XA-100 engine

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

I don't buy that all or even most the bad press is just media confusion / bias, and I definitely don't agree that the F16 got anywhere near as much, let alone rejection by Allied client states etc. But as I said before, I didn't start this thread to debate the F 35.

 

[GrauGeist]

Beleive what you want.

And I find it hard to discuss the F-35's engine without mentioning the F-35, but I suppose it could be done...

 

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

Whether or not the F-35 has any flaws or not, seems to be extraordinarily controversial around here. Which I guess is understandable since we are all aviation enthusiasts, many of us are veterans and quite a few work in the industry either directly or as consultants. I know we like our planes especially those from our own countries and especially those we might have any kind of direct or indirect affiliation to. I have seen people on here claiming Hurricanes were excellent fighters and I've seen people assert quite aggressively that the F-104 Starfighter didn't have any flaws.

I think it's obvious that like most new aircraft of it's level of complexity and expensive, the F-35 does have some flaws and it's not just attributable to a hostile or ignorant press. Not all of them are teething issues either. But I didn't post the thread to start a debate on the merits of the F-35 (or the F-22), I could easily have done that from the outset if I wanted to.

I will say this, I have talked about this and other issues with active duty US and European fighter pilots who are not so shy to acknowledge problems.

But I was really interested in learning more about the specific engine, issues about the F-35 came up due to the notion: "Why would it need a new engine since it's already perfect!" The engine sounds promising to me and genuinely innovative, and I was hoping to learn more about the technologies it is meant to utilize, and how the program is going.

I gather nobody here really knows much about this engine, at least that they can talk about in a public forum.

 

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

As for the F-16, I remember all the positive hype about that aircraft, I remember buying a white plastic, red white and blue model of the F-16 when I was a little kid with my lawn-mowing money back in the mid 70s, and I believe that was back before the plane was even operational. I also remember many US allies being very eager to buy that plane and it doing well in many engagements in foreign service, most notably by the Israelis but in other places too. I met a Greek F-16 pilot later in life who had nothing but praise for that aircraft.

And maybe it had cost overruns, but the F-16 was relatively low cost when it came out, I think it was one of the few that lived up to the promise of being a (comparatively) low cost fighter and even today with the Block 70 it's considerably less expensive than an F-35 or even an F-15. Less capable in many respects as well of course.

 

[GrauGeist]

Keep in mind that any military aircraft, when first rolled out, will have upgrades as the program advances.

The F-35A's engine (F135-PW-100) is currently one of the most advanced and powerful engines of it's kind (reaching 43,000 pounds of thrust in afterburner mode), but the military keeps wanting add-ons and upgrades (which happens with any type they've ever possessed) and of course there will be a need to upgrade the ability to move all that.

We can look back to WWII for an example. Pick any fighter (Axis or Allied) and look at the constant upgrade in engines as the type matures.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

As for the F-16, I remember all the positive hype about that aircraft, I remember buying a white plastic, red white and blue model of the F-16 when I was a little kid with my lawn-mowing money back in the mid 70s, and I believe that was back before the plane was even operational. I also remember many US allies being very eager to buy that plane and it doing well in many engagements in foreign service, most notably by the Israelis but in other places too. I met a Greek F-16 pilot later in life who had nothing but praise for that aircraft.

View attachment 674325

And maybe it had cost overruns, but the F-16 was relatively low cost when it came out, I think it was one of the few that lived up to the promise of being a (comparatively) low cost fighter and even today with the Block 70 it's considerably less expensive than an F-35 or even an F-15. Less capable in many respects as well of course.

Well I can tell you that I wasn't a little kid in the mid 70s, I was entering trade school and beginning my career and I remember the bad press the F-15 AND F-16 got as they were entering service, and how it seemed the press were pitting both aircraft against each other. One was looked at the overpriced luxury car, the other was looked at like the bargain basement tinker toy. I think what kept both programs alive was the widening of the cold war and of course the Regan Administration.

Then Northrop came out with the F-20 and again many questions were raised again why we were buying overpriced F-16s.

As it turned out both F-15 and F-16 became excellent combat aircraft in their respective roles.

The F-16 is still a capable weapon system but now at least a generation and a half behind the F-35 depending on what versions of each aircraft one would make a comparison to.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I think it's obvious that like most new aircraft of it's level of complexity and expensive, the F-35 does have some flaws and it's not just attributable to a hostile or ignorant press.

But also understand that some of us that who the privilege to have worked (or are currently working) in the aircraft manufacturing industry may take great offense when we see the press continually make inaccurate, uneducated and sometimes even fabricated comments about some of the very equipment we've worked on/ with on a daily basis.

Yes, the F-35 has it's flaws and LMCO did a lot of dumb things evolving the X-35 into the F-35, but at the end of the day we all seek accuracy in discussions, whether it's coming from the news media or on a forum like this one...

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

But also understand that some of us who had the privilege to have worked (or are currently working) in the aircraft manufacturing industry may take great offense when we see the press continually make inaccurate, uneducated and sometimes even fabricated comments about some of the very equipment we've worked on/ with on a daily basis.

Yes, the F-35 has it's flaws and LMCO did a lot of dumb things evolving the X-35 into the F-35, but at the end of the day we all seek accuracy in discussions, whether it's coming from the news media or on a forum like this one...

Plus its not an F-22, so it has that going against it…