I wonder how mach air space from coast does US maintain… I suppose much more than 12 miles.

It is at least loughable those claims about special case in Aegean, I wonder if international law has provision for such “special cases”. On the other hand I like the turkish guys because they actually show their intentions knowing that they won’t pay any penalty.

The case is another one to remind us that the main power is the arms power and not international laws, organisations etc.

I expect the new orders for more planes from both sides. They ll run out of planes with so many incidents in the area.

The American aerospace sector suffers from very low worker productivity.

A couple of years ago, a magazine had photo feature which followed a single aerospace worker for a single day at Boeing’s factory at Long Beach, CA – the former Douglas plant.

So, what did this $100,000+/year “worker” accomplish during a day? The “worker” had several coffee breaks, a lunch break and the inevitable bathroom breaks.

Did I mention that this so-called “worker” did seem to manage to wash a single windshield panel on a Boeing 717 – the sole productive activity in an 8 hour work day!

Unfortunately this is the fate of large organizations not only in US but all around the world. It is a management’s responsibility to have a role for each person all the time which is not so easy and considering the disability of middle level management that usually is one of the big problems of large companies, it’s not difficult to understand why there are mass dismissals.

Additionally there is another point. Those who are responsible to run production lines think a bit different. I ll explain from my personal experiance. As long as production “flows” within time limits and equipment reaches its capacity (notice : equipment) you don’t have to worry about people. I myself recently asked from a good worker, one day, to spend his day drinking coffee and looking catalogues for tools, just to have an idea while work was going perfect.

T
While the USA has stealth, it also is working on detection of stealth. The last thing the USA wants is for another nation to use stealth against them!

Exactly! That means that the technology to detect stealth exists.

T
Yes it will be. Stealth is not a stagnant technology, it is constantly evolving.
Designing a stealth vehicle, is something that many countries can currently do, it is the chemicle engineering, material processing, manufacturing are the keys to the whole thing.

However, the main advantage especially for exports will be lost. I wish I could agree with you but since I have seen manufacturing drawings from weapons dated from 70’s (rock, pank etc) but due to evolution and upgrades are sold today as high tech products.

You can’t convince me that during evolution they are going to make such modifications, like change material or manufacturing processes bla bla. No they won’t. If you have any of your friends working there, ask him about the jigs they use for products like F-16 to tell you their release date.

T
Actually, the technology demonstrators is NOT the favorite way of doing things for US industry. It is what the US Military prefers to prevent more projects like the Navy’s A-12 stealth bomber. These brand new weapons systems that are high risk and lots of money can be lost unless either the risk is reduced or demonstrators are used. Industry would prefer a lower risk and greater and longer production run, that is where the real money is. Programs like that are typified by the F-16 lightweight fighter. Orders for over four thousand four hundred aircraft have been ordered while over four thousand have been delievered!

Well we have to see what those companies actually are. I think most of them are system companies, not manufacturing companies. That means 80% paperwork and 20% real manufacturing. I actually wonder if production plans are actually part of these companies or “a” member of a group of companies. You come from US, so you can tell us. I m really interested to know.

T
That is controlled by those who control the budget, Congress. The F-16 had less of a problem because General Dynamics in Texas had the “Texas lobby” push for the F-16. The F-22 has been fought by the liberals every step of the way. Had the Cold War continued the F-22 would have entered service in Clinton’s first term. The Cold War ended and a two year restructuring of the entire program took place. Specs changed, program stretched out to “save money!” So, less money was spent each year but the program was stretched out by a dozen years and the total amount of money far greater.
Adrian

Well that doesn’t make it better. I m not US taxpayer, you are, but in my opinion you have to do smth. I tend to believe that companies dislike manufacturing from development for those reasons. I believe that if F-22 was earlier ready it would have been produced in greater numbers.

Think of Commanche or Crusader. The companies were paid for development they didn’t have to worry about huge workforce, investments and so on. In our times no one would like to risk a sudden fall in production with workforce cuts, restructuring etc.

the search for advanced technology balanced the need for production. You have to be wise to keep the balance.

How can anybody believe that for almost 20 years there is no tehnology to overcome the problem of identifieing stealth aircraft. First of all US should have already solve the problem.

So the question is how US can secure that such technology would not pass -from inside – to countries that might use it against their interests. Speaking personally I believe that it is just a matter of time – if it hasn’t happen so far.

UCAVs, to be truly effective, need to be remotely controlled by pilots in air conditioned rooms, as you rightfully suggest. Makes it easy for me. I don’t even have to concern myself with combating them, all I have to do is concern myself with simply screwing with the signal you’re using to transmit your commands to the UCAV. That’s why I personally don’t like the idea. Plus, you’re just asking to relive the stone-age experience. If I had to counter a huge UCAV force, I’d say to hell with it and just EMP the hell out of you.

Well, sorry that I disagree but if we are still talking about remote control vehicles then what’s the progress from 70’s?

I expect fully autonomous vehicles with a database of pre-designed responses to specific situations. That would be manouvres to do to achieve tactical advantage from the opponent. I suppose that technology has reached that level years ago.

I suppose the research now would be to make a combo of such vehicles, send them somewhere and let them fight without even communicate each other. That is only seeing with their cameras their companions to predict what they will do and keep for themselves a specific role of a complicated scenario, (let’s say in a two versus one dogfight).

I suppose that in clear sky and medium to high altitudes such scenarios should have been tested successfully.

Datalinks should only give decisions i.e. cancel the mission, or engage first and procceed to next point, which are typical commands to human operators (I don’t say pilots).

how much do F-22 cost?$200 million+?,the next generation of fighter to replace F-22 could cost as much $500~600 million!

Which means that it can down at least two F-22. Giving the rate of “improvement” I believe that it would cost minimum $800 million since it should down five F-22 😀