her209
No Lifer
- Oct 11, 2000
- 56,336
- 11
- 0
Where's the article on how much we spent on successful government defense projects?
I wouldn't call paying $200 for something that costs $20 a success.
Where's the article on how much we spent on successful government defense projects?
:whiste:
Military spending is never deemed wasteful,.. unless it involves saving soldier's lives with body armor. THEN they start counting the beans.
Maybe I just do not know that much about railguns but why is there fire? Railguns only use bullets accelerated by magnetics. There are no cartridges or explosives that are used in launching the projectile.
10 billion is chump change. I'm more upset about the f-35 which costs way more. They should never have tried to make 1 plane fill so many roles. It will never be able to fulfill all the roles it was intended for. Maybe half of the roles could be fulfilled but that's it.
No mention of FCS?
I wear BDUs every day. Military comfort tech.how many times a day do you use technology that is a direct result of military spending?
I wear BDUs every day. Military comfort tech.![]()
I don't think the U.S. military has ever wasted more money on a type of project as it has on laser weapons/defence systems. It's the ultimate boondoggle - it'll never be even remotely useful unless America suddenly desperately needs the capability to make things within 500 meters uncomfortably warm.
Really advanced R & D is going to flop more often than it succeeds, but at least spend the time and money on something that has the slimmest margin of success.
I'm not really disappointed by the project concepts, I'm disappointed that the same people who funded these programs were likely against the Superconducting Supercollider.
Could lasers be sufficiently effective at high altitudes?
If so, about how high?
Fern
That's actually an incredibly fascinating question that I'm now going to try to read up on.
I'm not really disappointed by the project concepts, I'm disappointed that the same people who funded these programs were likely against the Superconducting Supercollider.
They're really comfy and practical with the giant cargo pockets. I wear the tan ones because they work better for the climate. I think you could get away with wearing the black ones to work. I wear civilian shirts so no one would ever mistake me for military or trying to be a poseur.If I could do it without looking like a wannabe I would. Those pants look comfy!
They should have simply scrapped the STOVL version. The marines could stick with helicopters and the Navy and Air Force for air support.The problem was combining the B version with the A/C versions when the B model was going to have characteristics that were going to compromise the A/C versions.
They should have simply scrapped the STOVL version. The marines could stick with helicopters and the Navy and Air Force for air support.
The plane is currently parked in the boneyard in Tucson if you'd like to gaze upon your investment.