Wednesday What We’re Reading (Oct. 3, 2018)

Lots of F-35 news today.

Defense

Guns (etc.)

Miscellaneous

5 thoughts on “Wednesday What We’re Reading (Oct. 3, 2018)

    1. Fishbreath Post author

      We did. I don’t recall if we put it in a What We’re Reading post, but if we didn’t, we’ll include it next week, too.

      Flipping through it again, I do remember these lines:

      DOD deemed some of the information, such as aircraft availability, not mission capable rates, number of aircraft in depots, and budgeted and executed flight hours to be sensitive (i.e., For Official Use Only).

      being most annoying. Understandable, but annoying.

  1. Kilo Sierra

    I’m pretty sure infantry have been overloaded from the get go – what’s another study going to prove?

    All leg issues aside, I always look at bio’s of articles – said author was a bat boy, so perhaps he rode around in strikers too much…

    So when I was looking at the bio, I noticed he was tagged on the following article:

    https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2016/05/b-21-bomber-should-be-unmanned-day-1/128714/?oref=d-river

    Manned / unmanned B-21 aside, I wonder if anyone has proposed a non-LO (ala no coatings) B-21 for more flying hours (or cheaper per hour)? Perhaps the lack of LO treatment would totally screw with aerodynamics… Plus if you did thing right, you could totally keep anyone that cared guessing (scrap tail specific markings) – make every tail visually identical.

    Reply
    1. Daib

      What’s the point of the flying wing if you’re dropping the LO? If the environment is permissive enough that your subsonic B-21 doesn’t need to worry about radar air defense, just use a cheap B-52.

Leave a Reply