Slashdot Mirror
US Air Force Confirms New Stealth Aircraft
DesScorp writes "Aviation Week reports that the USAF has confirmed the existence of a new, formerly secret stealth aircraft, designated RQ-170 Sentinel, developed at Lockheed's legendary Skunk Works. Rumors of a secret new jet have been flying since 2007, with longtime aviation journalist Bill Sweetman dubbing the possible aircraft 'The Beast of Kandahar' because of the urban legend-like reports from Afghanistan. The aircraft is a UAV, a pilot-less drone that appears to have some kind of reconnaissance-only mission for the time being. It's a tailless flying wing that resembles a fighter-sized B-2 bomber."
Theyre just telling us its a secret new invisible jet because they dont want to tell us what theyre really working on
------
beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
Looks like U.S. military is already at least 1, if not 2 generations ahead of its allies. Besides, its enemies still have WWII-level technologies.
Does it really need to spend so much billions on finding -yet- more advanced stealth technology?
Are you volunteering to fly missions?
Yes, the military complex creates jobs, but there are jobs in OTHER SECTORS as well, which imho are more beneficial to the overall well being of human civilization.
There is nothing as beneficial to mankind as Pax Americana.
Advice: on VPS providers
I bet it swoops overhead and downloads child porn to the hard drives of terrorists.
They have no idea what they're in for.
"Are you volunteering to fly missions?"
Maybe he could volunteer to join the 30,000 extra troops that are being sent to Afganistan.
"Oh yeah, we've got a new stealth aircraft. Check out these pictures. What? Can't see it? Oh, that's right... it's impossible to photograph! Booyah!"
This craft is also capable of bombing missions, according to the Military Channel's own documentaries on experimental craft. It DOES have a bomb bay and missile mounts.
The same documentary also said that this craft is capable of completely autonomous aircraft carrier landings, and can even do so in the dark. (a milestone feat in itself, due many factors)
It's also capable of 24+ hour flight, which is awesome for scouting missions waiting for a mobile target, and is capable of mid-air refueling. (this is a living pilot no-no, and potentially keeps the craft up as long as it needs to be).
Eventually, this will be flying more than our own pilots will be, due to the fact that pilots cannot be mass-produced. Eventually, we WILL be putting arms on them, even if only because there might not be a good enough alternative.
Also, rumors about similar tanks are in the works... that are so overengineered that they tried to break it and couldn't (experimental model).
There are no perfect answers, only the right questions. More questions at http://foresightandhindsight.blogspot.com/
Fun fact: The United States spends as much on its military as the rest of the world... combined.
No it doesn't. Breaking windows to give the glass maker work to do doesn't create anything. A case can be made for infrastructure projects as they tend to facilitate the creation of actual things. Unfortunately, the military is in little danger of going on a diet any time soon as the US is still in "be afraid" mode.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
That's just what Kang and Kodos want us to do...
"Also, rumors about similar tanks are in the works... that are so overengineered that they tried to break it and couldn't (experimental model)." I for one welcome the arrival of the Bolos.
American soldiers haven't had to fear death from the skies for 50 years because of America's complete superiority in the air. Similarly, America's ability to maintain that superiority into the future depends on continued funding and development of new technologies. It's foolish to stop development because we're good enough now. Halting the development of these technologies creates an environment in which no one has worked on advanced fighter aircraft for 30 years because "we were good enough back then" and we can't get back up to speed.
The other problem is deciding when the time is that we need to start development back up again? Is it when we think possible enemies catch up? Is it when we are devastated by previously unknown technology from somewhere?
I know we are fighting different kinds of wars now (counter-insurgency, gorilla warfare, etc), but I think it's unreasonable to pretend that we'll never need to worry about fighting large scale wars because we aren't fighting them now. The truth is, the threat of wars from foreign lands is not non-existent, and given that, the US military machine should work to be as prepared as possible for that eventuality.
No armor has ever saved as many lives as good, fresh, intel on enemy positions and movements.
Looking as cool as an SR-71.
I believe the point is that our military is overkill compared with just about any military force on the planet. Anything beyond what we need to adequately defend ourselves is excessive.
Not with the degree of interventionism we've seen over the last decade it isn't.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
I'd like to see some pictures of gorilla warfare. Are these mechanized or trained Gorillas?
Theyre just telling us its a secret new invisible jet because they dont want to tell us what theyre really working on
They are tesing X-304's now with the X-303 moving form super super super secret to super area 51 secret
"Looks like U.S. military is already at least 1, if not 2 generations ahead of its allies.
Besides, its enemies still have WWII-level technologies."
Really? The latest Russian SAMS and fighters seem to be well in advance of The ME-262 and FLAK 88.
Maybe you don't know it but Drones tend to be pretty cheap for what they do so they are super expensive.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
I might be wrong, but I sure as heck see similarities to WW2 Nazi prototype aircraft ( might have been Japan's) if I can find the source I'll post it.
if you see me, smile and say hello.
From the crappy pic at AviationLeak, it looks like it may be an outgrowth of the X-45 development bird.
The most important task of the US military today is to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of someone who would use one. Scoff if you will, but Iraq probably would've had them if not for a few well placed bombs back in 1981. North Korea and Pakistan already have them, Iran will soon. I doubt any of the leaders of those governments are crazy enough to actually use one, but there's always the chance of one being "stolen".
A system like this, which can go anywhere in the world and hit a target with perfect precision within hours isn't a deterrent to someone with a nuke, but it might help find or eliminate a threat.
I follow defense technology closely, and while I'm a critic of many new defense programs... I think the F-35 is becoming an overpriced boondoggle, for instance... I'm a firm believer that the US has to maintain a level of technology superior to its adversaries. You never want to go into an even fight. You want to be better in every way to the guy opposing you on the battlefield. That requires constant research. If you sit still, others pass you up.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Trained and mechanized.
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
A-fucking-men
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
The pursuit of scientific endeavors is the only future for mankind. Universal healthcare and public transit are good economic investments in infrastructure, but they contribute very little to the betterment of humanity in the manner that scientific advancement through military research has.
It is painfully short-sighted to invest too heavily in social services before investing in technologies that could someday make those services obsolete.
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
Makes sense. A stealthed recon aircraft should be small. Recon is mostly flying preprogrammed flight paths, so the pilot doesn't make many decisions. Hence a moderate-sized UAV.
The Air Force guys hate it, but UAVs are getting the job done. The Army is going for more automation; they use autoland on their Predators, and have far fewer crashes than the USAF stick jocks who land the things manually.
I believe the point is that our military is overkill compared with just about any military force on the planet.
And while there are valid questions about the cost of our forces... an issue I raise a lot... that's just the way we like it.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
If the war was as morally important as something like World War II, YES I would volunteer.
What made WWII morally important?
From America's view, it was just Europe going at it again like they'd always been doing. We didn't really know much about what was happening inside Germany until we invaded Germany.
We weren't really brought into the war until directly attacked by the Japanese. The war in Afghanistan is arguably built on comparable merits.
I'd also rather wish that money was spent on my fellow soldiers for better armor, not for my fancy gadget.
You would rather have bullet resistant armor than something which could keep you away from where the bullets would be flying in the first place?
If the war is as pointless (it won't make a difference in the long term) and hopeless (there is no real "victory" possible, as I've yet to hear someone clearly define it)
Victory is leaving behind a stable local government. (specifically a non-hostile one, if you want to be pedantic)
NO I would NOT volunteer because I would not want ANYONE to volunteer or to go there in the 1st place.
Whether you want people to volunteer to go there is irrelevant. The war and the people there are both givens. The question as it has been posed to you is whether your opposition to funding this technology means you are willing to sit in and do the job that it is designed to do. Or does your opposition to America fighting this war also extend to opposition to its have a low rate of causalities?
When things get complex, multiply by the complex conjugate.
One comment on tfa raised an obvious question: Why deploy an advanced and experimental stealth aircraft in Kandahar against an enemy that doesn't have radar (nor any capability to threaten aircraft)? One clue may be that the closest international border to Kandahar is Pakistan's, and Pakistan certainly does have radar. The next question, about why this story was leaked complete with a picture, might have a related answer: The message is "Fuck you, Pakistan; we'll talk as though we're your friends, but we own your airspace and can see every hair on your bare asses, so don't try anything."
Once Empress Palin has been placed on the throne and Martial Law declared to rid God's Country of the godless liberal commie pinko socialists that have brought the country to its knees.
(nt)
Here's a picture of five of them in action.
[Insert pithy quote here]
um i'm assuming that you're referring to the stealth UAV as the "new fancy gadget" as far as protecting a life is concerned, that unmanned aircraft is better than any body armor, the pilot is far safer than any pilot in a manned vehicle. perhaps someday we'll have unmanned tanks and assault vehicles too. of course these will just be a precursor to skynet anyway
How many conflicts has the US fought in the last 50 years where the opposing military even had an air force? The reason troops havent had to fear "death from above" is that most of our enemies havent had planes, they are primarily infantry, rarely even mechanized infantry.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Any ideas on why they need such a secret and stealthy UAV in Afghanistan for? Obviously they weren't too worried about it if this Bill Sweetman guy was able to see it at the Kandahar International Airport.
One, Sweetman didn't discover it in the field. He was likely first alerted to it when someone sent him the grainy photos of the bird in flight. He's probably the most prominent miltary aviation journalist in the world, so people come to him when they think they've found something secret.
As to why it's in Afghanistan, that was a puzzle to me to at first, but some very good (and intriguing) theories have come up about it. For one, some note that not everyone in the Pakistani military is reliable in the Afghan war; there's a good chance some members are feeding intel to Al Qaeda and the Taliban. It's been suggested that since we've become very dependent on sending Predators and Reapers to hunt the Taliban in the desert, perhaps we don't completely trust Pakistani radar operators anymore. Perhaps we think they're sending what they know to the very people we're hunting.
Another, even more intriguing possibility, is that China is right next door. And considering the luck we've had with conventional intel aircraft monitoring China, perhaps this is our way of keeping an eye on the growing Dragon. However, if we're actually penetrating Chinese airspace, then we're playing a very dangerous, Gary Powers-like game.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
And yet, the Russia and the countries it sells its armaments to are not our enemies at the moment.
Thank you. Guerilla. Although an army of trained silverbacks would be pretty sweet.
The article refers to this craft as a "pilotless drone". Could be in for trouble!
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/chroncast/detail?blogid=5&entry_id=12853
From the crappy pic at AviationLeak, it looks like it may be an outgrowth of the X-45 development bird.
It looks more like the Navy's X-47B, which is also a tailless flying wing. The Navy and NG have been very open about the program, so perhaps that's another reason why USAF felt they didn't have to hide the Sentinel anymore.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
so, essentially what youre saying is, "why invest in healthcare when you can make a bomb that will kill everyone so that there is no need for heatlhcare ever?" sounds like a plan!
i wage a holy war against the apostrophe.
The problem is that you won't know what is needed to adequately defend yourselves until somebody attacks you.
We can get into the morality and ethics of extending military power into countries that don't necessarily want you there if you like, but it's beside the point. We can quote platitudes like "the best defense is a good offense" if you like, but that's also beside the point. The point is that until you know who is going to invade you, you don't know what size of force you will need to defend yourself. And even if you do have the numerical superiority, how do you know what technology you'll be going up against? The best insurance against that kind of unknown is to continue to develop the best and most advanced technologies you can so that should the need ever arise, the toys are already there. To paraphrase Roosevelt's "big stick" doctrine, you actually help to ensure that people never do invade you by maintaining a force that's equipped and staffed well enough to make it not worth it, which in turn allows diplomacy to actually work. That's a big part of why the cold war never went hot.
It's also worth noting that while you do still have to sign up for conscription, the US military hasn't conscripted soldiers in 30 years. Not that long, really, considering that some of her allies have never conscripted soldiers, but it's still worth pointing out that currently the US maintains a professional army. Every single member currently serving in the US Armed Forces is a volunteer.
WW2 era? Even albania probably has some cold-war era stuff. As I understand it (from nonclassified sources), China has a significant portion of the plans to the B2 due to their good intelligence work and their willingness to bribe.
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&safe=off&um=1&sa=1&q=RQ-170+Sentinel&btnG=Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g10&start=0 wtf.....
Who had an Air Force?
Korea=yes, for the duration
Viet Nam= yes, for the duration
Cold War = yes, the USSR and USA often flew matching flights.
Iraq I = yes (for about 20 minutes)
Al Qaeda = yes (4 planes for about 90 minutes)
Iraq II = yes (for about 3 minutes)
For the Future:
Iran=yes (F-14s, thank you Jimmy Carter), MiG 29
It's also worth pointing out that many of the medical advancements we would take for granted today came from military research/endeavours... :) Not all of the money being poured into the military is being spent on building bigger and better guns.
1) Looks like U.S. military is already at least 1, if not 2 generations ahead of its allies.
Besides, its enemies still have WWII-level technologies.
2) Does it really need to spend so much billions on finding -yet- more advanced stealth technology?
Isn't the U.S. already technology superior to everyone anyway?
#1 is the effect. #2 is the cause. #3 (below) is the reason.
Just because they are allies today doesn't mean they always will be.
Also remember that a F117 was shot down in Bosnia. Yeah, we have a ways to go in stealth tech.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
"Isn't the U.S. already technology superior to everyone anyway?"
I'm sure that's what the enemies of the U.S. want everybody to believe. Oh..that's right, the U.S. does not HAVE any enemies anymore, just "misunderstood" countries that Dubya and Darth Cheney made in to Evil straw men...
And shaved.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
How many conflicts has the US fought in the last 50 years where the opposing military even had an air force?
Vietnam War, Libya (multiple 80's incidents), Iran (multiple 80's incidents), Iraq (gulf war, gulf war 2). Those are the ones I know of off the top of my head. Also, aircraft have multiple uses besides pure air superiority. Reconnaissance is the main use of UAVs right now (being able to see over the next hill can be useful in avoiding ambushes). Bombing is another use, especially when you need some extra support in a fire fight.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
>American soldiers haven't had to fear death from the skies for 50 years because of America's complete superiority in the air
Except from "blue on blue" aka "friendly fire".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire
Fun fact. You're wrong. Out of world military spending: Including the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan it's 41.5%. Excluding Iraq and Afghanistan it's closer to 35%. Take into adjustments for cost of living due to an over valued dollar and currency manipulation by other countries and it becomes even less.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
Yes, especially considering how much cold hard cash the Taliban are throwing at advanced weapons research.
Blearf. Blearf, I say.
I'm not sure about an "overpriced boondoggle" (although I do have a list of my own complaints, but that is another matter), but just remember that the cost of development is shared with about a dozen other countries.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
From http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/04/AR2009120404600.html
"They had learned to man the turrets and handle the grenade launchers, to hike up rock-strewn hills at 90-degree inclines."
Aren't those "cliffs"? That's some hiking there.
Depends if you mean European Gorillas or the much larger African Gorillas. Of the course the African ones are non-migratory.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
There is nothing as beneficial to mankind as Pax Americana.
Not so beneficial to the American taxpayer. We could pay for some of the more ambitious health care reforms with what we've paid for in the Iraq war.
1) Your stat is completely inaccurate. The US spends 41.5% of the world's total military spending.
2) Your stat is meaningless. As a percentage of GDP, US military spending is certainly high but it's not even close to the highest (which is Saudi Arabia) and is similar with other countries with a military focus (like Russia).
3) The US spends less as a percentage of GDP now than it has in many many years of its history. In fact, if you consider war era defense spending, we spend less now than we ever have in the last 100 years.
How's that for fun facts?
p.s. some of this info you can get from here: http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending
for the history information, you'll have to dig harder. I built my own spreadsheet to learn more about government spending (and what parties are responsible for it).
Is this plane the cause of all the sonic booms that were heard out west a couple years back?
http://farshores.org/n06boom6.htm
or more recent ones:
http://boingboing.net/2009/03/06/mystery-sonic-boom-i.html
But how does a Taliban guy look different than a regular Afghani?
Ok, so we have loads of experience with Blended wing bodies in the military. How about applying that tech back to the BWB and getting it built. It can be used for Tanker, Cargo, and even bombers for the military. Likewise, it can be used for freight airlines. Then over time, we will see the regular airlines pick this up, put cargo on the outer edges and avoid the issues with having a regular airline pick it up. Why? Because it will use 30-50% less fuel.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Some people serve their country, not their morality. They step up to service because their country needs their service, not because their morality agreed with the current course of action. It's a fairly simple statement of "I'm willing to set aside my beliefs to do what my country believes is the better course of action for it." These people form the basis of the career military service. They don't volunteer for a war. They volunteer for whatever their country requires of them. They'll be there before the war starts and they'll be there after it's done. Only fools volunteers for a war, but it is a patriot who signs up for service.
Morality is simply a justification for war. It allows those who believe in morality to support war without their conscience gnawing at them. It lets them ignore the wounded, the dead, and the human suffering that will follow. It does not avoid any of that.
An incomplete list of conflicts in the past 50 years wherein the US has fought adversaries possessing air power: - Vietnam War - Desert Storm - Iraq War ...not to mention the entirety of the Cold War. If you've ever been one of the guys on the ground, you're damn happy your team has control of the sky.
"Breaking windows to give the glass maker work to do doesn't create anything."
That's not really what the military-industrial complex does. The jobs that are created are jobs developing, manufacturing, maintaining, and operating high-technology weapons and other equipment, not jobs repairing the stuff we blow up.
He's carrying a gun, mortar, and/or RPG. And he's in a group of several other guys like him. And he's moving toward a military checkpoint or installation. And he keeps ducking behind cover, thinking it will hide him.
The current conflict is a lot more dangerous then a lot of people in the west presume. They see a couple of towelheads shooting an AK-47 in the air or guarding someone with an RPG (really, what are you going to do Einstein, shoot your prisoner with an explosive grenade from 2 meters away?) and think "what danger could they be". Not much. Except in very large numbers to a country where the ordinary soldier is not all that motivated in the first place. And that is what Pakistan faces and the price is a nuclear arsenal that very few people in the world would tolerate even the risk of the Taliban getting their hands on it.
This ain't a message against the goverment of Pakistan, it is preperation for what goverment there might be in control tomorrow.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
This is precisely the point I am arguing. Thank you.
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
The Iraqi scuds were a serious threat at least in 1991.
One did hit a barracks in saudi arabia and kill 28 american troops. The ground war in 1991 was delayed
a week so that the US could hunt down the scud bases.
Serbia - Yea for a couple of the nights, the MiG-29s they had did alright in light of the odds they faced.
Bosnia, we knocked down some of their planes while their SAMs took out one of our F-16s.
Less than you'd think. It's hard to find shaving cream in Tora Bora.
It doesn't create jobs? So if the military aerospace went away, where would those aerospace workers go? With the state of the economy right now, they'd be out of work.
And look at the wrangling over the KC-X program, why are Senators getting involved, because who ever wins will bring jobs to the site that does the production.
At the time it was shot down the F-117 was 15-20 year old technology already. For stealth the generations kinda go like this.
First - U-2/SR-71/D-21
Second - F-117/B-1B (it has a small radar cross section to for its size)
Third - F-18 E/F/G, Rafale, Typhoon (stealth technologies to reduce signature)
Fourth - B-2/F-22/F-35
Fifth - ?
He's carrying a gun, mortar, and/or RPG. And he's in a group of several other guys like him. And he's moving toward a military checkpoint or installation. And he keeps ducking behind cover, thinking it will hide him.
Or he's hiding in a mosque or behind a bunch of women and children.
"Be prepared, son. That's my motto. Be prepared." --Joe Hallenbeck
Sure. If you like straw men.
Or you could realize that military research into communications (where do you think this newfangled internet came from?), materials, and medicine (especially trauma treatment) has benefited the general public quite a bit in the last fifty years.
But considering it an "eventuality" means we have no idea WHEN we'll actually need to use it, so pumping tax dollars into current technology and R&D today might simply mean we're broke when it comes time to build the technologies of tomorrow to fight wars against the superpowers of tomorrow, who will inevitably catch up to us and overtake our efforts because we've already run ourselves broke building and maintaining our (once) state-of-the-art military. No one's taking note of the Osborne Effect because we're obviously too powerful today to not be able to build our war toys tomorrow.
And we haven't had to fear death in the skies for 50 years because we've been fighting people who've barely mastered the ground.
I suppose if you really trust that the intellectual property and secrets of the US are really that well guarded and that far ahead of all those worthless pissant for'nr countries out there, and you also trust that at least one of those yokel nations is gonna need a taste of Uncle Sam's boot heel in the near future, then yes, you should support our continued balls-to-the-wall funding of building our military. But if you're like me and think that it's more important to our security to financially embrace the young Einsteins than the young soldiers-to-be, (and it's interesting who ends up in the service and how these days) and you believe that burgeoning industrialized superpowers abroad would make better allies than enemies, then it's nuts to support such vast spending on arming the U.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_Ho_229
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I'm pretty sure that the F-35 is overpriced, but it is not a boondoggle. Our next fight will at some point involve an adversary who has the ability to knock out our satellite links to UAVs. At that point, you need planes with a pilot inside - and that will have to be advanced fighters of the F-35/F-22 type. We don't want to have to develop a brand new fighter at the beginning of a classical war.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
The purpose of the economy is to produce what is needed not to guarantee the buggy whip manufacturer a job.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
The problem is that none of the battles America is currently involved with can be won by overwhelming force or technological superiority.
The reason they still invest so much in military technology is because they don't know what else to do. The whole massive structure of weapons research and development has a huge amount of inertia to it, and many people don't want to lose their jobs.
That the money could be better spent elsewhere is anathema to them.
As an example, one of the only really successful tactics against the Taliban has been simple bribery. But, you won't hear much about that as it does not go bang or look impressive at an air show.
The US seems to think Airbuse A300s are military aircraft too.
A very good reason to fly Boeing.
Those weapons don't create anything. Building more of them diverts resources from productive projects inevitably having a significant long term negative impact on the economy as a whole. The broken window fallacy applies to much more than the hypothetical broken windows themselves and in fact describes the result of intentionally over-producing any economically worthless goods.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
Is this picture better?
Russia seems to think Boeing 747s are military aircraft too.
A very good reason to fly Tupolev.
Whereas UAV pilots cower in bunkers on another continent - so very brave.
...never saw that coming....
There is nothing as beneficial to mankind as Pax Americana
Do you really believe that or are you being um, ironic or sarcastic or something?
I need to know because I'll mark you friend or for accordingly.
Personally, I find the prospect of a world ruled from America horrifying.
I want to be able to see breasts on television sometimes.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
The american army is technologically overkill, but China(or india, but they're much more friendly) could have a ground soldier for every man/woman/child in america. Yet despite this ridiculous population, they're still researching UAVs. which means their skilled pilots wouldn't die either. and they have an incredible manufacturing capacity ;)
I wonder how much all your technology skews the ratio of soldier to soldier. especially when that ratio is against anybody but india/china.
And that right there is the problem with the whole thing. I went in the Corps post 9/11 because I was a traditional southern, christian, republican guy who among tons of other valid reasons wanted to dish out some payback to the terrorists organizations who did it. But the issue is that I believed all the bullshit I was told, was excited about Iraq getting invaded etc. But once I actually got over there, saw the things that really happened, and had friends who never came home, I started asking myself one very important question. Why? Why had we invaded Iraq/Afghan? Why were we trying to establish democracy in a population that didn't want it? Why were we trying to secure a population that was so aggressive to us? Once I got access to the SIPR-net and started investigating for facts, I learned so much that my view completely flipped. You see, the military promotes the idea of the warrior-scholar (which I applaud), but when you start to think logically, rationally, and independently, you become that fine line of being to smart for your own good. Back the the issue, is that I believe America has abused the true patriots (the warrior-scholars) by using them in an unjust war, and tossing them aside (things are getting better but the VA still sucks). So yes, maybe many do sign up for service to country, but when that country seemingly betrays you and everything you thought was right becomes smoke and mirrors, it created a sort of existential crisis from within. Basically your saying that we use cognitaive dissonance as a recruiting tool, "Come, serve your country, just throw your morality out the window when you do it" seems to be what it means. The problem is that it seems to be a cycle. The younger generation seems to lack the ability to determine if the cause is just, and by the time they are done, they realize they were taking advantage of and get out of dodge, but then the next batch of gullibles keeps on coming and so on. But the crux is that a large percentage of the true warrior-spirits (the ones that are most decisive in battle) feel jaded, disillusioned, and abused. Ok I got a bit off track, but my entire point is that it's easy to say your serving your country, that is until it puts your morality in jeopardy, and you have to decide which one you value more.
There is nothing new in the last decade about how the USA has intervened. In fact, it's probably lower in the last decade than it has been in the previous 4 or 5 decades before it. After WWII, the USA took on a greater roll of interventionism, and the world, for the most part, expected it. (Not saying the world should have expected it, or that it was right to, etc. Just that for the duration of the Cold War it was expected.)
The difference is that most of the interventionism was done by covert ops - CIA, etc. - as opposed to the military directly. So you didn't know how much the USA was truly involved until far later.
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
I don't follow defense technology at all and I do question the value of a number of the programs. But from what I've seen so far, the RQ-170 makes a lot of sense.
The best battle is the one you never have to fight because your enemy realizes he cannot possibly win by any method of scoring. Systems like the RQ-170 are major components of this best practices strategy.
This also suggests the primary reason for beginning to publicize the RQ-170 at this time, and for its deployment in Afghanistan. The USA is saying to the Taliban and Al Qaida that for this and all kinds of other technical reasons, they should abandon their attempts to achieve a military success and try instead to bargain for some small piece of their vision. I can think of no other reason for the story of the RQ-170 to become public right now: it is abundantly clear that sending this message to the Afghan insurgents is well worth the cost of bringing this bird out of the closet.
And as others in this thread have suggested, it should cause potential adversaries to question whether the RQ-170 program has also served as a way of hiding the development and deployment of something even more capable...
Will
Word. That plane is still amazing even today.
Jonathanjk.com
Out of world military spending: Including the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan it's 41.5%.
Maybe, but look at all the advancements from the Stargate program!
Most developed countries do not allow UAV's in their airspace. If you want to test one....
Ah but see, once we look at the reason you signed up it's clear.
I went in the Corps post 9/11 because I was a traditional southern, christian, republican guy who among tons of other valid reasons wanted to dish out some payback to the terrorists organizations who did it.
You joined to dish some payback. The inability to dish payback caused you to doubt your work.
If you're going to join a service, do it to serve your country. The moment you join for your morality, your cause, or your emotions is when it is possible to be jaded. The first step is the dissolution of the notion of self.
If you want to serve your country, you'll serve your country. If you don't want to, you'll find a reason why your current course of action is not the right one. In life, there are no right or wrong answers. There are simply what we do and how we convince ourselves that we were right. That doesn't mean it was right (or wrong). If it helps you sleep better at night though, go for it.
Regardless, I thank you for your service. Whether it was done foolishly, wisely, or patriotically, service was rendered.
In other words he does not look any different than anyone else.
That is not intended to be a discriminatory statement, but nearly the entire middle east has a long tradition of everyone having several Ak-47's and so on in their home. Almost all of my friends that grew up in the middle east have stories of being given automatic weapons when they where like 10 years old and up. It is just part of the culture, in the same way boys in the rural U.S. might get hunting rifles. It is especially true in countries like Afghanistan that have been at war for generations with someone almost constantly.
Living in Chile
Well thanks to president obama, our most advanced fighter ever, the F22 Raptor is being discontinued
I've seen some advanced military simulations showing the effects of Godzilla warfare on Tokyo. Godzilla warfare is truly the greatest threat to western nations in the 21st century.
"I'm willing to set aside my beliefs to do what my country believes is the better course of action for it."
And where this eventually leads is:
"I was only following orders."
yea, their major break through was a disposable cell phone and home made explosives.
Let's see how that works out:
Taliban research budget: $2.50 for 15 mins on Google, perhaps two or three guys blew themselves up testing it out.
Weapon manufacturing and deployment: $50 per unit (likely more around $10)
Effective destruction: Near total neutralization of all enemy ground forces in the entire country, forcing them to check under every rock on every road or use multi-billion dollar airlifts for everything.
U.S. is going to spend by comparison $1 million US a day per solider for the new "surge" of 30,000 troops in addition to whatever it is costing already. I bet it cost the U.S. somewhere around $100 million for each taliban fighter they kill. They sure as hell are not stabilizing and retaking the country.
What good is air superiority, if the enemy has ground superiority? This has been proven over and over and over again. That is beside the point that no army or foreign power has ever "won" in Afghanistan. You win by not fighting there.
Living in Chile
Rumors of a secret new jet have been flying since 2007
Really!?
About Iran's birds :
F-14s take a ton of maintenance and spare parts to keep them flying. I think it's somewhere on the order of 50 man hours in maintenance for every hour in the air, and those 50 man hours are generally fixing or replacing hardware. Given that Iran hasn't got a constant feed of spare parts to keep the Tomcat's in the air, I am going to bet they scavenged some planes to keep others flying, recursively, until none were still air-worthy.
The MiG 29s? They can probably buy spare parts for those, no problems.
Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
If he runs, he's Taliban.
If he doesn't run, he's well disciplined Taliban.
Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
> Iran=yes (F-14s, thank you Jimmy Carter), MiG 29
I'm sorry, I think you mean Reagan and Bush (Iran-Contra, Arms for Hostage) for selling replacement parts.
Military leaders have revealed the existence of a top-secret spy
plane. Defense contractors are rumoured to have developed a
revolutionary stealth technology based on a combination of smoke and
mirrors. The unmanned aircraft is invisible to the naked eye and
inaudible in flight. Air force spokesman General McBluster, speaking
at a press event, told reporters "This technology will give us the
ultimate edge. Some say the military simply pours money into
fruitless projects but these are worth every cent at $1B each". The
aircraft is fuelled by a new eco-friendly bio-fuel known as Snake Oil,
which is manufactured by the plane's designers. Asked about any
potential downsides, Gen McBluster commented "Sometimes they are
difficult to find. Looking at them, you'd almost think the hangers
were completely empty. Believe it or not we've even had engineers
accidentally pour fuel on the ground where they thought the aircraft
were parked! Actually, it happens rather a lot. So they really are
remarkably stealthy. There's currently a glitch with the radios that
is preventing communications with the aircraft. But the manufacturers
assure us that these are just teething problems."
Hi I'm a guy from Argentina, a country in South America. This entry is an EPIC fail, a biblical fail. Please! Our country is a "melting pot", so we have some tv channels in french, protuguese, italian, english, german; and many us channels are either translated or subtiteled. I am absolutely sure I've already seen this aircraft on "The History Channel". I dont know if in the US it has the same disgusting ammount of propaganda it has here. They're pushing the borders of cultural imperialism and everything they broadcast is designed to show us the "greatness" of "our nation" (they not even say United States). They have many military documentaries, showing how "advanced" they are in killing and destroying, etc. Unpiloted aircafts had been a recurrent topic for some months last year. And now you say its the "new secret". wtf
In soviet russia the government regulates the companies.
Ah, the Flying Wing, ya gotta love it. Let's set the Wayback Machine to 1935 ....
Horten Ho-2 Flying Wing Test Flight 1935
-kgj
Per "World Military Aircraft Inventory" there are about 20 F-14's intact.
You're missing a giant point. China definitely has the ability to perform R&D, and if we stop, they can get ahead pretty quickly. Then we won't have the highest -tech, best state-of-the-art planes that also have been used and tested, and we'll be behind easily.
Spending 41.5% of the total world military budget is very, very close to outspending the rest of the world combined. We're only 8.5% away.
Actually I bet OBL shaved his beard off long ago. He is probably running a hot dog stand outside the white house as we speak.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Iran=yes (F-14s, thank you Jimmy Carter), MiG 29
Nice try.
The F-14 was developed in 1970 and was approved to be sold the CIA backed Shah of Iran in November of 1973. That would be on Richard Nixon's watch, as Carter wouldn't take office for another three years.
For the record, Iran bought 80, but only 79 were delivered. Of these only about 50 still exist, and 30 of these are active.
Reagan sold TOW and Hawk missiles to Ayatollah Khomeni. Nixon approved the sale of the F-14s to the CIA backed Shah.
People are getting far too hung up conspiracy theories because of theit stealth aspect rather than recognising their perfectly simple reconnaisance " we can stay up there for hours and provide live feeds" value. These aircraft are obviously there to gather intelligence in the badlands: Afghanistan - to support anti taliban missions on the ground - and NW Pakistan - to support the predator campaign targeting the high and midlevel AQ leadership. Simple really... and good to see it them action too. The troops down there can use the help.
Isn't this just a scaled down B2?
LOL at the useless cockpit bulge.
Just one Air Logistics Center provides jobs for 20,000 personnel, at least half of that number in contractors, 3X that combined number in support jobs (restaurants, stores, etc), and over $3B in economic impact to the local/state economy. There are 15 major logistics centers in the U.S. No one is breaking windows (beside the occasional sonic boom from an F-15 on a check flight).
Depends if you mean European Gorillas or the much larger African Gorillas. Of the course the African ones are non-migratory.
Depends on which ones can chuck a coconut farther, then it's a contest between the Army and the NFL as who gets first draft pick.
Our current strategy it to shoot them. If their blood is green, they were Taliban.
Modding me -1 troll doesn't make me wrong.
When you sign up to do the military's bidding, you're just surrendering your sense of morality for that of a bunch of war criminals higher up the chain. How is that a good thing? They justify the war with whatever bullshit they need to sell it to the public, and send you off to do the killing and dying part.
That's a terrible fucking deal - not only you have to do something you don't necessarily believe in, you're also end up doing a disservice to your country and its interests when all is said and done.
It was a nice looking bird, but nothing looks as badass as the F-117. The only way it could have been better is if it had a fucking gun. You only have so many missiles. A good pilot could take out quite a few bandits with a good cannon.
Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
And thank you Ronald Reagan for the spares to keep them armed and flying even longer. Irangate anyone
"Those weapons don't create anything."
Aside from well paying jobs. In the US.
"Building more of them diverts resources from productive projects inevitably having a significant long term negative impact on the economy as a whole."
I find it hard to believe that spending money on weapons is more wasteful than spending money on any other shiny new trinket. Which probably isn't made in the US.
I don't deny that the outcome of using the weapons is questionable at best. But don't assume that if we didn't spend the money on weapons we would spend it on something "useful" or "better". That would be a VERY dubious assumption based on our history.
...but nothing looks as badass as the F-117.
Really? That's close to the ugliest aircraft ever (except maybe for the Boeing JSF variant). They didn't call it the 'cockroach' for nuthin...
Or: "If he floats, he's a witch. If he sinks and drowns, well too bad he wasn't a witch and God will take care of his soul." Thanks, you have just conflated our military and the Salem Witch Trials.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
confirm or deny or comment on rumors and scuttlebutt-TR3B
I just saw him on the golf channel. His alias is gipper
There is Nothing moral about killing human beings, period.
We didn't fight there before 2001. How'd that work out for us?
Whereas UAV pilots cower in bunkers on another continent - so very brave.
Thank you. Personally, I only go to battle wearing a bright red jacket and blue pants carrying a balloon above me for higher visibility. It's the only honorable thing to do.
Yeah, damn Jimmy for continuing support of a strong regional ally since 1953. A relationship instigated by Republicans, and supported by both Democrat and Republican administrations afterwards. Damn Jimmy for not being /uniquely/ prescient of the Iranian Revolution two years in the future -- for not being way out ahead of /both/ Democrats and Republicans, and the CIA, in 1976, and just knowing that the F-14 export might eventually be a bad thing, maybe.
Fighter maneuverability for decades has been kept in check by the limits of the human body. UAV is the way to go. We've reached the point where we don't need manned fighters anymore.
Possibly/probably it is being used primarily over Iran, not Afghanistan. And it is made public because too many people have seen it now and the pictures exist. They did exactly the same thing with all the other past blackops planes, they eventually became too well known and too many people had knowledge of them and too many sightings to ignore.
I think it is also safe to assume that they have a further very advanced manned plane-perhaps even with hybrid engines and capable of at least brief exoatmospheric flight- that they don't admit to, in operation in small numbers.
This sort of stay two generations ahead of what they admit to having has been their standard operating procedure since...there has been an air force. I see no reason at all that nighthawk and spirit were the last secretly developed manned planes. I believe they still have just as much interest in manned flight as they do unmanned flight, for various reasons.
I think he's blaming Carter for the fall of the Shah and the rise of the Ayatollahs.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
Also remember that these days it takes about 20 years to go from idea to deployed combat ready aircraft. If we cancel the F-35 now we get to start over and hope our enemies don't surprise us in the next 20 years. Not a risk I want to take.
And what advanced aircraft program of the last 20 years *didn't* go over time and budget? Why wouldn't the next one become an overpriced boondoggle also? It seems to be the nature of the beast and if we canceled every program that became such we wouldn't have any aircraft at all.
Your comment is amusing but it does not necessarily follow that we must fight low tech with low tech. Imagine how the collateral damage situation will be when we can someday, instead of dropping a 500lb bomb on the spot where the bad guy is potentially killing innocents, point a very high energy laser directly at his head from many thousands of feet up. Bystanders might get some splatter but would be otherwise unharmed. That would be a very useful new technology and we aren't necessarily that far from it.
Being able to use night vision (and whatever other cool imaging technologies they are now coming up with) is already very useful to defeat low-tech enemies by targeting them at night. I have seen night vision videos of guys planting a roadside bomb being taken out by Apache. Without a very expensive high tech development program to develop that tech those guys and who knows how many more would have succeeded.
The ultimate in a guerilla war type scenario would be the development of a sort of JSTARS technology but for human beings. Will be very nice for patrolling boarders such as with Pakistan/Afghanistan or even the US border with Mexico.
mod parent down - spoilers!
If so, that makes even less sense, since it was a broad based popular rebellion that brought down the Shah. In light of that, the only thing that could have possibly stopped it would have been military invasion, and lethal force against civilians, in order to prop up an unpopular, undemocratic, and throughly reprehensible regime.
Not that Khomeni and the Islamic Republic isn't, nor at the time wasn't (except for popularity.)
Do you really believe that the Stalins, Hitlers, Maos, and Pol Pots are exceptions to history?
Like Germany, Korea, Japan, and Iraq are ruled from America? You exaggerate zillions of times.
Forget health care, forget humanitarian aid, just kill more people. Problem solved. Stupid friggin yanks.
Think about those numbers for a moment. Do you really think we are going to spend $30 billion per day? $2.7 trillion every three months? You need to check your sources as they are clearly wrong!
Yea, we did fight there before 2001 (check your history). That is why we are fighting there now.
We armed and trained them, and everyone else in the region for the last 50 years.
Dude, didn't you watch Rambo?
Living in Chile
Have you read Skunkworks (http://www.amazon.com/Skunk-Works-Personal-Memoir-Lockheed/dp/0316743003)?
If not, I'd highly recommend it. The book points out just how badly screwed up the military procurement process for new technology can get. It's a bit dated now - a decade or so, really - but still very much worth reading.
I consider this one of the most informative books I've ever read in my life, not just because of the military tech aspect, but because of the perspective on effective management of bringing an idea from the first notes to working prototypes. It should certainly be required reading for anyone in the engineering fields.
SB
It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
There is nothing as beneficial to mankind as Pax Americana.
And you wonder why half the world thinks America is an arrogant brat with a sense of entitlement exceeded only by the size and span of its overbuilt military. Caesar can do wrong.
Karma fed to this user will be promptly burnt. Be warned; be wary.
Afghanistan is not in the Middle East. New Rule: No invading a country if you can't pronounce it and can't place it on a map.
Karma fed to this user will be promptly burnt. Be warned; be wary.
...to find out that it had mount points for a range of weapons - and could be cranked out rapidly...say, a 100 a day...on short notice. If need be.
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
Why would we do that? How was that in our interest?
In other words you do not look any different than anyone else
-
Extracting sunbeams from
If he runs, he's Taliban. If he doesn't run, he's well disciplined Taliban.
What! You still here? Last time I saw you was in a helicopter, an you were bravely blowin' away women & children. (FullMetalJerket) Ah, you brave yanks! Somethings never change.
-
Extracting sunbeams from
Is that the real kind of intact, or the kind of intact where 75% of the USSR's tanks were unfieldable at the height of the cold war? Just because the planes are sitting in a hangar next to the tarmac doesn't mean they can fly.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The military is regrowing teeth now. Where is this technology in the civilian space? It involves a tooth bud made from adult stem cells and ultrasonic stimulation of the tooth bud, it's not exactly rocket science. There MUST be a more efficient way to perform this research than to build a soldier with a better smile.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
That's not really what the military-industrial complex does. The jobs that are created are jobs developing, manufacturing, maintaining, and operating high-technology weapons and other equipment, not jobs repairing the stuff we blow up.
That is false. The military-industrial complex blows stuff up and then rebuilds it. See: Halliburton, the military contractor deemed the only one ready to rebuild Iraq... while numerous major stakeholders operated our government. It's the same cast of characters running it all.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Right, and you should not get in to conversation until you learn how to think.
Living in Chile
I won't disagree that it was a broad uprising. However, prior to it Carter pressured the Shah to allow Ayatollah Khomeni to be allowed back into the country and a larger number of other things that essentially unblocked the Ayatollahs path to causing the uprising and taking power in the first place. I won't argue Carter is solely responsible, but it appears he does a portion of the blame.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
Is there a microwave oven in your kitchen? That was created by a weapon. Specifically, RADAR which was used as a weapon against long-range bombers.
While building the weapon itself doesn't give you anything other than the weapon, the R&D that was used to build it very often ends up in civilian life.
Like some little network the military developed so that the network could survive a nuclear strike, and now we're using it to argue about military R&D.
posting as AC... too lazy to login on sunday.
my point was that it was a humorous assertion for the GP to tie in healthcare as though it would be obsolete from military research. obviously defense spending has pushed lots of innovation but there some things that just wont become obsolete.
I think it was Patton who said "Your job is not to die for your country. It is to make the other poor bastard die for his."
Depends on what you mean by intact. If you mean physically still together, Iran might have 20. But there are rumors that Northrop Grumman personnel sabotaged the whole fleet by removing selective parts or damaging parts before they left. So a fleet of 20 might exist and fly but might not be capable of combat.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
It involves a tooth bud made from adult stem cells and ultrasonic stimulation of the tooth bud, it's not exactly rocket science.
Eh? Are you serious?
A tooth bud, made from adult stem cells - do you have any idea how hard it is to harvest adult stem cells, then wind them back into seedable stem cells?
And then ultrasonically stimulate them. Using certain frequencies and powers of ultrasound (disclaimer: I'm a sonographer). For certain duty cycles.
Do you really think all this stuff is obvious, to *anyone*? Whatever you might spout out, the stuff you're casually mentioning *is* pretty close to rocket science. If you don't believe me, go off and do the procedure yourself, on your own. Sheesh!
Maybe those 20,000 nukes are keeping those aliens away who wish to enslave our planet.
After all would you invade a planet thats uber rich, worth trillions of $$$, that would nuke it self to mars quality.
hehee
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
People always say this garbage. It's NOT THE TALIBAN our military industrial complex is spending billions preparing to fight. It's India, China, Iran, the EU, Russia or whoever the hell has money & resources and decides to go batshit crazy like Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Chavez and so on so forth. You don't prep for the war today, you prep for the one 15 years from now and you never know who will be on the other side.
I'm sure there's people working on anti-US stuff in ALL those places ... like the Chinese shooting down satellites and their supersonic anit-carrier missiles. The Typhoon surely wasn't designed to be better than the US fighters at the times was it?
And what advanced aircraft program of the last 20 years *didn't* go over time and budget?
Just outside the 20 year window, but the F-117 is the last one I can think of. Kelly Johnson, you are missed.
That's nothing. You think Canada Geese are actual birds! They even fly in formation for christsakes!
The fact that the poop everywhere is just due to some twisted Canadian engineers, sick bastards!
Are you saying there is a moral equivalent between using non-combatants as a human shield and leveraging vastly superior technology to reduce casualties?
The DOD actually said they don't need any more. How is that bad, or in any way Obama's fault? And I'm no Obama supporter, by far, but let's be fair.
- T
You're a bit of an idiot, aren't you. Worse, a morally simplistic idiot. Go back to school and learn some real philosophy, yours is bankrupt and uninformed.
I bet you're one of those people who believes we shouldn't have gone to war to stop Hitler either, huh? Huh? Peace through strength, Pax Americana. There is no other option lest the world return to utter chaos and insecurity. Or are you completely, completely ignorant of history? When it comes to the middle east we are pursuing American interest. And when/if Pakistan falls into civil war, you will be glad that we have forces in the region to rush in a secure those nukes before they end up on your own backyard.
and then China or a country secretly developing weapons sneaks up under our outdated radar and slits our throat
Some people serve their government overlords, not their morality. They step up to service because their government overlords need their service, not because their morality agreed with the current course of action. It's a fairly simple statement of "I'm willing to set aside my beliefs to do what my government overlords believe is the better course of action for it." These people form the basis of the career military service. They don't volunteer for a war. They volunteer for whatever their government overlords require of them. They'll be there before the war starts and they'll be there after it's done. Only fools volunteer for a war, but it is a patriot who signs up for service.
Patriotism is simply a justification for war. It allows those who believe in patriotism to support war without their conscience gnawing at them. It lets them ignore the wounded, the dead, and the human suffering that will follow. It does not avoid any of that.
No one needs war.
call me FOSS im the boss with the sauce and the source