Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SmirkingGerbil

  1. I used the old GAO report, as it leads to the newer ones. 160 non combat aircraft are still in inventory, that hasn't changed. I can see that this is just going to be "oh you spoke ill of the development and cost overruns . . . surely you are some meme and getting bad information . . . therefore I dismiss you as meme." So, as a meme, I leave you with the URL to no less than 25 of these reports (with the search criteria already baked in!!), up to the most recent, and none of them are "glowing" regarding development costs, procurement timelines, etc. I have read most of these, as a taxpayer, I was very interested. You will note, that I end my expose that it will be indeed a historical aircraft, and its data amalgamation and synthesis capabilities are unmatched, but the cost is way out of line compared to what was promised by LM initially. For your meme based enjoyment: https://www.gao.gov/search?q=F-35&Submit=Search :)
  2. Only if you include the 160 initial deliveries that will never be combat, mission ready, or even able to be used as trainers. The first 160 are so flawed and far behind in design changes they cannot ever be fully functional. The cost metrics are skewed, including the first 160 as if they are functional, they are basically bricks. If you remove those 160, especially the naval version, cost goes up. Now that they are replacing ALIS with ODIN, development costs of a completely new logistical, inventory, troubleshooting, and mission data platform will increase costs associated with each airframe. Not to mention that an F-35 has dismal readiness rates, and maintenance costs as compared to an F-15 who's combat readiness and mission loads literally exceed the F-35 by hundreds of hours. The F-35 expected cost over it's initial delivery run, and maintenance of those initial deliveries is expected to exceed 1.5 Trillion dollars, literally the most expensive weapon system (per plane) ever produced. But hey, don't take my word for it, just read over the GAO reports about it. Here is how the GAO characterized costs of procurement outside of raw manufacturing costs: To execute its current procurement plan, the F-35 program will need to request and obtain, on average, $12.4 billion annually in acquisition funds for more than two decades. One of many articles, detailing the 160 (or more) that will never be combat ready: https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a28685/f-35s-unfit-for-combat/ But the good news is, since the American Taxpayer, and Allies have funded LM's research, development, and initial startup costs - LM is looking sweet on Wall Street. Also, current Block models are finally coming into their own as mission capable. The data amalgamation and synthesis capability is literally a game changer and no near peer advisories have anything like it. It will truly be a historic platform.
  3. LOL - yes, I have also been following this at "The War Zone", and was aware of ODIN!! What I really found interesting is techs are finding ways to make the F-35 mission capable without access to ALIS, since ALIS is so buggy. For me ODIN is wait and see, as with everything on the F-35, it never quite does, what they say it will the first time around. :lol:
  4. I am sure LM won't have a problem turning over details about ALIS. The characteristics of the radar absorbing paint, which is currently in it's 5th iteration of design. The data amalgamation, tracking and information sharing that it can do with other aircraft, ships, AWACs, JTAC etc. simultaneously. Performance profile and capabilities, in super-cruise and other BFM parameters. Currently at a cost of 100 to 140 million apiece (model based), and a one off IRST module, plus a one of a kind helmet, shouldn't be an issue!:)
  5. 3.0 Licence Conditions from EULA: 3.2 You acknowledge that the Program has not been developed to meet your individual requirements and that it is therefore your responsibility to ensure that the facilities and functions of the Program as described in the Documentation meet your requirements. 3.3 You acknowledge that the Program may not be free of errors or bugs and you agree that the existence of any minor errors shall not constitute a breach of this Licence. Using Open Beta, would imply: " . . . it is therefore your responsibility to ensure that the facilities and functions of the Program as described in the Documentation meet your requirements." Those sections from the EULA might provide some guidance.
  6. The Okhotnik has some signature return issues, but is a big bird and impressive to say the least. Agreed on Kratos they came up pretty often recently. I will try to find it, but the USAF did a "loyal wingman" type of test with an F-35 and a drone, not sure if a Kratos or not. Australia has really been putting some time into the Loyal Wingman program, and I think it is in partnership with Boeing if I remember correctly.
  7. Put it in a Roth IRA, or a Mutual Fund that is split between small cap, and bonds. A $5K PC will be obsolete within a few months. However, I am jealous, so build a righteous rig, and have fun!
  8. Has anyone been following the "loyal wingman" programs? They couple a human manned fighter, or bomber, with a flight of Drones that can perform screening, act as a missile truck, or engage threats. A neat combination of Human/AI that can work together, complimenting each other.
  9. Interesting read. I have no credentials or experience in AI or neural nets. I went line by line through both posts. I found them engaging; however, I am aware just through raw curiosity and poking around that AI or neural nets (hope I said that right, because I am not an expert) run on GPU's not CPU's. The reason eludes me now, but when I read it, it made perfect sense. Great read, enjoyed it.
  10. Coming from a guy, that unleashed on the world, the ugliest truck ever known to mankind . . . meh. I designed that truck when I was eight years old. It was a shoebox that I cut down, and taped together to create that exact profile. I then took the wheels off my Tonka Truck, and shoved the metal axles through the cardboard, and stuck the wheels on. Looks exactly like the Tesla Cyber Truck, from the 60's. So I rest my case, unleashing a truck, designed by an 8 year old, and then pontificating on AI, does nothing for credibility. Meanwhile, Rivian has the ability to do a 360 in place, and looks a damn sight better.
  11. Hope you get a solution, that would be frustrating!
  12. At the risk of sounding dense, but here goes: Does mashing the brakes stop this? I have never had this happen; however, I do get drift on rollout and find that small pedal corrections (in nosewheel steering mode) are effective till the rudders kick in, I can get down the runway pretty straight and clean. I do have rudder pedals and they are my brakes, and even a gentle opposing (left brake only) will keep the hog straight.
  13. +1 Bandwagon. No complaints here. Every update so far has run well on my system and that covers two major hardware upgrades. That reddit link is honest, and worth the read. Loving all the new updates!
  14. I guess some folks won't buy Tesla then:
  15. Thank you sir. Only noticed, probably due to this release and took the time to document. Sorry for the double notice.
  16. 2.5.6 main issue I have noticed. Cold Dark Aircraft (non-static) at night seem to not have any interaction with ambient light or shadows - as in they have none. Load times normal. Flown PG, Normandy, and Caucasus. Night and Day. Everything appears good, water good. I have noticed a 5 to 10 frame FPS hit, even with SSR off - however overall performance is good. Here is a picture of the effect I am seeing with parked, cold, dark non-static aircraft, at night. This was Persian Gulf Map, and Mig 29. Added image here, had to remove from other post. Hope this helps.
  17. Long download . . . worth the wait! Figure servers are busy. Looks awesome, did notice a couple of things. Night looks fantastic, but it did seem to me, that smaller cities (though the lighting looked great) had a rectilinear box around them, without the soft hazing of light as it diffuses over distance. Attached image shows small town with light boxed along very discrete boundaries. See just below aircraft. Plus unlit or cold aircraft with no power or light sources of their own, look oddly dark, and no ambient lighting or their own shadows cast - but I think this is already noted. However, awesome update for sure, and water looks very good. Only flew A-10, started game from mission editor and from other menus. No issues on upgrade, starts up normally, loads differently maybe a tad slower, but not a huge difference. Removed dark aircraft for bug report.
  18. So many iconic aircraft, so many we need . . . but this is a singular animal all in a class of it's own. This needs to happen.
  19. Also, as much as I like the F/A-18, if a missile or some AA rounds hit a fastie, game over, you are either dead or totally disabled. Meanwhile, I just do some manual reversion, or adjust engines after putting out giant fires (sometimes even re-light an engine), and limp home in the A-10C, hell sometimes even get in a good gun run all busted up . . . fasties just fall apart.
  20. Was playing on Steam before I joined these forums, so my "join date" was mid 2012 - I remember when all we had was the KA-50 or the A-10C. I think some folks just depend too much on the advanced stand-off weps and targeting systems. I do use them in the A-10C, but she can be hella fun with a load of Hi Drag MK82's and good coordinates and Waypoints that you code into the CDU before take off . . . or just a good JTAC. However, my next most eagerly awaited module? The P-47 which I have been waiting on for what now? 5 years? Started with the Kickstarter project. So in effect, I am digging the vibe of the OP. I sure do like those "high tech" features on the A-10, but some of my most satisfying missions in the A-10 were taking advantage of intel, navigation, spotting by myself or other assets, and dumb bombs. Which is why I am looking forward to the P-47 in a CAS role.
  21. Ninja'd on TMS aft, curious Zimmer to see if you have tried the methods listed by Harker.
  22. Given that it doesn't work as IRL - I have found a use for it in DCS for not having to hug terrain. I fly high, and cruise on auto pilot while I setup targets and hit multiple assets from afar. Certainly not applicable for all scenarios, but I have enjoyed this method when I can. To each his own they say. :)
  • Create New...