backtop


Print 74 comment(s) - last by FITCamaro.. on Oct 18 at 10:35 PM


BAE F-35 Helmet  (Source: BAE Systems)
Fancy futuristic JSF helmet still not working

Schools are already in place to train fresh F-35 pilots now that the aircraft are inching closer to actual service duty. However, one thing that was still questionable was the wild looking helmet that is intended to give the pilot a 360-degree view around the aircraft.
 
The problem is that the high-tech helmet that the F-35 program needs is having some significant issues with performance. Specifically, the maker of the JSF helmet, Vision Systems International, has been unable to get high quality images displayed on the pilot’s visor.
 
Since the availability of that fancy helmet is questionable, a contract to create another helmet with less technology crammed in has been granted to BAE Systems.
 
BAE is using a version of the helmet that Eurofighter Typhoon pilots use. The Typhoon display that would be in the helmet is being removed and it is being replaced with a set of night vision goggles and a single eyepiece showing the heads-up display HUD.
 
"BAE Systems Electronic Systems is proud to be a part of the Lockheed Martin team for the F-35 HMD,” said Jim Garceau, vice president and general manager of defense avionics for BAE Systems. “The NVG HMD will enable all aspects of flight operations and it allows us to build on our long history of successful development programs with Lockheed Martin on the F-35, F-16 and F-22 programs.”
 
The helmet will also incorporate the BAE Q-sight and head tracking technology to help with precise weapons delivery. The modular design also allows an upgrade path for pilots to binocular visor-projected displays, alternate image sources, and night vision.
 
The helmet can also be easily modified if it becomes the main helmet for the F-35.

Sources: DefenseTech, BAE Systems



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Pfft
By Bad-Karma on 10/17/2011 5:10:21 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Meanwhile at home, people are complaining and crying about people on welfare needing to survive, crying about how their Tax Dollars are being wasted on human scum, yet think nothing of $millions being wasted on Tech we don't need, making a few people VERY VERY rich.


Do you even realize how many people are employed in the process of making these helmets. Odds are that 500-1000+ people are employed making everything from the base materials to the software? Remember, that if it doesn't grow on the surface of the earth, it has to be mined from under it.

If your "welfare" recipient would like to partake of part of this windfall contract, then I suggest they seek out the training needed in order to fill the job requirements. But I'm thinking a good majority of them won't.


RE: Pfft
By Dradien on 10/17/11, Rating: 0
RE: Pfft
By Reclaimer77 on 10/17/2011 8:08:10 PM , Rating: 2
So the military just wants to kill "brown" people, costs too much, and anyone who has a problem with Welfare is racist. That about sum it up?

I would call you a misguided Liberal but that just seems redundant given your arguments...


RE: Pfft
By Dradien on 10/17/2011 9:47:59 PM , Rating: 2
Aww, how sweet of you, putting words in my mouth:) I don't think I mentioned racism /anywhere/, and I didn't say the military WANTS to kill brown people.

Also, I'd rather be called a progressive, not a liberal.


RE: Pfft
By FITCamaro on 10/17/2011 10:52:10 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Also, I'd rather be called a progressive, not a liberal.


You can call yourself whatever the fuck you want. There is no difference.


RE: Pfft
By bupkus on 10/18/2011 4:41:03 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
You can call yourself whatever the fuck you want. There is no difference.


BTW, try to learn what liberal means. You use it too often to be completely oblivious to its meaning.
Try these links:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU-8Uz_nMaQ&feature...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6IES5BgQkg&feature...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWaR5JRG0lo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puusxNAkoe4


RE: Pfft
By Reclaimer77 on 10/18/2011 11:53:58 AM , Rating: 2
Ok I don't know if you're an American, but here we don't adhere to the "classical" definition of Liberalism and Progressive. In American parlance, there's no difference between a Liberal and a Progressive, they are just different terms for the same belief system.

Those links.. I mean, did you even look at them? The "Classical Liberal" era ENDED in 1914 according to the video. Hello? 1914!

I really don't understand why you think this history lesson is relevant to the discussion at hand. It's one thing putting up links that support your argument, it's another thing altogether when you don't even HAVE an argument and put up irrelevant links so you can look smart. Now you look like a fool.


RE: Pfft
By gamerk2 on 10/18/2011 12:00:29 PM , Rating: 2
Ummm...no. There is a significant difference between a liberal and a progressive. But since conservatives view both as socalists, they fail to see the often significant differences between the two.


RE: Pfft
By Reclaimer77 on 10/18/2011 12:23:34 PM , Rating: 2
They are leaves of the same tree. We can quibble on details, but at the end of the day...

But since I'm such a big idiot, why don't you lay out these differences for me? I'm all ears.

p.s. I haven't used the world 'socialist' here, come on now.


RE: Pfft
By FITCamaro on 10/18/2011 12:53:47 PM , Rating: 2
Because both espouse the same ideals today. Progressive is just the term liberals adopted to try and sound smarter.

Yes in the past liberal meant something else. But as liberals/progressives prove time and again, they don't acknowledge that language over time means different things. Hence why they try to say the general welfare clause means they can give unlimited benefits to those they deem to deserve them.


RE: Pfft
By Dradien on 10/18/2011 10:08:56 PM , Rating: 2
"Because both espouse the same ideals today. Progressive is just the term liberals adopted to try and sound smarter."

Nope.

Liberals have time and time again shown to move more to the center of the political tree. Modern day Liberals are like the republicans of Yesteryear.

Progressives are for the progress of the people of this nation, not the status quo as many liberals/conservatives are.


RE: Pfft
By lightfoot on 10/18/2011 10:29:07 PM , Rating: 2
You're just redefining common terms to suit your own agenda. You're basically saying that "liberals" aren't extreme enough for you so you need to find a new term. You've choosen "Progressive."

"Extremist" is probably the most accurate, but you can call yourself what ever you want.

Just because some conservatives are on the extreme fringe doesn't make you better just because you are extreme in the opposite direction.

Reality is somewhere in the middle, but extremists such as yourself push people away from, and not toward, your cause.


RE: Pfft
By Dradien on 10/18/2011 8:24:20 AM , Rating: 2
How cute, resorting to swearing to get your point across.

The amount of vitriol you display is just amazing. You might want to attend some anger management classes


RE: Pfft
By sigmatau on 10/17/2011 10:05:13 PM , Rating: 2
Recliamer introduces race in almost every topic he can. He must have no non-white friends. His mother must have been raped by a big black d...


RE: Pfft
By FITCamaro on 10/17/2011 10:53:04 PM , Rating: 1
Except he didn't mention race.


RE: Pfft
By sigmatau on 10/18/2011 10:06:02 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
So the military just wants to kill "brown" people, costs too much, and anyone who has a problem with Welfare is racist.


Typical Republican answer. Just lie.


RE: Pfft
By lightfoot on 10/18/2011 12:30:38 PM , Rating: 2
Where Reclaimer was directly quoting Dradien from a seperate thread.

quote:
By Dradien on 10/17/2011 7:52:31 PM


Dradien was the first to play the race card, in response to my post that had nothing to do with race.


RE: Pfft
By FITCamaro on 10/18/2011 12:51:43 PM , Rating: 2
Don't point out the obvious. They're too simple minded.


RE: Pfft
By Bad-Karma on 10/17/2011 9:39:56 PM , Rating: 3
There are plenty of available jobs to be had. In fact my organization has been trying to fill over 700 jobs for the last 3 years. Most of them start at $90K-$150K/year. But none of them are 'entry level" jobs. You need at least a BS in engineering or 10 years of experience in any of the intelligence career fields.

Reading the help wanted adds shows several pages of jobs each week just here in local Dayton. A quick search around the internet yields tens of thousands more throughout the USA.

What your whining about is that you want someone to hand out jobs at a moderate income without putting in the time and effort working their way up the ladder. It doesn't work like that kid.

Take away someone's access to free money, aka "welfare", and when they start going hungry you'll see how many get off their butt and look for work.


RE: Pfft
By Dradien on 10/17/2011 9:57:40 PM , Rating: 2
"There are plenty of available jobs to be had. In fact my organization has been trying to fill over 700 jobs for the last 3 years. Most of them start at $90K-$150K/year. But none of them are 'entry level" jobs. You need at least a BS in engineering or 10 years of experience in any of the intelligence career fields."

And there is your problem. Education has been on a chopping block for a while, and lets be realistic here, not everyone has the means or intelligence to get a BS in engineering.

Also, your organization doesn't represent the nation as a whole. Anecdotal evidence doesn't equal facts.

"Reading the help wanted adds shows several pages of jobs each week just here in local Dayton. A quick search around the internet yields tens of thousands more throughout the USA."

Ahh yea, the magical jobs people just come in and get with no problem. Funds to get the jobs, transportation, education, mobilty, intelligence...none on this matters. Unemployment is just some magical number people come up with...for what? Jobs are scarce. If a company has 700+ jobs avilable for three years that offer $90k+ a year to start, you seriously think people see that number and say "Well Gee Wiz bang, I'd rather suffer on my paltry sum each month with foodstamps, and limited time on TANF at a terribly low rate!"

Get real dude.

"What your whining about is that you want someone to hand out jobs at a moderate income without putting in the time and effort working their way up the ladder. It doesn't work like that kid."

Where did I say I wanted people to hand out jobs? No where, stop putting words in my mouth, kid.

"Take away someone's access to free money, aka "welfare", and when they start going hungry you'll see how many get off their butt and look for work."

You are the worst kind of human being, you know that? Do you have any hard facts, not rumors and water cooler crap, that people are happy and perfectly content to live on welfare? Actual HARD numbers. I don't know a single person that would rather live on paltry sum welfare nets you over even minimum wage.

What company do you work for? What do you want to bet that they get welfare from the government, in the forms of Tax rebates/breaks? I can you get at least some. Stop being a hypocrite bud, and look at the world around you, and stop living in your goddamn walled garden.


RE: Pfft
By FITCamaro on 10/17/2011 11:00:03 PM , Rating: 1
To say that people can't afford an education in this country is absurd. I paid for my own schooling. And I have the $60,000 in student loan debt to prove it. You may not get it for free, but you can afford an education. It just takes hard work and yes, some debt at times.


RE: Pfft
By Bad-Karma on 10/18/2011 5:05:36 PM , Rating: 3
You need to call your physician, your meds are a bit to high.

quote:
And there is your problem. Education has been on a chopping block for a while, and lets be realistic here, not everyone has the means or intelligence to get a BS in engineering.


Plenty of ditches still need to be dug and at least it's an honest days work.

quote:
If a company has 700+ jobs avilable for three years that offer $90k+ a year to start, you seriously think people see that number and say "Well Gee Wiz bang, I'd rather suffer on my paltry sum each month with foodstamps, and limited time on TANF at a terribly low rate!"


If you don't meet our qualifications for our level of jobs then your resume isn't even accepted.

Every years or so, almost like clockwork, the city councils in the area attempt to sue our org for either; not hiring enough people from the local towns; not having a diverse enough workforce; or want to levy a tax on our annual budget.

1.) As military bases around the country get closed or re-aligned we are constantly acquiring new missions (the more missions, the more manpower needed. Right now many are critically understaffed.) The level of job applicant rarely exists in the local area. We then have to spend large sums of money seeking out applicants from around the US and pay to move them into the local area.

2.) Not having a diverse enough workforce: What a joke, We're desperate for manpower but If you don't have the qualifications, don't bother applying (we can't lower out standards just to appease).

3.) This is a federal agency, local governments have no right to tax it, But large chunks of Dayton and the surrounding towns are decrepit welfare communities, so they think we somehow owe it to them.

quote:
You are the worst kind of human being, you know that? Do you have any hard facts,


I've put in 42 years serving in the defense of our country and have the scars to prove it. I've endured many hardships and long separations from my family. What the hell have you ever done but whine about how hard and unfair life is?

Let's take it a step further just to piss you off,

I don't pay into Social security, never have and never will. I don't like the fact that congress continually raids the accounts and then squanders it away on social programs. I don't trust that it will be there when I might need it so I keep my own retirement plans well away from the governments reach.

There are no state or federal withholding on my paycheck, I set the same amount aside and pocket the accrued interest from it, not the government. When it comes tax time I max out donations to science and research charities as write offs and simply pay the remaining balance, just so the government can't take it and then give that money to people who didn't earn it and certainly don't deserve it.

I'm a Alaska resident employed on federal property located in Ohio. I won't change my state of residency just so the state of Ohio and the local cities can't take the pay that I earned and waste it on people who didn't.

How's that sit with your whiny liberal sensibilities.

quote:
No where, stop putting words in my mouth, kid.


I'm 60, I'm a retired USAF O-6 at 22 years and will be retiring a second time from Government service in just under 2 years at SES pay grades. I've served in battles all over the globe so don't call me "kid", you childish moron.


RE: Pfft
By FITCamaro on 10/17/2011 10:51:04 PM , Rating: 2
Actually there are a lot of people not taking jobs who could. Why? Because they're making more on unemployment than they would working or the same so why bother to go to work? That's what happens when you have over 99 weeks of unemployment at taxpayers expense. Nearly two damn years.


RE: Pfft
By gamerk2 on 10/18/2011 12:21:03 PM , Rating: 2
You know, I keep hearing that statement, and I keep asking people to provide proof, and so far, none have. Especially since to obtain unemployment, you actually have to be looking for a job.

Secondly, Unemployment insurance is actually one of the more proven ways to stimulate the economy, which makes sense, as its one of the few programs that actually allows the consumer to spend, which is how you end recessions. Personally, I'd prefer the even more effective federal work program, but theres no way that would ever pass Congress, regardless of how well it would work...


RE: Pfft
By FITCamaro on 10/18/2011 12:51:05 PM , Rating: 2
I'm NOT against basic unemployment insurance run and funded by the states. I AM against the federal government keeping people on unemployment for periods of almost two years.


"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki