Thanks to Joe for the link.
via Fool.com
The DWL002 is being looked at and reported on as a stand alone system. Its anything but! Its part of the Chinese integrated Air Defense Network and that system has its origins in Russia. Additionally, these systems are being sold world wide.
Last, it appears that the critics...and it must be pointed out, especially APA (Air Power Australia) were the first to see this inevitability.
The planning on the part of air power theorists was faulty.
If a capability is unique and rarely encountered then planning for it is spotty. Once you attempt to make that "unique" capability mainstream then EVERYONE will be working on counters.
But a warning about the future worth of Lockheed Martin stock because of a newly "discovered" weapon designed to counter a plane they're developing and trying to get into service? That is brand new.
via Fool.com
The thing about technology is that it's always changing. What was cutting edge tech in 2001 could be obsolete by 2021. If that happens, and if the F-35 is ultimately not built in the quantities originally anticipated (as was the case with Lockheed Martin's similarly high-tech F-22 Raptor fighter jet, you'll recall), then Lockheed Martin stock could be worth less than investors are counting on.A few things about this.
The DWL002 is being looked at and reported on as a stand alone system. Its anything but! Its part of the Chinese integrated Air Defense Network and that system has its origins in Russia. Additionally, these systems are being sold world wide.
Last, it appears that the critics...and it must be pointed out, especially APA (Air Power Australia) were the first to see this inevitability.
The planning on the part of air power theorists was faulty.
If a capability is unique and rarely encountered then planning for it is spotty. Once you attempt to make that "unique" capability mainstream then EVERYONE will be working on counters.
But a warning about the future worth of Lockheed Martin stock because of a newly "discovered" weapon designed to counter a plane they're developing and trying to get into service? That is brand new.
"One of these aircraft is the future of warfare, and the other is not. So why is the clunky F-35 -- over budget, behind schedule, and already embarrassing Pentagon leaders into publicly lambasting its development as "acquisitions malpractice" -- the recipient of such persistent support, while the growing U.S. military UAV program is the target of so much outrage?"
ReplyDeleteThis is not something we will ever see from Andrea, Loren and Aaron -- good stuff, and true.