btw, before you make the worst mistake of your life, or your friend’s life.. a quote from elsewhere..

Acer has never had a good following. Back before they even made notebooks, their desktops BLEW….. I mean so bad that when you’d mention “asus” people would go.. “oh yeah, acer, I’ve heard of them, but i don’t like them” ……

Their notebooks are getting “fancier” but they still lack a LOT. Acer sent us some of their tablets a couple years ago as we had a huge call for tablets from connections we had in the medical field…. those tabets basically all broken down within a year and required replacement of many of the physical plastic parts on the system itself. With that, we found much better tablets that have made it through at least the last two years of real world use without any problems……

Whether it’s the plastic they use or what……… they physically don’y hold up well……. With that said, they don’t use Asus motherboards, and that’s the BIGGEST thing that Asus’ systems have going for them. Even if people know know the quality they’re going to get in their laptop, if they know Asus’ name in motherboards, they’ll know that even if they were built like junk, as long as they took care of it, it’s going to last them a good long time…… luckily, they are built well too and that’s something a lot of people find out after they buy them.

But Acer has gone the way of dell….. making the highest speced system that can pull in the most money and sell it cheap. There are things you’re not getting…. just because it has this cpu, this hard drive, this ram….. this video card… this screen…. it doesn’t mean that you’re getting everything you’d expect.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=19857

if you want quality, IBM leads by far, with Fujitsu, Asus, and LG being very good as well.

if you want a good deal, then Dell leads by far assuming you use the coupons (i dont know if the UK has them, but Canada and the states have them).

watch out for Ukrainian women, they tend to mix cement well.

btw, no offense to anyone..but if you’re going to ask about laptops.. best you ask in a laptop forum, not an aviation one..
try this site http://www.notebookreview.com and go post at their forum under Hardware section and see what results you get.. when posting, please mind what price range you want, screen size, uses (gaming or no gaming will be a huge factor if you need a GPU or not).. and weight/size.

Acer laptops tend to have curved keyboards which may or may not suit your style.. they are cheap, but some aren’t built very well. others are okay.. in general they are your typical laptops..
If you really want to save money AND have something of high quality.. I highly reccomend an Asus notebook.. particularly the “built on” series rather than the “ensemble” series.. since you are in the UK.. i’m not too sure where you can get them.. I also like to mention that the UK/Europe in general, has a WAY larger number of brands to choose from, where as the US has much less due to numerous non-compete contracts with major brands..

F-35 Hamburger

My only “desire” is to not give away massive amounts of tax dollars every year that produce no gain to our national defense. As for being optimistic about UCAV. Why not? Its good to see some thinking in an era where everyone wants the next latests manned aircraft, in this case JSF, which doesn’t justify the money we will pour into it.

and the broken record keeps on playing.. I’ll just end up quoting myself again since you are saying the same things over and over, to which i will do the same in response 😀

if the US is going to stay in the game it’s going to have to do it’s best to remain competitive by continuing to subsidize aircraft to other nations to defeat competition and to offer some building to foreign countries.

that my friend, IS related to our national defense.. you think stunting/defeating a foreign nation’s aircraft industry has no value in the defense of the US? But I guess you like the idea of a wildly successful Eurofighter or Rafale whose unopposed sales will lead to money for more R&D and the possibility of tech transfers or outright sales to hostile nations :rolleyes:
making countries use American equipment gives America political leverage over them too, as with any other country. That’s when you do the talking.. but then again, I guess this has escaped your simplistic logic since you’re just concerned with big bad companies and saving your tax money.

The “stats” if you want to call it that comes in a few flavors. As mentioned already, the gradual operational experience of ops planners and command and control like JSTARs, HQs etc to already feel more comfortable with UAVs and the idea of UCAVs as time goes on. That by itself is big. Add to that the progress made by both X-45 and X47 in tests. Their aerodyanmics isn’t especailly earthshaking or difficult with mach 0.75 at 35,0000 and higher being reached. The weapons dropping isn’t terribly complicated either with drops of SDB like shapes having made hits on targets. That isn’t so terrible and it is good considering a lot of funding hasn’t been poured at it.

Yeah and you still haven’t posted up relevent articles, news, stats, etc. I guess reading comprehension is too difficult for you?

Explain to me how cancelling an expensive, un-needed weapons system undermines America’s aviation industry? Especially when that industry does everything in their own power to shoot itself in the foot with stunts involving everything from the failed tanker lease, F-18SH, and other corrupt procurement methods of systems back and beyond. I’m sorry what I say doesn’t wrap everything up in a pretty bow with a smiley face.

again, questions that are already answered, read above my balding friend. Furthermore, do you really think the aviation industry always creates “perfect” aircraft? there will always be those that are not adequate for current needs. However in terms of the JSF, it is something needed, not only for us but for our allies who can’t afford or have clearance for your utopia of F-22’s, B-2s and long range knick knacks.

My only “desire” is to not give away massive amounts of tax dollars every year that produce no gain to our national defense. As for being optimistic about UCAV. Why not? Its good to see some thinking in an era where everyone wants the next latests manned aircraft, in this case JSF, which doesn’t justify the money we will pour into it.

there’s nothing wrong with that. Infact I feel that Americans are wasting their tax dollars with Israel (no offense to Erez), and getting little benefits in return. However there’s a fineline between being optomistic and being impractical/delusional. However I guess if I wanted further input on how such a future military force is supposed to function, i probably should talk to the horses mouth rather than a broken record who spews the same information as he/she is simply not the horse. 😮

anyways, i don’t know where elp gets his confidence in UCAVs.

He gets it after reading the posts of an eccentric old man, and then starts salivating over whatever he spews. His opinion is basically the other guy’s opinion, thus he is a broken record.

Now as for our Turkish friend who seems to take criticism of his views..or erm.. kurt’s views personally..

Really? You mean compared to the plane x vs plane y posts that show up here with no end in sight? Compare your past posts on this forum to mine.

oh, and you are now attacking me instead of defending your points :rolleyes: i am no genious, but at least I can formulate my own opinions instead of replay some one elses record elsewhere

It is a special use assault aircraft. It doesn’t have to be everywhere. Of course that is a topic all to itself of how we don’t need to have numerous bases all around the globe doing monic expeditionary warfare or in countries that can defend themselves. I don’t see how wasting money on a limited system like JSF is going to be “cheaper”

and what do you suggest?, pulling US forces out of foreign nations, let them build their own aircraft to fend for themselves and stay completely on the defensive? I doubt either US parties will allow that, let alone, allow a foreign aviation industry to build up it’s capability and jeapordize the economic interest of the US.. perhaps you didn’t know, but it’s a cut throat world out there in the world of business.

Not from what I have seen. UCAV X45 and X47 has made great progress. JSF on the other hand has system integration problems with hair on them. All that would be OK if JSF was a worthwhile effort. Its not. It does’t bring enough to the fight.

define great progress

X45 47 uses as a reuseable cruise missile, except the payload is more versatile. So funny that some are ready to shoot off a one time use $400k… $500k etc cruise missile for one target, yet have a problem with a vehicle that can be reused after one strike. Manned airpower isn’t going away. But to waste tons of money on JSF when we can hit all the targets without it, is silly. We do not have the money for this.

so are you implying that the F-35 can’t use the same warload to do the same job?

You are joking right? F22 is needed to help secure complete air domination. Once complete air domination is taken care of we don’t have to do the all the remaining tasks with a stealth jet ( in this case a slow, short ranged one ) to do the remainder of the warfighting strike work. Legacy design airframes will do.

yup, which is why our allies have plenty of F-22’s to justify not needing the JSF.

Tell me what industry domination. Name the country/company, and most weapon systems now are cobbled together by multi-national owned corporations. Boeing each and every day has become just a corporation that gets a bunch of subcontractors together from numerous countries and slaps their label on it. And they aren’t the only one. Look at Gripen, look at the Indian SU-30’s, Look at the Chinese ones. Most of these mentioned have no particular country loyalty, their loyalty is to the stockholder and how many politicians they can buy. Go ahead and wrap a flag of your choice around a major airframe of your choice. A few times it makes sense, a few times it doesn’t. So this idea of protecting our national aircraft industry is a very large joke. Get some annual reports of all of these companies. The airliner industry would be your first look but lets look at defense.The LITENING pod isn’t U.S. yet a U.S. flag is slapped on it as if it is here in the U.S. We spend lots of U.S. tax dollars so a corporation here can bleed the tech to Israel or fill in the blank etc. Domination? Look at all the component makers of the F-16. Turkish wings, on some, Samsung airframe components on others… all starting with corporate giveaways of our tax dollars by a bought and paid for political system. If that is domination, you can have it. ( and I just named a few of many things ).

you sound like a ultra left wing hippy, blaming the corporation for everything. Truth is everything is made globally, airplane or no airplane, so don’t cry when you hear that Turkey makes the wings of the F-16. Does this mean nothing is made in the US? that no US employees work in Lockheed Martin? like it or not, it is still a US company and its actions more or less, still benefit the US. I’m sorry you don’t like the idea that some countries want to shove down their products and work to another country, which prevents them from building something competitive and a threat to the business interests of your country.

Well first off genious. I am not a republican so your lame assumption holds no water. Two… “unilateral path” …. If it was up to me we wouldn’t be doing expedtionary warfare of no value.

of course not, you are a hippy who has no sense of business and long term planning. But i do look forward your replies once you’re done bending over for your eccentric buddy 🙂

Oh Elp, you just swallow anything Kurt says…
while it’s true that the F-35 is flawed.. and perhaps not as useful for the Air Force..I feel that it’s vital for both the Marines and the Navy, as well as giving something to the allies of Americar so they don’t go to Yurofatter. I think SOC will agree with me here.