Saturday, June 11, 2016

Threats? Oh dear.

Often, people who issue threats are betraying the precarity of their own position.

As a major potential F-35 customer, a lack of or continued postponement a Canadian order likely increases the cost of the F-35 for other customers, perhaps prohibitively. This could be terminal to the program as it would also impact US orders.

More to the point, Canadians generally find naked threats terribly impolite. It's ingrained in our national mythology. We are not keen to cooperate with rude people. Trudeau has an out here.

The Canadian military is conditioned by definition to respond to threats with aggression.

Boeing, Dassault, or Saab will see this as an opportunity to sweeten an offer.

I'm not sure Lockmart really did itself a favour.

5 comments:

Alien Contact said...

Our ships should have the latest lasers to hit drones. There are faculties we should not be building and should be preventing others from building. This may mean a first (stealth missile) strike on Russia or China, or even our 5 Eyes allies. We should change NATO so it is willing to risk a nuclear war by launching a pre-emptive missile attack on a said factory, including attacking itself. We should be willing to attack anyone hacking for such WMD info, including ourselves.
For this reason I like the idea of expanding the next purchase of subs to about 8 used models. The idea would be to outfit it as a "Growler" of the oceans. Could surveil the USA, UK, everyone, to see if anyone is supplying the logistics to a banned WMD factory. These types of factories aren't likely in the next decade or two, so for now the target could be TT type orgs before they attack us. I don't like equipping it with advanced UAVs. The whole point is to prevent robots that police can't kill, and UAVs that are too fast, too stealthy or too well missile equipped, from being invented. So I like LM's ISIS submarine suite, but not LM's UAVs.
It should be possible to use brain imaging to screen out mental illness, and maybe even screen for good Aristotle-ian virtues; such inventions should be encouraged.
The Armed Forces should embrace wind and solar as an EMP doesn't necessarily knock out those power sources, as well as use Powerwalls for Base housing. Jets and a refueller should be placed in a Faraday Cage. Reserves should be apply to get sewer, water and hydro infrastructures up and running. Inflatable tents would give many city cores a place to retreat from but winter might be an issue for us.

Alien Contact said...

...I like the Superhornets because countering future WMDs might require payload mass. For ethical procurement, just like I like ships built by the French Company that has a tidal power division, LM is off limits while it has an advanced UAV arm.

Alien Contact said...

For the threat of drones being hacked or just illicitly manufactured, there will likely be multiple targets to engage. The F-35 cannot bank fast. The F-22 can, the CF-18 can, and so can the Super Hornet.
I'd like to see the Super Hornet set up as a Growler custom-refitted to eavesdrop on factories that might be making AI, drones, robots, bioweapons and other future bad R+D. Such a Super Hornet can demonstrate it is not carrying missiles assuming the new Pod is taken out and replaced with some sort of sensor suite.
To fire on the factory, you might want a different airplane than the Super Hornet.

Alien Contact said...

Again, no one knows how well the F-35 stealth works head on, or from the side. It cannot bank fast. If it is fired on, it might not be able to turn to return fire and to exposed only its head on stealthy profile. So 3 1950's Avro Arrows, engaging it from three equilateral directions, probably kill it using present air-to-air missiles.
7 such aircraft might not kill the F-22; it is complicated.
The F-35 is designed to take on a crappy surface to air missile launcher, but not multiple ones from different angles. Again, from another angle, an adjacent missile hits the F-35 on its not too stealthy side profile before it can turn.
The people appointed and elected to educate the public about this are sworn to secrecacy. If we buy it I doubt we use it to engage other aircraft in a six plane formation (not needing to bank much to engage). We would only use it to hit anti-air single launchers or at least launchers without nearby launchers or nearby airfields.
And really, the goal is not to build future WMDs like (LM) drones and to use aircraft to fire upon manufacturing targets or researchers. An aircraft that loses to its own manufacturers hackable drones is comical. I'd like quantum encryption cable layer ship and all services to be able to continually upgrade the newest QE equipment.

Alien Contact said...

It seems there are lots of UAVs on the horizon, not just LM's. If it has a 2km ceiling, isn't stealthy nor armed with air-to-air missiles, and can't go fast, it can be shot down by fighter jets. The Predator doesn't concern me but there is a need to get UAVs back to a 2005-2015 tech level. For surveillance subs I'd only have weather and communications UAVs inside them. If the UAV is in thick atmosphere it will be seen with some sensors.
The F-35 loses its Stealth when its hard-points are used. So while maintaining Stealth, an F-35 might only be able to kill 170 drones. A Super Hornet maybe 1200, 8000 if refitted with more guns and pilots who played my father's favourite Atari game.
But my main concern for now is to limit synthetic biology and much flu research and both aircraft are able to launch a 2030 stealth missile. Ideally sane and degree holding adults get a weighted vote. And some people will have custom training. For some decisions there will be a referendum where Obama's vote is worth 100000x the least person's vote. And you need maybe 1% of eligible voters to vote, but for some decisions you might not want to wait. If you have EMPs for insect drones, and someone uses one on an airfield...you might have to react right away to win against the swarm. Just like in the UK when two towns persons were part of Parliament, there is mobility for most people to get a vote and up to about 100000 votes.
The threat of drones is greater than is the threat of Desert Storm Iraq.