Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Muckmaw1 on January 04, 2005, 02:19:27 PM
-
Iran: U.S. spy planes spotted
over nuke sites
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Tuesday, January 4, 2005
Iran has reported flights by U.S. military aircraft over nuclear facilities near the borders with Afghanistan and Iraq.
Iran's state-controlled media said the overflights by U.S. aircraft were spotted near a range of nuclear facilities, including the Bushehr nuclear reactor constructed by Russia.
In late December, Teheran ordered the Iranian Air Force to shoot down unidentified aircraft flying anywhere in the country. Iranian officials have accused Israel and the United States of seeking to conduct reconnaissance flights over Iran.
Iran has deployed anti-aircraft missiles around major nuclear sites, including Bushehr. So far, there have been no reports of Iranian missile fire toward U.S. or Israeli warplanes.
The U.S. reconnaissance flights were conducted as Iran was said to be accelerating its nuclear weapons programs in facilities unaccessible to the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The U.S. aircraft said to have entered Iranian air space included F-16 multi-role fighters and F/A-18 attack jets, the reports said. The Iranian media said the aircraft appeared to have been sent on reconnaissance missions over Iran's nuclear sites, particularly in the southwestern province of Khuzestan.
On Monday, the Iranian newspaper Aftab reported the entry of a U.S. fighter-jet on Jan. 1. The unidentified fighter was said to have flown at low altitude over the northeastern province of Khorrasan which borders Afghanistan.
Iran's air defense command contains aging U.S.- and Russian-origin surface-to-air missile batteries not regarded as a threat to U.S. fighter-jets. The Iranian systems include the U.S. Hawk MIM-23B, the Russian SA-2, SA-5, SA-6 as well as the shoulder-launched SA-18. Iran has sought to purchase the Russian-origin S-300PMU long-range system.
So we really even need spy planes anymore? I thought Sattelites could do the job.
If we are still using aircraft, what would be using? U-2?
-
Or just hook a digital camera to that new Mach 10 jet.
-
I read somewher awhile back that like 6 SR-71'a were put back in service. They all needed work to get them flying again and they found out that the ones that had went through long term storage procedures were the ones that took the longest to get air worthy.
-
iirc, the USAF retired the Blackbird, but there's speculation the CIA has still been flying them in secret. Wouldn't be suprised if that were true with current events going on.
-
I was always of the belief that if they retired the blackbird, they must have something better we don't know about.
Of course, this is just an aviation enthusiasts romantic thoughts.
They prolly do the job with satellites...which is not nearly as sexy.
-
Originally posted by Muckmaw1
I was always of the belief that if they retired the blackbird, they must have something better we don't know about.
Of course, this is just an aviation enthusiasts romantic thoughts.
They prolly do the job with satellites...which is not nearly as sexy.
If they are planning on developing nuclear weapons at any of these facilities, spy planes are the least of their worries.
-
muck..the airport where i fly my little cessna from is 15 miles south of Beale AFB
i seee U-2s there all the time..
awhile ago..i had a u-2 over my head at..he wasnt more then 2k above me...h ewas on aproach for landing...I think i was flyng faster then him..was sweet to see them so close up..and know..they were deep soemwhere takin pictures
-
Originally posted by indy007
iirc, the USAF retired the Blackbird, but there's speculation the CIA has still been flying them in secret. Wouldn't be suprised if that were true with current events going on.
Anyone seen Voss around lately?
(sorry Voss couldn't resist ;) )
-
Originally posted by Muckmaw1
So we really even need spy planes anymore? I thought Sattelites could do the job.
If we are still using aircraft, what would be using? U-2?
it depend in whitch company do have Mr. President`s fun club money, doesnt it ?
-
Actually lada, it doesn't.
I don't know about what hardware your unit is receiving (you MUST be a US military member to have such intimate knowledge about where the money is going, right?) but the F-15E community is receiving many badly needed technology updates that will allow us to work much more closely with ground units, resulting in being able to do much more precise work with less manpower. I couldn't care less who gets the money, but these upgrades have been on the wishlist for 12 years and neither President Bush had anything to do with it other than telling the project officers to go ahead.
Tell me who's pockets are lined with the cash from the sniper pod or litening AT pod projects, and you might uncover the grand conspiracy, but I've seen what each pod can do and the money has gone into high quality hardware that we need very badly. That's just one of many examples of what you call "fun club money" being spent.
My Mom is the recipient of some of that "fun club money" because she's been working on the next generation joint service ejection seat. Since it's my life she may be saving with her work, you can bet she takes her job seriously and has no problem taking her share of the budget to keep me and all our other pilots alive.
I won't say STFU because there's a chance you might have some actual experience, names, contracts, or numbers to back up your cheap shot at the President, but I will say that it IS a cheap shot and if you actually believe the propaganda you're repeating, you don't know what the hell you're talking about. I've seen the hardware that's being bought and with the obvious exceptions of where outright fraud was being comitted (like that one lady who dished contracts to Boeing and is going to end up in jail for it), the money is being spent in good faith.
-
so did Boeing lose that contract ?
Im not blaming quality of your HW... we all already know that some of it sux (like guns) some of it is quite nice piece of work.
But sign contracts for billion of $ during 2 months offensive in afghanistan, because 6 month ago it were politicaly hard to push was quite cheap. May be it were case with the boeing.
However ... american companies are quite familiary with bribery (as many other companies around the world).... And beat yourself to the chest and belive, that your politicals and national companies arent corrupted could point on lack of informations.
Here you have few more stories from the world
http://www.againstcorruption.org/BriefingsItem.asp?id=8553
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/oct2004/hall-o30.shtml
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/smallarms/2001/03bribes.htm
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-schatz072403.asp
http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0441/041013_news_mossback.php
and another nice example of corruption: Mr. Bush got most of his money for last campain from companies who got contrats in Iraq. I somehow noted that some emrican people doesnt consider this to be corruption.... but we simply do.
here is some funny article if you can handle a bit of critics
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/reconstructindex.htm
hehe one more funny quote from mentioned article
Friday’s move was the first among many planned to eventually forgive the bulk of Iraq’s crippling debt burden. In exchange, Iraq will surrender its economic sovereignty to global financial institutions , provide foreign investors greater access to Iraqi natural resources, and increase investment opportunities for multinational corporations.
so basicaly goverment cut of debt and expect other companies to take over and benefit from their "gift"
Just have a look, whos own those companies. .. Its so classic.
-
Yes, Boeing lost that contract and had several others put on hold during the investigation. It's going to delay several critical programs but that's the nature of fraud investigations I guess.
As for the other stuff, find me which contract LOSERS never got anywhere... As far as I can tell, only the French got left out and that's because they were dragging their feet trying to milk more money out their contracts with Saddam. Everyone holds the haliburton and titan contracts up to the conspiracy light, but they forget that there were maybe two or three companies in the entire world that could handle the scope of the jobs being contracted, and pretty much every company that could handle any given contract was awarded either their own contract or a piece of another one, and as soon as a suitable Iraqi business could be found to take over the contract, the work was transferred to the Iraqi company. The initial contracts are either over or expiring, and it's not always the same company that gets the contract renewal. I know several people working in Iraq and elsewhere who are out of a job because their company lost a contract that was awarded shortly after 9/11 or right after the Iraq invasion. When you need a job done fast and there is only one company that can guarantee that it can get the job done, you give that company the contract regardless of how many conspiracy theories it will start.
I'm sure you and others like you would rather we used government funds to float loans to a half dozen startup companies, give them a few years sucking at the govt. money spigot until they were big enough, then hold a "competition" to award a contract to whatever government owned consortium played the political games the best, but that's the European model and the US is not going to play that particular economic game. We've seen the work it turns out, the Tornado, the eurofighter, the joint french/uk carrier that keeps morphing into various different shapes, and we decided long ago that our system produces equal or better results in less time for less money. Sure, that means we give the same old established companies the contracts instead of properly distributing it around to the proletariat, but that's the nature of capitalism. When a country with over 10% unemployment and a huge welfare roster criticizes the US economy (not every EU country is like that but many critics are in that situation), it's really tough to not respond with a simple STFU.
-
Well, we gotta show some force some how..
We can't just say, looky what we tooky from a space sattelite, which could be computer generated images...
-
I see two Black birds every day on the way to work with two bg ole holes in the wings were the engines used to be.
I have to beleive though that a sattilte would be more reliable and safer than using aircraft.
Let Iran shoot down an aircraft that's not over their territory and lets just see what happens.
-
Originally posted by lada
so did Boeing lose that contract ?
Im not blaming quality of your HW... we all already know that some of it sux (like guns) some of it is quite nice piece of work.
Where are you, lada? Identify the firearm product from your country that is better than say, the M16A2, or the M4 (neither of which are my personal favorites, btw).
How about artillery? I know of two countries that have longer ranged guns than US Artillery pieces, are you from one of them?
How 'bout helicopters? Does your country produce those? Which ones?
Armored Fighting Vehicles? Which ones?
The list goes on and on. I have held, fired, and taken apart most of the current generation of infantry weapons, and can say--categorically--that there are some as good, but none superior to American weapons.
-
Eagl I'm curious what base are you at again? Sorry not trying to hijack or anything, just curious.
-
satellites may not always be better or cheaper....they have limited amount of fuel to use if they need to change locations to get into the right spot.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
satellites may not always be better or cheaper....they have limited amount of fuel to use if they need to change locations to get into the right spot.
They're also not exactly convenient to upgrade or repair.
-
Rapid deployment of limited life satellites is a possibility. Cheap, easy to deploy, and ready for any situation.
-
Let Iran shoot down an aircraft that's not over their territory and lets just see what happens.
What can we actually do? Our military is stretched thin right now. Maybe airstrikes, but we cant divert troops from the battlezone (Iraq).
-
Cobra I'm at RAF Lakenheath.
-
I was stationed there myself for 3 years with the Es.
-
Red or Blue?
-
Originally posted by Muckmaw1
"In late December, Teheran ordered the Iranian Air Force to shoot down unidentified aircraft flying anywhere in the country. Iranian officials have accused Israel and the United States of seeking to conduct reconnaissance flights over Iran.
===
"So we really even need spy planes anymore? I thought Sattelites could do the job."
Think about it for a second.
You can send reconaissance aircraft where you want them when you need them there.
Reconaissance sattelites are 'probably pretty effective' (:)) but they also are a little more predictable. There's more than one Nation that can get data on exposure windows which they can then pass on to Iran in return for some type of payment.
Mike/wulfie
-
Originally posted by lada
it depend in whitch company do have Mr. President`s fun club money, doesnt it ?
Did you overdose on really bad acid while watching 20+ episodes of 'The X-Files' in a row?
In case you didn't, here's a simple concept you obviously haven't been exposed to yet.
1. Presidents are around for 8 years tops.
2. Weapons/system/etc. research-design-development-deployment cycles frequently run longer than 8 years. The notable exception to this is the U-2 program.
Mike/wulfie
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
What can we actually do? Our military is stretched thin right now. Maybe airstrikes, but we cant divert troops from the battlezone (Iraq).
airstrikes would be all that's probably needed. No one in the states wants to occupy Iran right now but shooting down an one of our aircraft would be all the excuse needed to turn the clock on Iran's nuke program back 10 years.
-
Madhatters
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
airstrikes would be all that's probably needed. No one in the states wants to occupy Iran right now but shooting down an one of our aircraft would be all the excuse needed to turn the clock on Iran's nuke program back 10 years.
You think they don't know about what happend at Osriak?
Their nuclear effort is not concentrated at one site, and we don't know where most of these sites are even located.
-
Originally posted by rshubert
Where are you, lada? Identify the firearm product from your country that is better than say, the M16A2, or the M4 (neither of which are my personal favorites, btw).
The Corps say:Mother Russia made them nice and long lasting. Fallujahgrad? ;)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v195/GeraldDuval/Strange%20things%20in%20Iraq/PPsh.jpg)
-
Originally posted by -MZ-
You think they don't know about what happend at Osriak?
Their nuclear effort is not concentrated at one site, and we don't know where most of these sites are even located.
Wow are you a CIA analyst or something? You must be pretty good if you happend to know where all the sites are.
-
Originally posted by GreenCloud
muck..the airport where i fly my little cessna from is 15 miles south of Beale AFB
i seee U-2s there all the time..
awhile ago..i had a u-2 over my head at..he wasnt more then 2k above me...h ewas on aproach for landing...I think i was flyng faster then him..was sweet to see them so close up..and know..they were deep soemwhere takin pictures
you telling me the blackbird slows down so much on finals a cessna can outrun it??? :eek:
-
Originally posted by mechanic
you telling me the blackbird slows down so much on finals a cessna can outrun it??? :eek:
He's talking about a U2.....every slow high flying plane
A blackbird is an SR-71
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Wow are you a CIA analyst or something? You must be pretty good if you happend to know where all the sites are.
Their nuke program is decentralized, we (the US) have no idea where all the facilities are. There is no one target we can bomb that would set back their program like what the Isreali's did.
Look into it yourself.
-
Originally posted by -MZ-
Their nuke program is decentralized, we (the US) have no idea where all the facilities are. There is no one target we can bomb that would set back their program like what the Isreali's did.
Look into it yourself.
Why in hell would we just bomb ONE target?????
-
MZ just exactly where are you getting your data from? You obviously must have a extremely high position somewhere. I'd also think that if you actually did have a high position you wouldn't be squawking all over these boards.
-
Originally posted by rshubert
Where are you, lada? Identify the firearm product from your country that is better than say, the M16A2, or the M4 (neither of which are my personal favorites, btw).
How about artillery? I know of two countries that have longer ranged guns than US Artillery pieces, are you from one of them?
How 'bout helicopters? Does your country produce those? Which ones?
Armored Fighting Vehicles? Which ones?
The list goes on and on. I have held, fired, and taken apart most of the current generation of infantry weapons, and can say--categorically--that there are some as good, but none superior to American weapons.
Sorry for interrupting personal dogfight but as a Sr Lt of the Soviet Army (now in the reserve) I can't but ask a question about the American personal underwater firearms. Are the American underwater assault rifles better than, for instance, the old Soviet APS ?:confused:
-
I'm assigned to the madhatters (bolars) but currently working in the OSS as a scheduler.
Sorry about thread mini-hijack...
-
Has anybody flown the sr-71 in fs2004. Is it any good?
-
Originally posted by Cobra412
MZ just exactly where are you getting your data from?
Knock yourself out.
http://www.ceip.org/files/nonprolif/countries/country.asp?ID=2&country=Iran (http://www.ceip.org/files/nonprolif/countries/country.asp?ID=2&country=Iran)
Maybe the CIA knows where everything is, but I'm stilll not sure they could find their bellybutton if it had a bell on it.
And even IF we were able to find and bomb everything, start to thing about some of the ramifications - especially their potential to cause huge headaches for us in Afghanistan and Iraq.
-
I would rather spend my tax dollars on improving the U.S. than on dropping bombs that cost $100,000 each.
The general rule is- If you leave the middle east alone, they will be too busy fighting themselves to attack the U.S. Of course Israel messes up that equation a bit.
-
Originally posted by eagl
Cobra I'm at RAF Lakenheath.
You flying Eagle Cs or Es?
Ever do any approaches to RAF Cottesmore? I worked in ATC briefly and would occasionally get Eagle Cs on approaches although they removed the RHAG whilst I was there so I don't think the USAF make any more landings there now?
As for the SR-71, I saw a couple fly many times when they used to be based at RAF Mildenhall. I actually remember seeing one fly over where I live back in, 1991?, being escorted by two T-38s on what I would assume when they were leaving the country?
Duxford has a SR-71 on display, didn't NASA keep a few airworthy?
-
Originally posted by -MZ-
Knock yourself out.
http://www.ceip.org/files/nonprolif/countries/country.asp?ID=2&country=Iran (http://www.ceip.org/files/nonprolif/countries/country.asp?ID=2&country=Iran)
Maybe the CIA knows where everything is, but I'm stilll not sure they could find their bellybutton if it had a bell on it.
And even IF we were able to find and bomb everything, start to thing about some of the ramifications - especially their potential to cause huge headaches for us in Afghanistan and Iraq.
last time I checked most Iraqis arent too fond of Iran. It would be totally justified if they unjustly shot down a US jet. I'm not saying unleash the hounds on them nore would I agree with a pre-emtive strike. I would however, think this would justify a strike AND solve a delema of their nuke program.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
last time I checked most Iraqis arent too fond of Iran. It would be totally justified if they unjustly shot down a US jet. I'm not saying unleash the hounds on them nore would I agree with a pre-emtive strike. I would however, think this would justify a strike AND solve a delema of their nuke program.
C'mon Guns, the guys are building nuclear power plant and innocently experimenting with barely enriched uranium. They just need a strict teacher and constant control.
Why do you forget the ancient state of Israel ? The unchecked by the USA Israeli nuclear program was so successful ! And wasn't that the
trigger to start the chain reaction in the bad neighborhood ?
-
Originally posted by genozaur
C'mon Guns, the guys are building nuclear power plant and innocently experimenting with barely enriched uranium. They just need a strict teacher and constant control.
Why do you forget the ancient state of Israel ? The unchecked by the USA Israeli nuclear program was so successful ! And wasn't that the
trigger to start the chain reaction in the bad neighborhood ?
Ahhhh Blame it all on the jews! I see, they shouldnt have them but a country rich in state funded terrorism should?
I just don't agree with it, and I think that would be the perfect "excuse" to take them out.
Really letting Iran enrich nukes is like letting a pedophile run a day care!
-
SR-71? A-12? Yeah, I suppose. Why use them when you can get acceptable performance out of a fighter that's supposed to be in the region anyway? And if you want something for surveillance, what's wrong with a UAV or the good old U-2? Slow, high-altitude, discrete, annoying as hell. Still, those really fast recon jets are supercool.
On another note, a lot of americans seem to be taking their holiday on cyprus these days, so if any of you are come through here, look me up, will you?
-
Replicant
I think I made one PD in there during my local area orientation, but I don't remember. Since then I've pretty much only done approaches back here.
edit - I'm an E model driver.
-
I saw the SR-71 fly a few times while I was stationed at Edwards AFB. NASA has one or two that they still fly out of Edwards for testing. The double sonic boom always gave it away. Really cool plane, but i suspect they are using UAV's more than anything now.
-
yes..i was talking about the u-2..
and i do think i was dam close to his speed...we kinda crossed perpendicular..so i couldnt have the best judgement on speed...
i was going around 110mph...nose down with a tail wind in the c152..lolol
was sweet to see so clsoe flying..and to think the guy just came back froma alonnnngggazzzz flight to take pictures of somthing for our stealth to go destroy ; )
-
Originally posted by GreenCloud
yes..i was talking about the u-2..
and i do think i was dam close to his speed...we kinda crossed perpendicular..so i couldnt have the best judgement on speed...
i was going around 110mph...nose down with a tail wind in the c152..lolol
was sweet to see so clsoe flying..and to think the guy just came back froma alonnnngggazzzz flight to take pictures of somthing for our stealth to go destroy ; )
i bet he was flying along the european beaches gawping at the topless women.
-
Even though she is an old bird I think she is one of if not the most beautiful airplane ever built.
-
Originally posted by wombatt
Even though she is an old bird I think she is one of if not the most beautiful airplane ever built.
yup, although i think Concorde is probably the most beautiful aircraft in my opinion, looks awesome with its nose up.
-
You use strange words in english ... why don't you use "naphtaline" ?
Cause storing a SR71 in "Moth Bollocks" look pretty weird when translated in another langage like mine :)
-
Originally posted by tce2506
I saw the SR-71 fly a few times while I was stationed at Edwards AFB. NASA has one or two that they still fly out of Edwards for testing. The double sonic boom always gave it away. Really cool plane, but i suspect they are using UAV's more than anything now.
The SR 71s are mothbolled and probably going to go on display at some museum.
what did ya do at edwards?
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Ahhhh Blame it all on the jews! I see, they shouldnt have them but a country rich in state funded terrorism should?
I just don't agree with it, and I think that would be the perfect "excuse" to take them out.
Really letting Iran enrich nukes is like letting a pedophile run a day care!
Alright, forget the hotbed of the Near East.
My another question is about China.
Why several US-based organizations are in such an opposition to the Chinese government's decision to bild a dam and a hydraulic power plant
(Three Gorges Dam Project) ? [see e.g.
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a37a7c0595e1e.htm
All the environmental concerns are the obvious
smokescreen for not wanting to let another great nation of 1.3 billion people have imports' independent energy industry.
And this is not just a trend in the US foreign policy , it's a wide thoroughfare for the special intrests of the oil industry.
What do we see around the world right now in this respect? North Korea : this poor nation is being put on it's knees because it wanted to start production of the nuclear energy. Iran : same thing. Iraq : occupied because it was selling it's own oil too chip ! China : being harassed in order to permanently freeze the Three Gorges Dam Project.
Oh yeah, it must be called fair competition.
And what about the Ukraine where a US puppet-president has been just installed with the help of the US money ? The newly "elected" president of this country is its former prime-minister who was fired a couple years
ago after the mass protests of the coalminers who are against his policy of the large-scale closures of their mines. And this in the country where coal is practically the only source of energy (a handful of small gas fields is a mere fraction of the needed energy supplies).
-
That ignores the fact that the 3 gorges project could impact the global climate more than any other man made project in history... The same anti-US people who cry out over American environmental impacts turn right around and support the Chinese in the largest dam project in history. It doesn't make sense.
-
Originally posted by eagl
sniper pod
Are those any good? We have bought these for our F-16's
-edit- woops.... i mean pantera pods. my bad
(http://www.mil.no/multimedia/archive/00050/pantera_50663a.jpg)
-
Yea, they're good.
-
good. so far the USAF and the norwegian airforce are the first users of this new pod.
-edit- in october some pople from LM were here in norway to test a new consept developed by NOBLE (norwegian) and LM that enables the pantera pod to transmit live footage from the pod to a display in the cockpit and to a groundstation more than 50nm away....live and in full color. This is now beeing introduced here and they are prolly gonna sell it to the USAF too :)
-
The USAF is currently fielding 5 different pods... It's a little embarassing and somewhat of a pain in the prettythang having to know how to use 3-4 types of pods. However it's let us jump ahead 3 full generations of pods without having to pay out enough money to buy thousands of pods that would have been obsolete already.
There's tons of stories behind the scenes regarding the pods, but unfortunately most of it is either classified or company proprietary so we can't even talk to the company reps about the other company's pods. All I can say is that the newer pods are really good and someday the footage may end up on CNN so you guys can see it too :) The Guard is gonna be PISSED when they notice though... Haha.
-
Egl have you seen the new F16I's with the conformal fuel tanks. they look like they are on steroids...pretty cool
(http://zjws.8u8.com/xk/f16i.jpg)
-
Yea. Those conformals are pretty nice. They're going to have max gross weight issues when they're full and they take off with a full A/G loadout, but that's their decision to make. They already voided the warranties on their older vipers by modifying G limiters and cracking the wings, but I guess they have their reasons. An F-16 without the conformals would have trouble carrying any bombs to... say... Iran... and making it back. An F-15E could probably do it but they cost a lot more to buy and operate, plus the F-15E has the radar cross section of a small asteroid so it's tougher to get in unobserved. If there's one thing a viper always needs, it's more gas.
-
Originally posted by eagl
The USAF is currently fielding 5 different pods... It's a little embarassing and somewhat of a pain in the prettythang having to know how to use 3-4 types of pods. However it's let us jump ahead 3 full generations of pods without having to pay out enough money to buy thousands of pods that would have been obsolete already.
There's tons of stories behind the scenes regarding the pods, but unfortunately most of it is either classified or company proprietary so we can't even talk to the company reps about the other company's pods. All I can say is that the newer pods are really good and someday the footage may end up on CNN so you guys can see it too :) The Guard is gonna be PISSED when they notice though... Haha.
Have you tried/tested/seen the pantera pod?
-
Pantera is the export version of the sniper, and I just got my academics on the sniper pod last week. It's really good and I think we'll be very happy with the pods, based on the briefing I saw. If I recall correctly the design is somewhat modular so there are features we're not buying that export customers may purchase. I do know that we're expressly forbidden to discuss the pod with the Raytheon reps because the competition isn't really over and there is a lot of proprietary info floating around. Hell, there hasn't even been a formal flyoff competition as far as I know, so a direct comparision of two pod types by a military member can never be discussed :eek:
We can't even tell the raytheon guys "hey your pod would be better if it did this thing that the sniper pod does" because that would corrupt the whole acquisition process. We gotta be very careful how we discuss feature requests and image quality. We're using, borrowing, and buying several types of pods and during a deployment we can expect to use different pods on different missions, so the competition isn't really over as far as I know.
My personal non-official opinion is that I doubt anyone buying a pantera pod will be disapointed.
Those flat windows on the pod... Very expensive. Check the red sealing tape before and after every flight :)
-
nice to know that we are not shelling out for junk at those prices :eek: :)
I know that we have bought 8 of them and are modifying them with the kind of link system i mentioned earlyer, and that the rest of our f16's are getting the rest of the modified variants when they go through the M3 fase of the mid-life update. The udate also changes most if the puters and innards that have not been delt with tin the past M updates. In M3 they will also get link16, helmet sights /dispplays and new lcd displays + some more puter power.
-
Originally posted by eagl
That ignores the fact that the 3 gorges project could impact the global climate more than any other man made project in history... The same anti-US people who cry out over American environmental impacts turn right around and support the Chinese in the largest dam project in history. It doesn't make sense.
Sahara desert may have even bigger impact on the global climate than the Three Gorges Project.
Why don't the United States of America invest into the irrigation of this nice piece of land in order to counterbalance the climatic assault by the Chinese ? :D