F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter

Status
Not open for further replies.
^ Didn't Nvidia own a trademark to "Cuda" already?

Nwy... This missile must have a new type of rocket/propulsion to achieve the range of an AMRAAM with that small size. If it becomes a reality, it would an awesome piece of gear... perhaps a game changer!
 
There are dozens and dozens of "CUDA" trademarks belonging to a host of different companies. Remember that when you take out a trademark, you must specify what it pertains to.

Trademark Search

nVidia's "CUDA" specifically references GPU tech.
Trademark Search


On the issue of "AMRAAM class", I think they are talking about seeker tech and not range.
 
fretburner said:
^ Didn't Nvidia own a trademark to "Cuda" already?

Nwy... This missile must have a new type of rocket/propulsion to achieve the range of an AMRAAM with that small size. If it becomes a reality, it would an awesome piece of gear... perhaps a game changer!
Click to expand...

Depends which AMRAAM you are talking about. There is a huge difference in range between AIM-120A and AIM-120D for instance...

It seems unlikely that such a small weapon would have sufficient propulsion to achieve AIM-120D levels of range, however ranges closer to the initial variant might be possible...
 
ADMk2 said:
Depends which AMRAAM you are talking about. There is a huge difference in range between AIM-120A and AIM-120D for instance...

It seems unlikely that such a small weapon would have sufficient propulsion to achieve AIM-120D levels of range, however ranges closer to the initial variant might be possible...
Click to expand...

Maybe a multi-stage motor of some sort with different launch profiles depending on target range. Close in it would be burn and maneuver for long range it could be accellerate and climb to altitude with a dive and pre-terminal lighting of the second stage.

Mmmmm....I should patent this and offer a licence to Tom Clancy.
 
Volkodav said:
Maybe a multi-stage motor of some sort with different launch profiles depending on target range. Close in it would be burn and maneuver for long range it could be accellerate and climb to altitude with a dive and pre-terminal lighting of the second stage.

Mmmmm....I should patent this and offer a licence to Tom Clancy.
Click to expand...

I think Meteor already does a similar thing with it's motor so you're out of luck :)
 
This has been well gone over and a search will bring up the links on this thread

Winslow Wheeler, for most that would be enough, but I will expand it. The base year price has been shifted from 2002 to 2012 year dollars, which accounts for most of the rise. the f-35a is still said by LM to be URF 67m and from the sar URF 73m, both in 2012 year dollars for full rate production, about 2018-20.

I can't recall if this link has been posted, oct 2012 for the LM urf 67m
Lockheed Sees 'Great Progress' On F-35 Fighter
By Reuters
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_10_25_2012_p0-510504.xml
 
IMHO the single largest reason that the procurement price has risen is that the DoD decided to drop the annual build numbers for the F-35A from 120 per year to 80 (a 33% drop annually).

Disrespecting Economies of Scale comes at a price. ;)
 
Belesari said:
An interesting article what do ya'll think of this? I dont find it supriseing but then i also dont really see the F-35 as so much of a defense program anymore as a political and military one.

How the F-35 Nearly Doubled In Price <i>(And Why You Didn’t Know)</i> | TIME.com
Click to expand...

I'm kind of wondering why you think the program to develop your nation's premier front line fighter for the foreseeable future, one that will be in service with all three military branches that operate combat jets, isn't much of a defence program?

As far as the article goes, word to the wise - Winslow Wheeler is the kind of guy who yearns for the days when you could make a radar-less dogfighting hot rod and expect it to survive, and even be practical, in a modern environment. This tends to colour his judgement rather significantly, so regardless of the context, I wouldn't read a thing he puts to paper.
 
Belesari said:
An interesting article what do ya'll think of this? I dont find it supriseing but then i also dont really see the F-35 as so much of a defense program anymore as a political and military one.

How the F-35 Nearly Doubled In Price <i>(And Why You Didn’t Know)</i> | TIME.com
Click to expand...

A friendly piece of advice, ignore anything written by Winslow Wheeler. He has no clue what he is talking about. Go read some of his proposal papers they are mind boggling idiotic.
His ideal fighter is basically an up-engined F-5 with no radar and a pair of Sidewinders.
 
No, no, let me make it clearer.

If the GCV program fails its a military problem after all its for the US and is rather low key as far as things go.

If the F-35 program fails its VERY well known, will bring down alot of people and cost alot of jobs already guarranted to governors, senators, etc. Then add in the fact that its basiclly been bought into by most of our allies........its a political thing now. IT Must not FAIL.

I'm not really happy with the F-35. Yes i understand everything your gonna tell me i've heard it ALL before. I just dont like the cost, dont like the reliance on certain tech, etc. REALLY dont like the conditions put upon the design by demanding it be conventional and STOVL. Really i believe it would have been better to try and get the A and C models going good then work on using the tech used in those in a dedicated STOVL model.

But bottom line its now all we are going to get. You cant kill it and even if you did the marines MUST get a replacement for the harrier which is to damn old.


Bonza said:
I'm kind of wondering why you think the program to develop your nation's premier front line fighter for the foreseeable future, one that will be in service with all three military branches that operate combat jets, isn't much of a defence program?

As far as the article goes, word to the wise - Winslow Wheeler is the kind of guy who yearns for the days when you could make a radar-less dogfighting hot rod and expect it to survive, and even be practical, in a modern environment. This tends to colour his judgement rather significantly, so regardless of the context, I wouldn't read a thing he puts to paper.
Click to expand...
 
Belesari said:
I'm not really happy with the F-35. Yes i understand everything your gonna tell me i've heard it ALL before.
Click to expand...

I understand some of what your concerns, but why would I waste my time telling you anything? You understood everything, and you've heard it all before, right?
 
I don't know about the other Mods, but if I see stuff which is just a regurgitation of previous discussions, or where some basic research hasn't been conducted - then I'm going to start editing and deleting

 
Belesari said:
I'm not really happy with the F-35. Yes i understand everything your gonna tell me i've heard it ALL before. I just dont like the cost, dont like the reliance on certain tech, etc. REALLY dont like the conditions put upon the design by demanding it be conventional and STOVL. Really i believe it would have been better to try and get the A and C models going good then work on using the tech used in those in a dedicated STOVL model.
Click to expand...

Excellent, then if you know it all and have heard it all before then perhaps you can give winslow wheeler an education on modern systems constructs, and point out to him that his pet rock theory hinged on GCI management (because thats ultimately what he would end up with) died as a fighting construct in 1991 - and that no modern military since 1991 has maintained a GCI focused CONOPS - except countries like Mali, Myanmar, the Royal Bahaman Police Force etc....

dumbing down the debate does not add weight and gravitas to your own personal philosophy, the discussion is about combat constructs in modern warfare

Wheeler is living in the halcyon days of the F5 and the Skyraider. That might be fine for taking on drug cartels using Cessna 180's as mules in south america, but it's going to do zero for the survivability of an asset in modern contested complex battlespace
 
Belesari said:
I'm not really happy with the F-35. Yes i understand everything your gonna tell me i've heard it ALL before. I just dont like the cost, dont like the reliance on certain tech, etc. REALLY dont like the conditions put upon the design by demanding it be conventional and STOVL. Really i believe it would have been better to try and get the A and C models going good then work on using the tech used in those in a dedicated STOVL model..
Click to expand...

Tremendous. I highly recommend you not purchase it then...

As for anyone else actually interested in a useable combat aircraft in 20 years time, that can replace your aging aircraft from now, well I'd highly recommend this one.

:D
 
gf0012-aust said:
Excellent, then if you know it all and have heard it all before then perhaps you can give winslow wheeler an education on modern systems constructs, and point out to him that his pet rock theory hinged on GCI management (because thats ultimately what he would end up with) died as a fighting construct in 1991 - and that no modern military since 1991 has maintained a GCI focused CONOPS - except countries like Mali, Myanmar, the Royal Bahaman Police Force etc....

dumbing down the debate does not add weight and gravitas to your own personal philosophy, the discussion is about combat constructs in modern warfare

Wheeler is living in the halcyon days of the F5 and the Skyraider. That might be fine for taking on drug cartels using Cessna 180's as mules in south america, but it's going to do zero for the survivability of an asset in modern contested complex battlespace
Click to expand...

Am I going mad or was there a tie with the light weight fighter mafia (Boyd/Sprey.Riccioni) ? Certainly some of the stuff Wheeler comes up with rings a bell with the whole "quick, take out that nasty electronic gubbins, we can do air to air over Europe with only a ranging radar, it'll be *gggreat...* " routine.


I'm still baffled as to why Wheeler gets so much attention - Sweetman I can sort of understand, I mean, he's written *books* and everything but seriously, what's Wheeler ever done that mattered ?

As for myself, well, I'm getting all excited - the UK just named it's first three F35B pilots, really looking forward to seeing the thing on a UK carrier deck.
 
StobieWan said:
Am I going mad or was there a tie with the light weight fighter mafia (Boyd/Sprey.Riccioni) ? Certainly some of the stuff Wheeler comes up with rings a bell with the whole "quick, take out that nasty electronic gubbins, we can do air to air over Europe with only a ranging radar, it'll be *gggreat...* " routine.
Click to expand...

yes, the light weight mafia is alive and well - its akin to the same mentality of those who moon over the Reagan days and think that the solution for the USN is to head back to the 600 ship Navy - there's almost zero appreciation of how the punching weight has changed.

you see the same idiocy in discussions about armour - it gets dumbed down to issues of relative thickness when armour as a construct has moved way beyond the concept of a physical mass as the primary deterrent

I just despair at the dumbing down of the debate to these levels as it just demonstrates that you can be as smart as a rock and the public embrace your ideas without any understanding and comprehension of contemp issues..

lets all go back to the trebuchet and sling. who needs to fight a modern war? " ::)

StobieWan said:
I'm still baffled as to why Wheeler gets so much attention - Sweetman I can sort of understand, I mean, he's written *books* and everything but seriously, what's Wheeler ever done that mattered ?
Click to expand...

Nada, zilch, zero and zip in the last 40 years. Don't worry though, its a universal problem with the press satisfying the gen public by trotting out talking heads with no relevance to the debate - eg look at all the armchair generals that CNN etc trotted out for GW1 - every one of them got their own analysis wrong and Schwarzkopff deleivered a decisive 100 day war


StobieWan said:
As for myself, well, I'm getting all excited - the UK just named it's first three F35B pilots, really looking forward to seeing the thing on a UK carrier deck.
Click to expand...

Slow and steady wins the race. I've long concluded that the best thing to do with the JSF debate is just to watch the program slowly deliver and counter the naysayers by results. Every milestone that gets reached must drive the chattering hysterics into a frenzy as it means that their words of wisdom, predictions of doom and gloom and sage advice are ground down and demolished. Doesn't stop them though - they just generate new excuses

They'll still be doing the same in 30 years
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top