F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread

[tphuang]

re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

No, you're fine, I've been accused of being a naysayer on our sister forum initially, (MY REAL PISSY BEEF with the F-35, is that it KILLED the LOVELY AND FAR MORE EFFECTIVE, on any level F-22, as the result of some dumb, (well lets just say stupid), dem congressmans ban on its sale abroad, because their was "NO MO PORK", on the Raptor, it wasn't going to pad anyones pockets???? The F-35 was our partners best choice airplane, so we got the ThunderHogge II, the Raptor got "Shanghaied". So no, its open to fair criticism, it does have some issues and has had, they will be worked around, and it will be a very successful front line fighter, and it is already a game changer!

I actually totally agree with export ban for F-22. On the issue of F-22 and F-35, USAF would be a lot happier if actually got all the F-22 + it's own F-16 replacement instead of having a more costly common design with navy and marine. But marines wanted a 5th generational STOVL aircraft and now the entire program is more expensive.

 

[Jura The idiot]

re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

News from Arizona:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Bernard]

re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

I actually totally agree with export ban for F-22. On the issue of F-22 and F-35, USAF would be a lot happier if actually got all the F-22 + it's own F-16 replacement instead of having a more costly common design with navy and marine. But marines wanted a 5th generational STOVL aircraft and now the entire program is more expensive.

I agree If the United States would have built the proposed 750 F-22s, 132 of the Stealth Bombers. United states would have saved more money in the long run than with the 21 B-2 Stealth bombers we have now and 180ish F-22s we have now. This saying that we probably wouldn't need a LRSB and the F-35 program. I say "not need" the F-35 program because they would not have cut the carrier version F-22C

'-Naval F-22 variant – a carrier-borne variant of the F-22 with variable-sweep wings for the U.S. Navy's Navy Advanced actical Fighter (NATF) program to replace the F-14 Tomcat. Program was canceled in 1993. Former SoAF Donald Rice has called the possibility of the naval variant the deciding factor for his choice of the YF-22 over the YF-23"

and also could have developed more of a bomber role like the FB-22 for a few hundred of them if they wanted to.

"The FB-22 was a proposed medium-range bomber for the USAF. The FB-22 was projected to carry up to 30 Small Diameter Bombs to about twice the range of the F-22A, while maintaining the F-22's stealth and supersonic speed"

Because I know they are adding in the ability to be able to drop bombs in some of the recent upgrades.

They also looked into a two seater F-22
"F-22B – planned two-seat variant, but was canceled in 1996 to save development costs."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

With keeping the line open we could have continued advancing technology for the F-22 and not had to have the F-35? What do you people think? Then built a separate stovl plane for the marines.

 

[Air Force Brat]

re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

I actually totally agree with export ban for F-22. On the issue of F-22 and F-35, USAF would be a lot happier if actually got all the F-22 + it's own F-16 replacement instead of having a more costly common design with navy and marine. But marines wanted a 5th generational STOVL aircraft and now the entire program is more expensive.

so you don't think it would have been "nice" of us to sell them a much better aircraft for the same money, MOL???, and you've actually got more up to date technology, which we are rather certain has been pirated???? in part due to its widespread proliferation on the F-35, ..... while I am very pleased that the F-22 tech is much harder to steal due to its archaic technology, the F-22 is a much more capable platform, which gives you a much better "bang for the buck". Truth is that Gen Norton Scwhartz did not want to get fired as did his predecessor for promoting and defending the F-22, Rummy, Cheney, and Gates were "ground pounders", and had other pet projects to promote, and the joint chiefs have been under Army/Navy control, the idea of air-superiority was NOT job 1 with any of this crew, and the four named are Republicans, but everybody loves the idea of us all sharing the same airplane, that's just one of those grand ideas, like the Swiss Army Knife, a truly lousy knife, but the fork and spoon are "awesome", besides, who needs a knife with pulled pork????

tp, I do like the idea of protecting our tech, but truth be told, the F-35 project has let the cat out of the bag???? IMHO, brat

 

[thunderchief]

re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

True, but none of them has the EOTS to data link with each other like the F-35 who can link to ships (AEGIS destroyers) and mobile launchers as well.

EOTS (electro-optical targeting system) is carried on almost any modern fighter. And if you have datalink, you could share information from any sensor .

As for sharing information, let's compare with good old Mig-31 and technology from 80's . Mig-31 could fire its R-33 and let it be guided to target by another Mig-31 . Also :

The Foxfire was tightly integrated with a RSIU-5 VHF datalink, NATO designation Markham, reportedly a solid state design, this datalink carried radar video from a ground based GCI scope to the cockpit CRT display of the Foxbat, and also carried radar video from the Foxfire to the GCI station. During an intercept, the Foxbat pilot could approach his target silently on GCI video, and then light up his radar once in position to launch and guide his missiles. The GCI operator could simultaneously advise the pilot while observing a repeated image of the Foxfire's video.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And in modern times, let's see what Rafale could do :

As a net-centric capable asset, the RAFALE can exchange images. The Rover (“Remotely Operated Video Enhanced Receiver”) is an element of this capability which allows aircrews and forward air controllers on the ground to share videos or images of the target. It helps prevent blue-on-blue incidents and collateral damage, a decisive advantage in peacekeeping operations.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Jura The idiot]

re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

...

And in modern times, let's see what Rafale could do :

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I see now ... similar features are advertised for the Rafale as well as for the F-35 ... but I think this part from the official

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

applies: "The F-35 is a true 5th generation fighter, with stealth designed as part of the aircraft from the beginning."
Thud?

 

[Jura The idiot]

re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

I'm curious about replacing of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

with F-35: Isn't it risky to use quarter-billion-dollars airplane for a mission previously flown by ten-million-dollars airplane? (I'm not saying either airplane can be shot down easily or something -- I even checked

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, saw only four Warthogs there, all in

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

)

 

[Franklin]

re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

Because of that article above about the X-32 i have rewatched the battle of the X planes on Youtube. In fact Lockheed Martin shouldn't have gotten the contract as they cheated during the competition. Both companies were provided with a 4 year time span and a fixed budget to make their tech demo planes but Lockheed Martin went over that budget. But instead of disqualifying Lockheed Martin they just put it down to sloppy accounting and wave it off. And Lockheed Martin got off with a slap on the wrist. The fact that Lockheed Martin couldn't finish their tech demo plane within the allocated budget was perhabs a sign for things to come.

 

[tphuang]

re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

so you don't think it would have been "nice" of us to sell them a much better aircraft for the same money, MOL???, and you've actually got more up to date technology, which we are rather certain has been pirated???? in part due to its widespread proliferation on the F-35, ..... while I am very pleased that the F-22 tech is much harder to steal due to its archaic technology, the F-22 is a much more capable platform, which gives you a much better "bang for the buck". Truth is that Gen Norton Scwhartz did not want to get fired as did his predecessor for promoting and defending the F-22, Rummy, Cheney, and Gates were "ground pounders", and had other pet projects to promote, and the joint chiefs have been under Army/Navy control, the idea of air-superiority was NOT job 1 with any of this crew, and the four named are Republicans, but everybody loves the idea of us all sharing the same airplane, that's just one of those grand ideas, like the Swiss Army Knife, a truly lousy knife, but the fork and spoon are "awesome", besides, who needs a knife with pulled pork????

tp, I do like the idea of protecting our tech, but truth be told, the F-35 project has let the cat out of the bag???? IMHO, brat

as you said, too much of this is political. Off topic, but they could've continued producing B-2s at 500 to 700 million per unit fly away cost (if you believed Grumman) instead of shutting down the production at 21 and who knows what B-3 is going to cost. And they could've continued producing F-22s at 137 million per pop, which is about how much these LRIP F-35As are costing (and F-35Bs a lot more obviously). I was just thinking that if they built a F-16 replacement without consideration for navy or marine corp, it would've had the same economy of scale as F-35A and cost a lot less.

 

[Air Force Brat]

re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

as you said, too much of this is political. Off topic, but they could've continued producing B-2s at 500 to 700 million per unit fly away cost (if you believed Grumman) instead of shutting down the production at 21 and who knows what B-3 is going to cost. And they could've continued producing F-22s at 137 million per pop, which is about how much these LRIP F-35As are costing (and F-35Bs a lot more obviously). I was just thinking that if they built a F-16 replacement without consideration for navy or marine corp, it would've had the same economy of scale as F-35A and cost a lot less.

I agree completely TP, and that is my point, to much politics, and to little engineering and smart thinking, you are of course right. Both the F-22 and B-2 are still X planes in the sense that they are very "capable", well into this new century!