Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: USAF Reveals 30-Year Plan: Replacement for F-22 to start development in 2020
Phaid    2/15/2010 4:53:17 PM
The US Air Force (USAF) has revealed a raft of fighter, strike, transport, special mission and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) development programmes in a 30-year plan released in February. The proposals were included within the US Department of Defense's (DoD's) Aircraft Investment Plan covering the period between FY11-FY40 that it submitted for the first time in February as part of the FY11 budget request. Under the plan, USAF expects to allocate funding to initiate the development of replacements for both the Lockheed Martin F-22 multirole fighter and C-5 Galaxy strategic transport aircraft by Fiscal Year (FY) 2020. http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdw/jdw100215_1_n.shtml
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24   NEXT
Phaid       2/22/2010 12:57:30 PM

I'm not able to open the link at work, so I will take a look tonight, but maybe you could answer a question for me. Why did the military take a very effective .45 caliber handgun and replace it with a 9mm?


Commonality with NATO, bigger magazines (13 rounds in the M9 vs 7 in the M1911), and lighter weight are the stated and IMO reasonable reasons.
 
But nobody ever shot down a Japanese fighter plane with an M9, so there's that.
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid       2/22/2010 1:05:46 PM
 
"Shrinking fighters: The QDR lays out a fleet of 1,224 ?primary aircraft? for the Air Force. The total is 539 fewer planes than the 1,763 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters that the Air Force wants to buy in the next 20 years. Air Force officials refused to discuss the difference until after they brief lawmakers on their portion of the QDR, starting the week of Feb. 7."

 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       2/22/2010 1:54:42 PM


 

"Shrinking fighters: The QDR lays out a fleet of 1,224 ?primary aircraft? for the Air Force. The total is 539 fewer planes than the 1,763 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters that the Air Force wants to buy in the next 20 years. Air Force officials refused to discuss the difference until after they brief lawmakers on their portion of the QDR, starting the week of Feb. 7."






@Mustang,

I'll echo Phaid but I'll also add this. TO THIS DAY, finding people who actually understand how to measure firearms effectiveness against human targets is very difficult. Even more so back then. This is why you see so many caliber changes and other turmoil. You also have to be especially careful with handgun rounds. By far the most important thing with a handgun round or any bullet for that matter is the ability to penetrate a persons body deep enough to destroy vital organs or the CNS. Other than that people can fight a long time even if mortally wounded. Our 9mms are very effective in achieving this.

@Phaid,

What are your thoughts on that link you posted?

 

-DA

 
Quote    Reply

mustang22       2/22/2010 2:26:45 PM
I get the political reasoning behind it, my point being that a lot of decisions are not always made on the overall effectiveness of the system, but the system's ability to keep everyone happy except the guys using them.
 
As for magazine capacity a Glock 21 in .45 also holds 13 rds. The weight difference would be several ounces...negligible IMO.
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       2/22/2010 2:48:13 PM

I get the political reasoning behind it, my point being that a lot of decisions are not always made on the overall effectiveness of the system, but the system's ability to keep everyone happy except the guys using them.

 

As for magazine capacity a Glock 21 in .45 also holds 13 rds. The weight difference would be several ounces...negligible IMO.


That's just the thing Mustang. I am one of "The Guys usung them". I also own several personal .45s and have even shot a man with one before a looong time ago. In Iraq, the M9 worked superbly in it's intended role. Every soldier in the unit carried one. I found it to be accurate, durable as hell and very reliable. I really like that there is no shroud over the barrel back to the breach. I think that really helps with avoiding jamming. I own a Glock and like it too. But that's a matter of personal preference and not to say one is better than the other. If you switched pistols all you would accomplish is a logistical headache for no appreciable gain. The same is not true of the current fighter debate which has more to do with actually needing more in the first place.
-DA
 
Quote    Reply

mustang22       2/22/2010 4:48:45 PM
Well I'm happy it worked for you, if it hadn't you may not have been around to talk about it. Every local law enforcement agency in my area including the State Police switched from 9mm to either .40 or .45 within the last ten years, they just weren't happy with the performance.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       2/22/2010 5:18:05 PM

Well I'm happy it worked for you, if it hadn't you may not have been around to talk about it. Every local law enforcement agency in my area including the State Police switched from 9mm to either .40 or .45 within the last ten years, they just weren't happy with the performance.

 

 It's just hype. LE officers are surprisingly ignorant of wound ballistics and weapons effectiveness I'm sorry to say. I did some private work a few years ago training LE officers from SoCAL and let me tell you..

1. They can't shoot

2. They know very little about weapons and bullets

In fact most soldiers are that way too except the shooting which is better due to imposed training. Mustang, it's important to consider something now. LE isn't bound by treaty not to use anything but ball ammunition so the marginal differences between .45 and 9mm may be slightly greater. But not by anything that matters to a trained shooter! With small arms nothing trumps shot placement. NOTHING. Well as long as we are talking about duty and combat rounds. You need the penetration as well. Anything .38 Special and up based on personal preference. One reason I recommend 9mm is because it is a substantial round, cheap, low recoil and easy to learn how to shoot. It can also be had in all of the various form factors depending on why you carry a pistol. It's a proven killer.

If you take a look at statistical data for officer involved shooting involving 9mm and .45 acp. What you will find is that performance is about identical. Instances where suspects are shot and do all kinds of crazy things like transform into the Hulk and toss trucks back at the officers are almost always because the bullet did not strike a vital immediately incapacitating area of the body. Even a high suspect cannot aggress you if his CNS is destroyed. Thats the key and it takes shot placement not caliber when talking about 9mm and .45 ACP.

1000 apologies for the huge digression everybody! Just enjoying the 2nd amendment while we still have it!
 

-DA
 
Quote    Reply

mustang22       2/22/2010 6:34:07 PM
I agree a bullet to the CNS is the only sure way to end a fight, I also agree that training is the number one priority, but for you to suggest that all these agencies that have done analysis after analysis of actual shootings is nothing more than hype is ridiculous.
 
I apologize for getting off topic with this but would like to continue the discussion and bring up some interesting points. I will post something in "weapons of the world" a little bit later.
 
Quote    Reply

DarthAmerica       2/22/2010 6:48:32 PM

I agree a bullet to the CNS is the only sure way to end a fight, I also agree that training is the number one priority, but for you to suggest that all these agencies that have done analysis after analysis of actual shootings is nothing more than hype is ridiculous.

I apologize for getting off topic with this but would like to continue the discussion and bring up some interesting points. I will post something in "weapons of the world" a little bit later.


I look forward to it. Believe me, you would be surprised about what the "analysis" typically consist of in the 9mm vs x bigger round debate.

-DA 
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive       2/22/2010 10:10:05 PM
I'd be interested to hear what darth thinks about the rules on hollowpoing/expanding ammo.
 
The 5.56 round is superior to the 7.62 in terms of both accuracy and recoil, the lack of what has been described as "stopping power" could also be described as the lack of internal trauma it causes at longer ranges (i.e. so that if it does not intersect a vital organ, it will not incapacitate/kill, but rather penetrate without fragmenting or causing a significant blast cone as it is known and relied on to do at shorter ranges).

My personal opinion is that the rules are hypocritical for the following reasons.
 
a) any non-expanding round will cause similar internal tissue trauma at short ranges as an expanding round would produce at-range, hydrostatic shock and fragmentation being the intended effects with STANDARD ammo.
 
b) Many countries require hunters to use expanding bullets to hunt certain game because the speed at which such ammo incapacitates/kills is greater, and thus more humane when fired accurately, the rules that apply to warfighting seem to favour the long-term effects over short-term ones. I.e. that a bullet should either kill outright, or produce minimal long-term injury/tissue damage is considered more important than the time it takes someone critically wounded to die from their wounds. Fair enough, but given a) applies, my primary moral objectives would be to ensure that a given hit is lethal, and quickly.
 
I don't know which side of the argument I'm on, but basic physics seems to mean that we should also be banned from shooting targets at ranges less than 200m to avoid the "unintentional" internal fragmentation effects of jacketed ammo at high velocities (5.56) at short-medium ranges.
 
Sorry to post O/T but it is a question I've often wondered about.. I think in a world where we use bombs/HE/missiles/rockets/thermobaric weapons all of which have a lethal radius, and a larger radius that inflicts unpredictable, permanent wounding the regulations on the deployment of bullets seem to be a bit redundant..
 
Most criticisms of 5.56 ammo I've heard have always been that it penetrates without imparting energy, the solution suggested by many is to increase calibre, in that case you lose accuracy, increase recoil, and find it harder to hit a target at range in the first place, my suggestion would simply be that you optimise the round for terminal effect at range.
 
5.56 ammo is ideal for an assault rifle in terms of ballistic performance, a high-velocity round, the desired shattering/fragmentation that happens when it hits a target at short-medium range is an example of people working within the letter of the law whilst ignoring the spirit, the effect on the target is the same either way, which makes me think that the rules need changing.. 
 
Anyway... Just a thought.
 
 

 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics