F22 Raptors to flyover Superbowl Pregame

[MegaWorks]

Originally posted by: Reck
You're not cynical. I'm cynical. You're retarded.

s t f u :roll:

😕

 

[mwtgg]

Originally posted by: Reck
I'm retarded.

Thanks for telling us what we already knew.

 

[UglyCasanova]

And let this be an example of how vastly different OT is from P&N. 😛

 

[imported_Reck]

Originally posted by: mwtgg

Originally posted by: Reck
I'm retarded.

Thanks for telling us what we already knew.

spare me your terrible wit.

anyhow sorry for being pissy here. i just get annoyed at being flamed for sharing a different view on things.

 

[mwtgg]

Originally posted by: Reck

Originally posted by: mwtgg

Originally posted by: Reck
I'm retarded.

Thanks for telling us what we already knew.

spare me your terrible wit.

Spare me your ignorant comments. Thanks.

 

[atiyeh]

Originally posted by: Reck
nothing more than an atttept to glorify our military. makes me cringe that people actaully like this kinda thing.

makes me glad I and others are putting our life on the line for your crappy attitude.

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: Reck

Originally posted by: mwtgg

Originally posted by: Reck
I'm retarded.

Thanks for telling us what we already knew.

spare me your terrible wit.

anyhow sorry for being pissy here. i just get annoyed at being flamed for sharing a different view on things.

Back to P&N with you, OT has no tolerance for flamebait, and as such, we'll GLADLY break out the B-52's loaded with napalm. Oh, wait, that's glorifying the military. Oh well, DIAFSBANDFAB52

 

[Liviathan]

Pic anyone?

 

[bernse]

Too bad they didn't go with F-23, I liked the look of those better. 🙂

 

[pecel]

Link to Airforce Video?

 

[GTaudiophile]

Did anyone get a vid cap of flyover?

 

[faenix]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: ThePresence

General John Jumper says the Department of Defense plans to cut back on production of the plane. Pentagon critics say at a little over 130 million dollars each, they're too expensive and unnecessary given the U.S. domination of the world's skies.

This is a case of the accountants playing "creative numbers".

The planes themselves don't cost anywhere near $130 million. The vast majority of that figure is research and development costs which is money already spent- cancelling the program now does not save you $130 million per fighter.

It's a game which has been played in government for a loooong time when they want to get a project cancelled.

Let's break down some numbers for an example:

You want a plane built that fulfills a role, and you want 1000 planes. For the majority of your program, you're not building planes. You're spending money researching things and designing it. You spend $3 billion for the research and it gives you valuable data. You come up with your design and you want to build it. The materials and labor might cost you $30 million to build the plane. After the R&D phase, this is the actual money you will spend to acquire each plane- $30 million a piece.

Now when you factor in the (already spent) R&D cost of $3 billion, if you build your fleet of 1000 planes the R&D cost will amortize to $30 million per plane. Then add the $30 million material and labor cost to build the plane and you have an amortized cost of $60 million for each plane.

But you have someone who wants to kill the program. They know how to play the game and they know that playing the funky numbers game gets results. So they lobby to have your plane reduced, with the long term goal of killing the project. The government reaches an agreement with them and agree to cut the purchase order. Now they will only buy 500 planes to save money. With the $3 billion cost now being amortized over 500 planes, the cost per plane is now $60 million R&D + $30 million material and labor for a total cost of $90 million per plane.

But now they're not satisfied. Seeing the reaction the other politicans gave when they heard the cost, they lobby to get that number further reduced. They reach an agreement, and the purchase order is now cut to 300 planes. Doing the math again, we have $3 billion amortized over 300 planes for a $100 million R&D cost, plus the $30 million for the materials and labor. Total cost is now a "staggering" $130 million per plane.

Armed with this outrageously inflated figure, the politician goes for the final blow. They parade around congress asking if we really need to spend $130 million per fighter, when you could get a cheaper one... for say, $60 million (the original cost of the fighter).

This is how you play funky numbers and kill a program. Usually you can save the program by agreeing to inflate the cost per fighter to say, $131 million per plane and spend the "skimmed" $1 million per fighter to build a new stadium in the politicans district, with his name on it of course.

:thumbsup:

You know your stuff.



[/quote]

 

[Googer]

Originally posted by: Rogue
I saw a B-2 fly straight overhead a few weeks ago here at Fort Riley, Kansas. They fly out of Wichita and by the direction it was flying, it was flying home. That's the second time I've seen one. The first time it came in low and slow overhead at about 500 feet. It was massive and truly a sight to behold. It was for a local 4th of July parade. The Air Force detachment that works at Fort Riley used a laser guidance system to guide it down the center of main street as a training mission.

I see Blackhawks, Chinooks and Apaches regularly. By far the coolest was an A-10 at the firing range. I understand why they call them a Warthog, because when they cut loose on the main gun, it sounds like a snorting hog, litterally. A pissed off one at that.

I saw about 10 of them flying toghether in and out of Mac Dill AFB In tampa Last week and see them from time to time in doubble or tripple formations.

 

[Googer]

Originally posted by: russianpower

Originally posted by: sniperruff
why not save the money and better equip our troops. superbowl is nice but most people have forgotten that we are a nation at war(s).

Agreed. :thumbsup: There was also absolutely no logic in spending 40 million dollars on an inaguaration either.😉

What I think you are missing here is the 40 million spent was mostly from private funds for the parties and the rest of tax payers money spent was on the security.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: Reck
nothing more than an atttept to glorify our military. makes me cringe that people actaully like this kinda thing.

whats your problem? did the air force accidentally bomb your house or something?

 

[EyeMWing]

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: Reck
nothing more than an atttept to glorify our military. makes me cringe that people actaully like this kinda thing.

whats your problem? did the air force accidentally bomb your house or something?

Methinks a sailor banged his girlfriend.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: Reck
nothing more than an atttept to glorify our military. makes me cringe that people actaully like this kinda thing.

whats your problem? did the air force accidentally bomb your house or something?

Methinks a sailor banged his girlfriend.

his girlfriend? pshhh... more like the girl he was stalking

 

[mwtgg]

Originally posted by: EyeMWing

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: Reck
nothing more than an atttept to glorify our military. makes me cringe that people actaully like this kinda thing.

whats your problem? did the air force accidentally bomb your house or something?

Methinks a sailor banged his girlfriend.

Well, yours was tagteamed on a boat, does that count?

I'm sorry, but that was too easy. 😉

 

[Fiveohhh]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Did anyone get a vid cap of flyover?

I got it capped but its an Hi Def cap and not sure how to edit a tp file. If anyone has some links on how to cut it out and convert to mpg I'll get it done this week.

 

[SludgeFactory]

Originally posted by: Rogue
By far the coolest was an A-10 at the firing range. I understand why they call them a Warthog, because when they cut loose on the main gun, it sounds like a snorting hog, litterally. A pissed off one at that.

The 23rd TFW (Flying Tigers) was stationed outside the town where I grew up, I'll recognize the growling sound of A-10 engines flying over low & slow until the day I die. The firing range was several miles down the road, you could hear muffled explosions from bombs. Cool planes, and the AF still can't seem to get rid of them :thumbsup:

 

[DanTMWTMP]

Originally posted by: faenix

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: ThePresence

General John Jumper says the Department of Defense plans to cut back on production of the plane. Pentagon critics say at a little over 130 million dollars each, they're too expensive and unnecessary given the U.S. domination of the world's skies.

This is a case of the accountants playing "creative numbers".

The planes themselves don't cost anywhere near $130 million. The vast majority of that figure is research and development costs which is money already spent- cancelling the program now does not save you $130 million per fighter.

It's a game which has been played in government for a loooong time when they want to get a project cancelled.

Let's break down some numbers for an example:

You want a plane built that fulfills a role, and you want 1000 planes. For the majority of your program, you're not building planes. You're spending money researching things and designing it. You spend $3 billion for the research and it gives you valuable data. You come up with your design and you want to build it. The materials and labor might cost you $30 million to build the plane. After the R&D phase, this is the actual money you will spend to acquire each plane- $30 million a piece.

Now when you factor in the (already spent) R&D cost of $3 billion, if you build your fleet of 1000 planes the R&D cost will amortize to $30 million per plane. Then add the $30 million material and labor cost to build the plane and you have an amortized cost of $60 million for each plane.

But you have someone who wants to kill the program. They know how to play the game and they know that playing the funky numbers game gets results. So they lobby to have your plane reduced, with the long term goal of killing the project. The government reaches an agreement with them and agree to cut the purchase order. Now they will only buy 500 planes to save money. With the $3 billion cost now being amortized over 500 planes, the cost per plane is now $60 million R&D + $30 million material and labor for a total cost of $90 million per plane.

But now they're not satisfied. Seeing the reaction the other politicans gave when they heard the cost, they lobby to get that number further reduced. They reach an agreement, and the purchase order is now cut to 300 planes. Doing the math again, we have $3 billion amortized over 300 planes for a $100 million R&D cost, plus the $30 million for the materials and labor. Total cost is now a "staggering" $130 million per plane.

Armed with this outrageously inflated figure, the politician goes for the final blow. They parade around congress asking if we really need to spend $130 million per fighter, when you could get a cheaper one... for say, $60 million (the original cost of the fighter).

This is how you play funky numbers and kill a program. Usually you can save the program by agreeing to inflate the cost per fighter to say, $131 million per plane and spend the "skimmed" $1 million per fighter to build a new stadium in the politicans district, with his name on it of course.

:thumbsup:

You know your stuff.

[/quote]


let's not forget the billions the gov't spends on R&D projects that really never materalize into real machines hehehe.

military spends a ton of money on companies just for concepts and research that will eventually never materialize.


anyway's, when we saw the flyby, we went "woa!? f22's!? cool!"

hehe, it was just cool, that's all 🙂

 

[Pocatello]

Because of the cost of the war in Iraq, the Pentagon is forced to cut back from buying weapons for the future. One of the cutback is the F-22 program. The F-15 was great in its day, but it is getting old.

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: Liviathan
Pic anyone?

 

[ThePresence]

Originally posted by: Baked
Looked like the usual navy blue angels to me.

Text

(AP) - The Air Force will show off two of its pricey new F/A-22 Raptor stealth fighters Sunday at the Super Bowl in Jacksonville.

Air Force officials are battling budget-cutters over the jets that cost $133 million each, not counting research and development.

"We are enthusiastic to showcase the air dominance capabilities of the F/A-22, and the Super Bowl is the perfect venue to do so," said Brig. Gen. Jack Egginton, commander of Tyndall Air Force Base's 325th Fighter Wing.

The Pentagon recently decided to slash production to about 180 Raptors. Gen. John P. Jumper, Air Force chief of staff, is trying to get the number back up to 381 during the next quadrennial defense review.

Two of the planes from the 43rd Fighter Squadron at this Florida Panhandle base will participate in pre-game ceremonies.

Maj. Lance Pilch of Flemington, N.J., and Maj. Max Marosko of Coupland, Texas, will be at the controls of the Raptors for a flyover with a pair of Navy F/A-18 Super Hornets from Oceana Naval Air Station in Virginia Beach.

Tyndall, located in Florida, is the only base where Raptor pilots are trained. Jumper completed three training flights here in the new jet on Jan. 12. Six days later, the first operational Raptor arrived at Langley Air Force Base in Hampton.

You may have been looking at the F18's. 🙂

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: russianpower

Originally posted by: sniperruff
why not save the money and better equip our troops. superbowl is nice but most people have forgotten that we are a nation at war(s).

Agreed. :thumbsup: There was also absolutely no logic in spending 40 million dollars on an inaguaration either.😉

well tell that to the private citizens that paid for the inaguaration.