 defense programs ranging from the Missile Defense Agency's Airborne Laser to the Air Force's Global Hawk remotely piloted aircraft. (Reuters 06:16 PM ET 03/31/2004) Mo http://q1.schwab.com/s/r?l=248&a=942...a&s=rb0403 31 ---------------------------------------------------------------- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|