Is the military airplane industry a scam?

The B-52, first flight in 1952, is still a good bomber to the Airforce.

Meanwhile the F-101, first flight in 1954, isn't.

Couldn't they have done upgrades on the F-101, just like they did with the B-52, and saved a ton of money?

>Muh F-35 that cost a trillion dollars
They could have instead built 1000000000 F-101 with the same money.
I doubt there would be enough missiles in the world to shoot down all those F-101.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    alright, what are we sliding?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It looks like Ukraine might take Belgorod city.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Couldn't they have done upgrades on the F-101, just like they did with the B-52, and saved a ton of money?

      What blew up today?

      >question the us mic
      >well poisoning starts within 30 seconds
      makes you think who makes these replies
      activates the almonds

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >shill while about to be embarassed again
        >surprised when called out on it

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >shill
          I don't think you know what that word means.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >n-no guys its only shill when I say it is!
            >ignore belogrod comra-
            >I MEAN
            >idaho oblast!
            so, you guys evacuating invaders and/or kidnapping kids out of belgorod huh?
            9,000 or so.
            gotta get those little money bags out before they grow up to be drone pilots huh?

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              ok so, again, i don't know if you know what that word means. i invite all people to freely look at the successful ukrainian actions in belgorod and anywhere else in russia, particularly refineries. now shut the frick up you deranged moron.

              it's a thread about the military plane industry
              i'm rightly calling out all derailment attempts

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              oh I see its actually a russian village this time lol.
              my mistake.
              so lets drop the "invaders" bit and keep the kidnapping on, huh?

              ok so, again, i don't know if you know what that word means. i invite all people to freely look at the successful ukrainian actions in belgorod and anywhere else in russia, particularly refineries. now shut the frick up you deranged moron.

              it's a thread about the military plane industry
              i'm rightly calling out all derailment attempts

              Give it up man holy shit

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                ???????

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            oh I see its actually a russian village this time lol.
            my mistake.
            so lets drop the "invaders" bit and keep the kidnapping on, huh?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It is a bit strange.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Asking why the F-101 is no longer in service is not "questioning the US MIC", it's just stupid.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Is the military airplane industry a scam?
          You can't really get much more overt than that, anon.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Couldn't they have done upgrades on the F-101, just like they did with the B-52, and saved a ton of money?

      What blew up today?

      >Topic about something else
      >Immediate ukraine derailing
      Frick off. I hope the frogs are right about ukraine losing so I stop hearing about slavBlack folk

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I've been saying that since day 1. Fricking roll over, stop taking my tax money then complaining about gibs, and let's have the CIA not run moderation on this board.
        They literally banned an innocuous thread yesterday discussing spooks, but leave the shittiest barely tangentially related Ukraine threads up for years.

        Frick 'em all, this board is dead. Hey handlers, I know it's a dayjob, but how do you expect to win over people to your side when you chase them off for being astroturf? Tell your boss to cut your pay, because you suck at whatever you're trying to accomplish.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Couldn't they have done upgrades on the F-101, just like they did with the B-52, and saved a ton of money?

      What blew up today?

      >WHAT? WHY AREN'T YOU TALKING ABOUT UKRAINE? YOU MUST BE A SHILL!
      So tiring

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      have a nice day Black person
      work jannies!

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Couldn't they have done upgrades on the F-101, just like they did with the B-52, and saved a ton of money?

    What blew up today?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A hospital, I think.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    F-101 should be upscaled to fire B-52s from rotary weapons bay racks then the B-52s could fire SLAMs at India and the Middle East thus reducing those who defile MY precious /k/ and simultaneously improving global code quality.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    why stop there, we could build 100000000000000000000000000000 biplanes with canvas wings from WW1, the enemy wouldn't even have enough bullets to shoot them all down

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Equip wing tip katanas on the F-101.
      It could shootdown all those biplanes without firing a single bullet.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Sign me up, hoss. I'll give 'em a good show

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      If you made them all drones, that wouldn't be a half-bad idea so long as they had enough payload for one grenade apiece.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Plus making em out of wood and canvas, they'd have a pretty low RCS, no?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      how much would a ww1 style biplane cost today?
      I guess engines would be around 20k western monetary units
      body would be another 10k?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        A full-scale flying Sopwith Camel replica kitt plane apparently costs 30k–40k bucks to put together.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That's with terrible economies of scale too; if production was serious, it could be much lower.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      we could produce basically infinite birds and drop them in front of an active runway

      Plus making em out of wood and canvas, they'd have a pretty low RCS, no?

      no because the engine has a massive return. we can see wood planes on primary radars today and so could the british in ww2 (memetalians still used wooden planes)

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Life is a scam. Suicide is the solution.
    Pam pam pam
    pam

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > a scam
    Yes and no. “Yes” in that these things are being sold at WILDLY above cost even factoring in capital investment and operating costs. But it’s not like all that profit just goes into a Cayman Islands bank account; these are pubically-traded companies with leadership oversight etc that makes sure revenue goes into growing the company, ie, investing into new technology so the hyper-inflated cost isn’t graft going into someone’s pocket, it actually goes into the growing the company and strengthening the nation’s MIC in general.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >what are stock buybacks
      >what are shareholder dividends

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >pubically-traded
      They sure are.

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The A7U was the perfect all-American aircraft

    America could have built 10000000 of them and they'd win all the wars

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The role F-101 performed, made her obsolete faster.
    Also the era factor.
    >Couldn't they have done upgrades on the F-101
    yes and no. You can't upgrade forever. Also it was cold war and demand was to meet and exceed enemy capabilities, not just upgrade aircraft. I guess introducing new generational fighter was easier.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Wheel invented 5000 BC.
    Yet chariot invented 3000 BC obsolete.

    Is vehicle industry a scam?

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Your understanding of both money over time, and industry is juvenile.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    reformer tier moron thinking, OP

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The F-101A and C could carry like 1 or 2 small nuclear bombs, It wasn't a very good fighter bomber.
    The F-101B was good for it's job of intercepting bombers but by 1982 when the last one in US service was retired, ICBM's were the big issue and there were much better fighters around to intercept any bombers.
    Don't worry my Voodoo loving friend AMARC still has a single airworthy F-101B as a last line of defense just incase

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Inside the briefcase next to the nuclear launch authorization is the phone number to a old Quonset hut at AMARC with a napping 80 year old man sitting in a chair next to it

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Oh, look, a reformer. Frick the human cost of the pilots getting shot down, right, Ivan?

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The purpose of the B-52 is being a big dumb plane that flies where it needs to go and carries a lot of heavy stuff to near where it needs to go.
    This is a role that cannot be filled by any other plane and also does not require any advancements of the airframe itself whatsoever.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The purpose of the B-52 was to fill the "bomber gap"....and certain people's pockets.
      >a role that cannot be filled by any other plane
      >schlepping a few tons of shit somewhere
      >a role that cannot be filled by any other plane
      I won't even.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Is there a plane that is cheaper than "effectively free"?

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    At least bring back A-7 Corsair II's, I love the dopey looking things.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      shes's not a hangar queen at least.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/xPXg8EO.jpg

      shes's not a hangar queen at least.

      Is this the predecessor of the F-16?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        no
        but I see why you could think that

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Corsairs II and Thunderchief are the closets.

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You still have to train and pay pilots regardless of how cheap the plane is. And pilots need to be physically fit and intelligent. They're not cheap.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Look up the Ship of Theseus though experiment. Just because it looks like the original doesn't mean it is.

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >you could build a million more cheaper jets for the cost of the newer jets.
    I understand why this looks appealing, but you have to think about who would pilot all those jets. You need to train them adequately, and the jets need to be maintained. They are also just incompatible with the current weapons. Not just that the hard points wouldn’t fit them, they are underpowered. You’d have to build new engines and make sure they fit. Air frames get better over time as engineers better understand aerodynamics. Electronics get better over time, wires, cables, screens, controls. Better radars and computers come out. Better material that’s lighter, harder, more easily manufactured.

    You could keep upgrading airplanes, but eventually they will become completely different. It’s easier, more cost effective, and yields better results if you just build from the ground up based on current and expected future requirements. The B52 is really well designed for its purpose.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I see your argument and raise you the mighty Sidewinder. Still fits anything, truly better with age. Also probably more complicated and defo more computing power than any buff.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Definitely less complicated than anything in a B-52, and infinitely less complicated than whatever "10 pinball machines worth of relays stacked and miniaturized" fire control the Voodoo has. If we're talking about the first variants, that is. But how many of those are still in service?
        Also it's pretty much magic and dumb luck that the Sidewinder was even invented, same with the Walleye.
        >haha if I put dot on crt screen then camera follow dot, being a TV hobbyist sure is cool
        >hmm what if we strapped this to a bomb

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The AIM-9X is exactly illustrative of why the OP is stupid - it was a clean-sheet design that only kept the same restrictions on form factor. The maneuvering system is different (TVC over fins), the guidance is different (imaging seeker), the warhead, the motor, the iconic Sidewinder rollerons have been deleted. It kept the Sidewinder name for continuity.

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah but look how cool that is.

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The B-52 has the benefit of its large size for necessary upgrades and also relatively minimal structural limitations to perform adequately within its mission scope. The F-101, and fighters in general do not share this.

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why don't we build more B-52s?

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >They could have instead built 1000000000 F-101
    what do you mean i have to refuel, rearm and train and pay at least 1000000000 pilots + ten times that many ground crew

  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    SEXO?

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    THIS IS IT /K/
    I'M CALLING FOR TOTAL SEXO WITH CONVAIR AIRCRAFTS

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Subsonic non-stealth bombers are a technology that matured in the 1950s. Russia still flies the Bear, the UK flew the Vulcan forever, China flies whatever that Soviet bomber knockoff is. Supersonic fighters kept developing into the 1990s when stealth technology became available.

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Winged M113 UltraMegaGavin should have been produced. It could have dispensed B-52s out the back by LAPES for extended range low-level attack missions.

  27. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  28. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    no because those are two different airplanes. next question.

  29. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >barely 20 years in service

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      in this case it's not surprising at all, the aircraft had a very poor payload capability and the airframes were aging in dog years, once we figured out better methods of stealth it was only a matter of time

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it was a very bad plane, but it is also a tech demo.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      20 years in service
      >he doesn't know

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *