US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.


Bhurki

Junior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The US Navy’s new autonomous refueling drone takes historic first flight
An $805 million contract awarded to Boeing last August covers the design, development, fabrication, test and delivery of four Stingray aircraft, a program the service expects will cost about $13 billion overall for 72 aircraft, said Navy acquisition boss James Geurts.
Is that a typo? $13B for 72 aircraft?
Isn't this supposed to be a non stealth tanker ?
 
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The US Navy’s new autonomous refueling drone takes historic first flight
An $805 million contract awarded to Boeing last August covers the design, development, fabrication, test and delivery of four Stingray aircraft, a program the service expects will cost about $13 billion overall for 72 aircraft, said Navy acquisition boss James Geurts.
Is that a typo? $13B for 72 aircraft?
Isn't this supposed to be a non stealth tanker ?
Aug 9, 2019
incredibly (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
),

"The estimated price tag for the MQ-25 Stingray refueling drone dropped from $15.2 billion to $13.1 billion “due primarily to a revised estimate to align to the fixed price contract awarded [to Boeing] on August 30, 2018” and revised cost estimates."

Anything’s Possible
 
quote of the day comes from inside of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:

Of course, the fact we are talking about the president of the United States may complicate any legal case any prosecutor might try to bring, especially since the situation is unprecedented and involves national security.
 

Bhurki

Junior Member
Registered Member
I meant its a LOT.
$180M for a 35k lb class aircraft with highly shared components( reduced dev cost) with no requirements of stealth or combat flight envelope.
You'd think the dev cost are covered in $800M contract to manufacture 4 prototypes, so $13B is just for procurement.
F35 costs about $100M.?!?
 
...
F35 costs about $100M.?!?
that's what the LockMart PR Dept wants fanbois to repeat, and in the meantime the F-35 cost is salami sliced
May 30, 2017
... I checked myself what I found in Internet ... well it doesn't seem to make sense but:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

says 'Lot IX' $698032385

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

says 'Lot IX' $60000000

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

says spares for Lot 9 $237765479

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

says nonrecurring items for 'Lot IX' for $431322997

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

several items for Lot 9 $430878490

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

something for 'Lot IX' for $120555991

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

says 'Lot IX' $ for $5370955495

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

several items for Lot 9 $181765203

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

says Lot 9 $743169377

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

this one is particularly funny: "... to provide additional funding for affordability-based cost reduction initiatives in support of low-rate initial production Lot 9 F-35 ..." $137834819

LOL I skipped several contracts below $100m but still:
698032385+60000000+237765479+431322997+430878490+120555991+5370955495+181765203+743169377+137834819 = 8,412,280,236
(of course they said 'a $6.1 billion deal'
Lockheed ‘Disappointed’ by Pentagon’s Latest F-35 Contract November 2, 2016
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)
8412280236/57 is almost 148m ... for one of Lot 9 without an engine and so called LOT 9 AIRFRAME UPGRADE AND RETROFIT CONTRACTS
... apparently also documented in the mind-boggling link
Unit Cost of F-35s Delivered This Year Still Exceeds $206M
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(at that time
6100/(43+13+2) = about 105
deal was announced EDIT of course I refer to Lot 9)


real world price toward
Sep 11, 2019
wow
6500/32 = 203.125
Poland cleared to buy F-35 fleet
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:
inside
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:
The New York Times published information that could help reveal the whistleblower’s identity. The piece drew
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, an
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from the Times’ editor, and this from the whistleblower’s lawyer: “Any decision to report any perceived identifying information of the whistle-blower is deeply concerning and reckless, as it can place the individual in harm’s way,” said Andrew Bakaj, his lead counsel,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
the Times.

personally I'm curious who the rat is
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
only now I've read the delation and its text is kind of cool
(LOL just a signature is missing)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
My friend, aren't you the one who always catches the "vapors' when someone posts something "political"? yet here you post an extremely provocative, obviously political hit piece designed to undermine our current Presidential administration!

I'd suggest here that you are being hypocritical. In fact you seem to "specialize" in any kind of one sided garbage that cast the US, our allies, or our equipment/operation in a bad light??

While I have no problem with honest political commentary? with the emphasis on "honest", even you must realize this is politicall propaganda against our President and his administration?
 
Last edited:

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
inside
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:
The New York Times published information that could help reveal the whistleblower’s identity. The piece drew
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, an
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from the Times’ editor, and this from the whistleblower’s lawyer: “Any decision to report any perceived identifying information of the whistle-blower is deeply concerning and reckless, as it can place the individual in harm’s way,” said Andrew Bakaj, his lead counsel,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
the Times.

personally I'm curious who the rat is
Yes heshe is RAT, who wished maximize the damage to our current foreign policy, while "hiding behind" the "whistle blower" law. He/she is a RAT, but he is no whistle blower, just another low level "political hack!

The President himself ordered the full release of his conversation with the President of the Ukraine.

So yes, this individual should be exposed as the fraud he/she is.....
 
My friend, aren't you the one who always catches the "vapors' when someone posts something "political"? yet here you post an extremely provocative, obviously political hit piece designed to undermine our current Presidential administration!

I'd suggest here that you are being hypocritical. In fact you seem to "specialize" in any kind of one sided garbage that cast the US, our allies, or our equipment/operation in a bad light??

While I have no problem with honest political commentary? with the emphasis on "honest", even you must realize this is politicall propaganda against our President and his administration?
Brother are you actually saying the impeachment of the Commander in Chief is off topic of
US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
??
 
Yes heshe is RAT, who wished maximize the damage to our current foreign policy, while "hiding behind" the "whistle blower" law. He/she is a RAT, but he is no whistle blower, just another low level "political hack!

The President himself ordered the full release of his conversation with the President of the Ukraine.

So yes, this individual should be exposed as the fraud he/she is.....
in fact I don't care about Trump's games related to Bidens (whom he mentioned by a total coincidence hahaha during his first ever phone call with the Ukrainian),

but I care about purported White House interference with the Pentagon's military aid for Ukraine

(repeat: the Pentagon's funds (appropriated by the Congress), not White House's funds or Trump's funds!)

and I think the Inspector General should look into this!

US Military is not a private army or the White House army
 

Top