The F-35 Is Now the World’s Most INSANE Stealth Fighter: Here's Why

[Zipper730]

So, the F-22 is about 50% more expensive? As for multi-role capability, I'd almost swear that there were proposals early on to enlarge the bays to carry the desired payload -- why was that never implemented, if it's not classified?

Why was the F-23 passed over in favor of the F-22?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Is the F-35 a world beater? Is it a supersonic F2A3? Where did the buzz that the F-35 has problems going supersonic come from or is that more "S and J"?

The F-35 is a world beater. It's supersonic limitation is due to sensors and optical lenses installed throughout the fuselage. This is a systems limitations, not an airframe limitation. And even with this situation, is there a need for this aircraft to fly supersonic? If you have aerial superiority or can't be detected on radar, why is there a need for supersonic flight? The F-117A couldn't fly supersonic and look at it's combat record.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

So, the F-22 is about 50% more expensive? As for multi-role capability, I'd almost swear that there were proposals early on to enlarge the bays to carry the desired payload -- why was that never implemented, if it's not classified?

Costs? I remember reading about that as well. Also consider if you start modifying a dedicated air to air fighter to drop bombs, what does that do to overall mission if those modified aircraft as now configured different from the rest of the fleet? Will they have the same performance? Maintenance? Add all that up and maybe it's just better to leave well enough alone and go with the F-35.

Why was the F-23 passed over in favor of the F-22?

IIRC, production cost, sustainability and growth capability was what pushed the F-22A ahead of the F-23 despite the F-23 being the better performer in many cases. People say the decision was political based, I know this is BS.

 

[SaparotRob]

The F-35 is a world beater. It's supersonic limitation is due to sensors and optical lenses installed throughout the fuselage. This is a systems limitations, not an airframe limitation. And even with this situation, is there a need for this aircraft to fly supersonic? If you have aerial superiority or can't be detected on radar, why is there a need for supersonic flight? The F-117A couldn't fly supersonic and look at it's combat record.

I had a similar thought. If the F-22 (in sufficient numbers) cleared the sky of opposition one could use just about any other competent aircraft for all the other missions, subsonic or not. That's why I felt that canceling the Raptor was misplaced economy.

 

[SaparotRob]

..and why did the F-35 get such bad press?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

..and why did the F-35 get such bad press?

IMO the press HATES;

1. Aviation
2. Defense Contractors
3. The Military
4. Defense spending

As soon as the B-21 starts being built it will be the new whipping boy

 

[Peter Gunn]

Re: the video at 11:01 - I imagine the reason they're ramping up F-15 production is two words..."missile boats." A single F-35, operating inside hostile airspace, can designate targets for a number of F-15s. The F-15s fire their long range air to air missiles from beyond detection range, so they don't need to be stealthy. What they DO need is to be larger, twin-engine aircraft which can carry more missiles. Basically, the F-35 is too good at its job. One F-35 can keep any number of F-15s busy.

They even want to make B-52s into "arsenal planes," just to have something to carry enough missiles for the F-35s' targets.

B-52 Arsenal Planes



-Irish

While reading the article about the B-52 Arsenal working with the F-35, first thing that came to mind was the F-35 seemed like a single seat AWACS plane. I realize it's not but that was just the first thing that came to mind.

 

[GrauGeist]

The F-35 being under scrutiny by the press is not a new thing.
You can almost take any of their hit-pieces (oops, I meant article) from their archives and replace the phrase "F-35" with any aircraft name and it would be virtually identical.

Here's a great example from the 1980's that covers several existing and new types, engines and manufacturers:
The Airplane That Doesn't Cost Enough

 

[buffnut453]

While reading the article about the B-52 Arsenal working with the F-35, first thing that came to mind was the F-35 seemed like a single seat AWACS plane. I realize it's not but that was just the first thing that came to mind.

Many of the articles I've seen about the F-35 like the pilot's role to being that of a quarterback, able to marshal tactical assets and apply force by employing weapons from multiple platforms.

 

[buffnut453]

The F-35 being under scrutiny by the press is not a new thing.
You can almost take any of their hit-pieces (oops, I meant article) from their archives and replace the phrase "F-35" with any aircraft name and it would be virtually identical.

Here's a great example from the 1980's that covers several existing and new types, engines and manufacturers:
The Airplane That Doesn't Cost Enough

The other issue is that we all have very poor memories. Anyone recall that the F-15, when it entered service, had worse radar performance than the F-4 that it was supposed to replace? The F-15 also had to contend with the back-seat-mafia who were firmly of the opinion that a single-seat air superiority fighter would never succeed (because if it did, their jobs were obsolete).

Every new aircraft is plagued by glitches coming into service and early variants are always far less capable than later variants, and yet some still expect cutting-edge technology to deliver fully-operational capabilities as soon as the new aircraft enters service.

 

[SaparotRob]

The F-35 being under scrutiny by the press is not a new thing.
You can almost take any of their hit-pieces (oops, I meant article) from their archives and replace the phrase "F-35" with any aircraft name and it would be virtually identical.

Here's a great example from the 1980's that covers several existing and new types, engines and manufacturers:
The Airplane That Doesn't Cost Enough

The F-35 being under scrutiny by the press is not a new thing.
You can almost take any of their hit-pieces (oops, I meant article) from their archives and replace the phrase "F-35" with any aircraft name and it would be virtually identical.

Here's a great example from the 1980's that covers several existing and new types, engines and manufacturers:
The Airplane That Doesn't Cost Enough

I remember this article now. My Lord, has it been that long ago? I may have been working for Jay-El Ducommun(?) at the time. Honestly, it didn't seem like a hatchet job to me. Yeah, I really liked the F-20 (The F-5's smoking hot sister). I agreed with that article. Now, I can hear more sides of the issue. What was I missing?

 

[SaparotRob]

"Back seat mafia". That's classic!

 

[cvairwerks]

Col. John Boyd and the "Fighter Mafia"

 

[N33]

It isn't surprising to me that the media often focus on weapons systems that cost billions of dollars and have serious problems that need fixing, when a good percentage of the citizens paying for the weapons are barely hanging on financially and millions are going hungry every day. There are a great many urgent needs that could be addressed with all those dollars, so intense scrutiny and accurate criticism are inevitable and appropriate.

 

[GrauGeist]

The cost of the 478 F-35s purchased by the U.S. and Allies totals 34 billion.

The U.S., on average, sends about 50 billion abroad in aid to needy countries.

And rarely do these articles include "accurate crtitsism"...they are typically sensational hit-pieces aimed at revenue.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

It isn't surprising to me that the media often focus on weapons systems that cost billions of dollars and have serious problems that need fixing, when a good percentage of the citizens paying for the weapons are barely hanging on financially and millions are going hungry every day. There are a great many urgent needs that could be addressed with all those dollars, so intense scrutiny and accurate criticism are inevitable and appropriate.

Please spare us the bleeding heart - and don't make this political. I'd advise you to read this: A few ground rules for the new folks

 

[nuuumannn]

Individual government and/or regime politics and spending decisions aside, the armed forces is like an insurance policy; you have to pay for it, you'd rather spend money on other things, but it's there if you need it. And when you need it, you complain that it falls short in coverage. Why? Because not enough money is being spent on it. Go figure.

 

[nuuumannn]

As for the F-35 and things going wrong and the press response? The majority of the press don't realise the policy that the aircraft's development operates under - Concurrency. In short, it goes into service with issues, which are dealt with through operational experience throughout all its operators and investigation through normal R and D channels. It might be a surprise to learn that the F-15, F-16 and F-18 programmes also went through Concurrency. It was under Macnamara that Concurrency programmes in the US military began.

An article that describes the fact that criticising Concurrency in the F-35's case is worthless.

How Concurrency In Building The F-35 Fighter Has Proven To Be A Big Plus

 

[FLYBOYJ]

F-15 was too expensive and not needed. The F-16 had engine and wiring problems that killed several pilots. The F-18 has cracks in their vertical stabilizers. Ahhh, the 70s and 80s. First polyester then big hair...

 

[GrauGeist]

I'm just going to put this out there, for what it's worth:
With VERY few exceptions, military aircraft have always had issues of one sort or another between concept and acceptance since day one.

Also, during peacetime, a military aircraft's development between proposal and acceptance will take longer and has the luxury of change-orders that cause additional delays unlike in wartime, when the type is rushed through development and fixes/changes are made on the fly (no pun intended).

Just imagine if the B-29 were being developed today - the press would be delirious with fodder for their rants, there would be congressional hearings and special oversight investigations beyond belief...