2 hours ago, martin-w said:

 

Google it. Hybrids catch fire the most per capita. Then ICE, then a handful of BEV's. So know, not a valid comment.

thank you oh comment god. icymi, 😉 mean sarcasm.

3 hours ago, martin-w said:

Musk does some things I like and some things utterly dumb. His talent is seeing a need and getting it done. But paradoxically, when he steps out of his lane, it's reminiscent of the Dunning Kruger effect.

That may well be what makes me think of him as an idiot savant...

7 minutes ago, n4gix said:

That may well be what makes me think of him as an idiot savant...

Or just an overly rich idiot!

3 hours ago, charliearon said:

Or just an overly rich word not allowed!

 

And how did he become rich? And no, the family diamond mine thing is a myth. He was in debt by $150,000 after leaving university. He couldn't even afford a new computer for his first company. An [word that you can say be the filter won't let us say] no, a sufferer of Asperger syndrome yes, a genius, no.  

Edited December 7, 20241 yr by martin-w

25 minutes ago, martin-w said:

 

 An [word that you can say be the filter won't let us say] 

Actually this is of interest to me because I've been reading a lot about cybertrucks recently, even going so far as to watch a lot of reviews which are almost uniformly bad. I've been wondering for weeks what the attraction is, and with the facts on the ground is this really a guy that should be putting down anybody else? https://mashable.com/article/tesla-cybertruck-shutdown

13 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

Actually this is of interest to me because I've been reading a lot about cybertrucks recently, even going so far as to watch a lot of reviews which are almost uniformly bad.

 

It was a weird concept to begin with.

I don't think it has an accurate reliability score yet, by an unbiased authority. Time will tell. All we have is comments on the internet, and of course, those with no issues don't comment on the internet. There are lots of fake videos out there too, set up videos of panels falling off and rust on stainless steel and all manor of things. 

I guess it will need a future JD Power rating to get some idea of reliability. Aesthetically though, its like Marmite, you ether love it or hate it.  

Edited December 7, 20241 yr by martin-w

12 hours ago, Matthew Kane said:

F-35 is nothing more then what the U-Boats were at the start of WW2, they quickly became obsolete by finding their vulnerabilities, and so will be the fate of the F-35 as well.

But it rakes in huge profits for the defense contractors, some of which are then "re-invested" as campaign donations and lobbying efforts.

It's all a big racket.  BTW, isn't racketeering illegal?????

Dave

On 12/5/2024 at 8:03 PM, YukonPete said:

I'm sure he is smarter than you on the topic!

how about you encourage him to move to Canada so we can be rid of him.😂

 

Bill W

The F35 was a boondoggle from the beginning.  Like I've said before, it was simply another scheme to make a few people rich.

We could have stuck with the F-22 and improved it, as from what I've read it is a fantastic plane.  We could have also done what we're doing now with the F-15EX, just modernize and upgrade existing, proven designs like the F-15 and F-18.

Ironically, I've read that the F-35's cost is less than the F-22 and even the F-15EX.  The fact is that these things simply cost too much when you can produce unmanned drones at a much lower cost and therefore make a whole lot more of them. 

Then there's the life of the pilot to consider, of course.

I agree with Musk that we should focus more on making better drones.

Dave

Edited December 7, 20241 yr by dave2013

9 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

I agree with Musk that we should focus more on making better drones.

Maybe it's just me... But i've read waaaaayyyy to much science fiction in which somebody relies on super-tech drones or remotely piloted fighters and gets the stuffing whomped out of them when an/the enemy learns how to jam the signal, an ongoing problem already on the Ukraine battlefront.....

Or the type of thing exemplified by something I remember reading, God knows when....

"Superiority" is a science fiction short story by British writer Arthur C. Clarke, first published in 1951. It depicts an arms race during an interstellar war. It shows the side which is more technologically advanced being defeated, despite its apparent superiority, because of its willingness to discard old technology without having fully perfected the new. Meanwhile, the enemy steadily built up a far larger arsenal of weapons that while more primitive were also more reliable. The story was at one point required reading for an industrial design course at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology

EDIT: “Soon after publication, ‘Superiority’ was inserted into the Engineering curriculum of MIT—to warn the graduates that the Better is often the enemy of the Good—and the Best can be the enemy of both, as it is always too late.”

2ND EDIT: Look whut' I found..... https://youtu.be/iTLPref3ke0?si=wqsjWIBSeTGnkqiW

 

Edited December 7, 20241 yr by HiFlyer
Grammer error

4 hours ago, dave2013 said:

BTW, isn't racketeering illegal?????

Depends on who's doing it,

Noel

3 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

But i've read waaaaayyyy to much science fiction in which somebody relies on super-tech drones or remotely piloted fighters and gets the stuffing whomped out of them when an/the enemy learns how to jam the signal

Yep, that's always a risk.  It is also a risk with the current super-duper technological marvels such as the F-35, which relies heavily on advanced electronics.

I figure that if I use 25 drones and swarm a target with them, instead of using a couple of very expensive piloted F-35s to hit the same target, it would likely be difficult to jam or destroy all the drones and easier to hit or jam a couple of big jets.  The drones can be made stealthy as well.

If I put up 100 older, less advanced tanks against 20 newer super advanced tanks, I'm betting that the 100 tanks will ultimately win the battle.

I had a friend who in the Navy worked on the Phalanx anti-aircraft gun.  This thing is impressive.  It fires extremely fast and uses an advanced radar and targeting system which even tracks its own bullets.  However, if I swarm this thing with 50 fast-moving targets, it would not be able to destroy them all.

My point is that maybe numbers do matter.  We spend a lot of time and money developing really advanced and expensive stuff, but an enemy could overwhelm us with a lot of cheaper, but reliable and effective, stuff.

Dave

16 hours ago, dave2013 said:

We could have stuck with the F-22 and improved it,

 

I recall they are improving the F22 but the trouble is that no more can be built, they would have to start from scratch. 

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/air-forces-f-22-raptor-nightmare-explained-3-words-207364

 "Restarting production is impractical due to exorbitant costs"

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/inside-us-air-forces-plan-make-sure-f-22-raptor-dominates-sky-212855

 

6th gen is on the way, of course, and I've read that it will fly with drones. 

https://www.sandboxx.us/news/the-air-force-wants-drones-on-steroids-to-accompany-its-future-fighters/

Edited December 8, 20241 yr by martin-w