some F35 info

[davparlr]

I think the plane will do its job. I don't think dog fighting is a big issue. Information netting should be a game changer. Long time in development, but three versions must have taken a toll.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Since the F-35 was and IS being sold as strike-fighter, I'd say it had better be able to be a fighter. If it can't ... we have bought a turkey, pure and simple. I have no idea where you were 14 - 17 years ago when the F-35 was being hyped, but fighter was at the top of the list ... it was a STRIKE-FIGHTER and is still being marketed as such. That means fighter when the strike part is done.

If it can't, we've been sold a load of crap and have been lied to. If that is the case, stop making them now, scrap what we have, and start over with some decent leadership. If that is not the case, then make that fact public with proof from an international war game with non-restrictive ROE and a public outcome.

Don't TELL me; SHOW me or quiet down about it. As amply stated earlier, make your case. Not with development crap; with combat success or combat war game success ... with decent ROE. Since we have 100+ of them; they SHOULD be able to perform NOW. If they can't, stop the expense NOW. If they can, then full speed ahead.

I have no preference but hate the not knowing part of it. Meeting test milestones is meaningless. Success against modern enemies looking for you and knowing you are coming makes your case easily. I think the British or French could easily field a force of modern enemies. So could India, Russia, Japan, Spain, Germany, Italy, Turkey, Korea, etc. Try a war game with Brazil or South Africa or others.

See what it can really do and go with what you find out. If we're good to go, then GO. If we're not, regroup and make a new plan.

Simple and easy ... unless you already know the outcome will be bad and are desperate to spend the money while you can and nobody knows better. I don't claim we're there, but am getting closer to thinking it every day we don't know for sure while I cringe at the money we are expending.

Spare me the "we're on track." It's been 14+ years. Put up or shut up. I'm not in Congress but, if I were, my patience would be wearing VERY thin and Eurofighters would start to look mighty good about now. So would Sukhois.

Prove it or cancel it, and do it immediately.

Instead, we'll probably see more delays and phased-in capability expansion ... other words for more of the same delaying tactics. It makes a potentially good aircraft seem like a bad one, and nobody seemingly wants to really find out.

Greg - perhaps you should become the program manager for the project as you think it takes months to develop a modern weapons system. You keep saying the same thing, but at the same time the aircraft is on it's final development stage and being deployed.

You keep questioning it's maneuverability - with an internal ordinance configuration it has the maneuverability of an F/A-18C - not bad for an aircraft that has been sold as a fighter as well.

Bottom line, this is a new age, forget what was done in WW2, Korea and Vietnam. People saying that a multi-role multi-service fighter (F-111) will never work, well I don't think the F-4 did too badly and at the height of the F-111 debacle, when doubters said that a multi-service multi purpose aircraft couldn't work, there was one being operated right under the skeptics noses!!!

I'm not in no way attempting to change your mind or convince you to support this aircraft, but I will say right now you're blowing smoke. The development of this aircraft wasn't perfect but neither were any of it's predecessors.

So in your last sentence you state - "we'll probably see more delays and phased-in capability expansion ... other words for more of the same delaying tactics. It makes a potentially good aircraft seem like a bad one, and nobody seemingly wants to really find out." Show us this or put up or shut up!!!

In the mean time I'll show this clip that's a year and a half old - an F-35 "B", Just so the difference is plainly explained.

https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=f-35+airshow&ei=UTF-8&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-001

 

[Lucky13]

I think the plane will do its job. I don't think dog fighting is a big issue. Information netting should be a game changer. Long time in development, but three versions must have taken a toll.

Sharing information is old, SAAB started to use that with its Draken long time ago...been developing since the 60's.

 

[davparlr]

Comparing today's netting to what was available in the 60s is like comparing today's internet communication to the rotary telephone. The modern high capacity data net will not only be fed from formation pals where targeting/threat information is instantaneously shared but also by AWACS, Joint STARS, ground site, command and control sites, etc. Information will be sorted, categorized, and prioritized to ensure operator usability, at least that is the plan .

 

[Lucky13]

It's where it started, with what was available back then....still makes it old news pal!

 

[Lucky13]

Draken carried one of the first 'data link' systems back in 60/61 I think it was....so, 54 years in the making for SAAB!

 

[fastmongrel]

I have just been told that the Govt have signed up to a 40 year contract for parts, upgrades and updates to software and hardware.



I hope that the UK never has to renogiate the contract because spares arent going to be available off the shelf. Lockheed Martin have a wonderful cash cow and I bet they are going to milk it hard.

 

[Lucky13]

I wouldn't call it a 'cash cow', you might offend all the honest and hard working cows around the world or any other anymals, it not being a called cash xxxx...or Lockheed Martin!

Back to my Morgan's!

 

[fastmongrel]

Lockheed martin cash generator

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I wouldn't call it a 'cash cow', you might offend all the honest and hard working cows around the world or any other anymals, it not being a called cash xxxx...or Lockheed Martin!

Back to my Morgan's!

I have just been told that the Govt have signed up to a 40 year contract for parts, upgrades and updates to software and hardware.



I hope that the UK never has to renogiate the contract because spares arent going to be available off the shelf. Lockheed Martin have a wonderful cash cow and I bet they are going to milk it hard.

Apparently both of you don't realize that you make more money off by post production support than you do by actually building aircraft. Imagine how much money was made supporting the B-52?!?!?

 

[Lucky13]

You don't just phone their support line, or deal with any problems with an online chat support!?

Not much with the B-52, since only the USAF flies them....
True, you make a few $$$$ or ££££ besides on other things than the aircraft itself, I know....
Must be a few $$$$ on the F-35, with what the bird itself cost....

 

[fastmongrel]

Apparently both of you don't realize that you make more money off by post production support than you do by actually building aircraft. Imagine how much money was made supporting the B-52?!?!?

I do realise, its how a lot of Capitalism works. Its just that for 40 years we are tied to one aircraft because there is no way Her Majestys Treasury is going to pony up if the F35 turns into a Lawn Dart. Lockheed Martin seems to have more accountants than engineers.

 

[Lucky13]

A lot of development will happen in 40 years and how much can be added to F-35, or is it....don't buy anything else, or...?
....any of them there famous thumbscrews?

Right...who's round is it?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Well despite what you folks say or think but it's looking like the F-35 isn't that much more expensive than some of it's contemporaries, $145 million for the F-22, $120 - $140 mil for the Typhoon, and least we forget the "low cost" Gripen at about $60 mil. In either event I think the F-35 is more than starting to show it's capabilities as 200 of them will soon to be flying with another 77 on order by the US military...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

A lot of development will happen in 40 years and how much can be added to F-35, or is it....don't buy anything else, or...?
....any of them there famous thumbscrews?

Right...who's round is it?

You could apply that to any fighter being built - the F-15, the F-22 and yes Lucky even the Gripen!

 

[Lucky13]

Very true my good man, that's why she did a 'Hornet' and grew a couple of sizes!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Very true my good man, that's why she did a 'Hornet' and grew a couple of sizes!

Yep! And that's the beauty of it all as all the "winners" we've seen in fighter aircraft in the past 40 years all "grew a couple of sizes" or had some type of upgrades after entering service. During this time we've seen no "dogs" or "lawn darts" from western manufacturers, I doubt we're going to see one now!

 

[Lucky13]

Very true! Hopefully with a lot less incidents than with the '104!

 

[GrauGeist]

Very true! Hopefully with a lot less incidents than with the '104!

It's interesting to see the ongoing problems and political backlash the F-104 had, but in spite of it's shortcomings, it was a beast and remained in service nearly 50 years.

One thing that might be of interest, is it's "dogfighting" limitations. It's main strength was it's fearsome speed. Slowing it to "brawl" put it at an immediate disadvantage and several pilots paid the price for this mistake.

However, it's rate of climb and it's sustained top speed are still impressive, even by today's standards.

 

[parsifal]

was the starfighter ever used in anger?