HMS Astute
Junior Member
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Jura The idiot
General
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
now I'll sound as a naysayer, but I'm afraid one engine is missing :-(
...
...
now I'll sound as a naysayer, but I'm afraid one engine is missing :-(
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
Jet engines never quit, at least that is what a DT poster implied to me???? ROFL brat
Jet engines never quit, at least that is what a DT poster implied to me???? ROFL brat
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
Of course you are naysaying with humor.
But seriously, the US has operated single engine aircraft off of their carriers very effectively for many, many years in the past.
In the modern era, the A-4 was a single engine, light attack aircraft which operated very successfully off of US carriers. The F-8 Crusader was an effective single engine fighter. The A-7 Corsair II was an effective single engine attack aircraft. All of them saw extensive combat off of US carriers.
Now...we come full circle and the F-35C is going to be a very effective, 5th generation strike fighter.
Not so.
Of course you are naysaying with humor.
But seriously, the US has operated single engine aircraft off of their carriers very effectively for many, many years in the past.
In the modern era, the A-4 was a single engine, light attack aircraft which operated very successfully off of US carriers. The F-8 Crusader was an effective single engine fighter. The A-7 Corsair II was an effective single engine attack aircraft. All of them saw extensive combat off of US carriers.
Now...we come full circle and the F-35C is going to be a very effective, 5th generation strike fighter.
Brumby
Major
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
Jeff,
I am somewhat less optimistic about its future performance from what I have read. The F-35 apparently “can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run,” primarily driven by the compromised design for vertical lift resulting in the single engine. Even its single most important strength is being questioned and officially now referenced as "semi-stealth" according to the recent CSBA report. Now it can't even hide.
More concerning is its potential adversary, the J-31 is essentially the F 35 that never was but is optimised for speed, acceleration, and flying range because of a twin engine and not bogged down with a compromised design for vertical lift.
Jeff,
I am somewhat less optimistic about its future performance from what I have read. The F-35 apparently “can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run,” primarily driven by the compromised design for vertical lift resulting in the single engine. Even its single most important strength is being questioned and officially now referenced as "semi-stealth" according to the recent CSBA report. Now it can't even hide.
More concerning is its potential adversary, the J-31 is essentially the F 35 that never was but is optimised for speed, acceleration, and flying range because of a twin engine and not bogged down with a compromised design for vertical lift.
HMS Astute
Junior Member
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
I don't know how effective the F35Cs will be for the USN, but the F35Bs will be the most powerful, advanced and best aircraft for the Royal Navy. Not many countries in the world have or can afford 5th generation stealth aircraft for their navies. UK is fortunate to be a part of the F-35 family and also being level 1 partner in the programme (biggest foreign customer) allows it to manufacture so many different components of this advanced aircraft in the UK.
I don't know how effective the F35Cs will be for the USN, but the F35Bs will be the most powerful, advanced and best aircraft for the Royal Navy. Not many countries in the world have or can afford 5th generation stealth aircraft for their navies. UK is fortunate to be a part of the F-35 family and also being level 1 partner in the programme (biggest foreign customer) allows it to manufacture so many different components of this advanced aircraft in the UK.
Last edited:
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
Compared to the legacy HarrierII F35B will be a major upgrade. Harriers you might recall are subsonic operated with 1950s avionics and rapidly dwindling. F35B is a whole different standard bringing a modern fighter to the VTOL class.
Compared to the legacy HarrierII F35B will be a major upgrade. Harriers you might recall are subsonic operated with 1950s avionics and rapidly dwindling. F35B is a whole different standard bringing a modern fighter to the VTOL class.
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
That's because the F35 isn't designed with current combat philosophies in mind. It is designed to fight in network-centric warfare where the planes will work together as a unit including other F35s/AWACS/Radar systems to engage enemies from a position with superior sensor capabilities - the AN/APG-81 in itself is a monster of a radar. The whole point of this type of warfare is to avoid getting into a turning and climbing fight with its opponents - the US has the F22 for that (albeit in smaller numbers); I cannot see a case where the US would feel completely unchallenged engaging peer air forces without the F22 in a future conflict scenario. The F35 with the HOBS AIM-9X is certainly not 'bad' in WVR combat, it's just not as good as the F22.
Now of course there are inherent risks involved in introducing a new school of combat philosophy; we saw back in Vietnam the ineffectiveness of the solely missile-armed F4s going up against overall inferior Russian Migs; but these are problems that are ironed out as experience develops and technology advances. In fact after the Vietnam War, BVR missile engagement has become the norm in modern air warfare. I can go on to list some the other major concerns with the F35 but I think you get my point.
These new strategies are being developed by those who are more qualified than any of us - people with the most amount of experience in modern air-combat and access to the most recent technological advances; we can question some of their assumptions, but would be foolish to deny what they have come up with. And these are not just theories, the US is backing this up with over a thousand F35s planned for their armed forces. The US is saying: let the haters hate, we'll do what we know is right for us (which incidentally is what China has been doing for the past few decades).
The J31 AS A PLATFORM does have the POTENTIAL to be superior to the F35, but that would require on-par avionics, engines and relevant supporting systems, which are yet to been seen. By the time we mature our systems to F35 levels, the US will be well on its way in developing next-gen systems.
Now if in 30-50 years China catches up to the US and we become the ones to be at the forefront of military aviation, our innovative efforts will have their naysayers too; being young I hope I will have the privilege to live to see that day.
That's because the F35 isn't designed with current combat philosophies in mind. It is designed to fight in network-centric warfare where the planes will work together as a unit including other F35s/AWACS/Radar systems to engage enemies from a position with superior sensor capabilities - the AN/APG-81 in itself is a monster of a radar. The whole point of this type of warfare is to avoid getting into a turning and climbing fight with its opponents - the US has the F22 for that (albeit in smaller numbers); I cannot see a case where the US would feel completely unchallenged engaging peer air forces without the F22 in a future conflict scenario. The F35 with the HOBS AIM-9X is certainly not 'bad' in WVR combat, it's just not as good as the F22.
Now of course there are inherent risks involved in introducing a new school of combat philosophy; we saw back in Vietnam the ineffectiveness of the solely missile-armed F4s going up against overall inferior Russian Migs; but these are problems that are ironed out as experience develops and technology advances. In fact after the Vietnam War, BVR missile engagement has become the norm in modern air warfare. I can go on to list some the other major concerns with the F35 but I think you get my point.
These new strategies are being developed by those who are more qualified than any of us - people with the most amount of experience in modern air-combat and access to the most recent technological advances; we can question some of their assumptions, but would be foolish to deny what they have come up with. And these are not just theories, the US is backing this up with over a thousand F35s planned for their armed forces. The US is saying: let the haters hate, we'll do what we know is right for us (which incidentally is what China has been doing for the past few decades).
The J31 AS A PLATFORM does have the POTENTIAL to be superior to the F35, but that would require on-par avionics, engines and relevant supporting systems, which are yet to been seen. By the time we mature our systems to F35 levels, the US will be well on its way in developing next-gen systems.
Now if in 30-50 years China catches up to the US and we become the ones to be at the forefront of military aviation, our innovative efforts will have their naysayers too; being young I hope I will have the privilege to live to see that day.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
Perfume I agree wit the First part of your statement and partially with the second but the third part well...
I am Reminded of the 1959 Kitchen Debate. in Which a American company showed off to the Russian leadership the standard of living for the Average American household of the time. General Secretary Nikita Khrushchev and then Vice President of the United States of America Richard M. Nixon broke out into a debate. Khrushchev made a statement along the same lines stating that in 42 years Russia would surpass the Us. well the debate was 1959 and 42 years after that would have been 2001, I think the results speak for themselves.
[video=youtube_share;-CvQOuNecy4]http://youtu.be/-CvQOuNecy4[/video]
[video=youtube_share;Mm0yQg1hS_w]http://youtu.be/Mm0yQg1hS_w[/video]
So lets hold back on the predictions. unless of course you have a pebble in your shoe.
Perfume I agree wit the First part of your statement and partially with the second but the third part well...
I am Reminded of the 1959 Kitchen Debate. in Which a American company showed off to the Russian leadership the standard of living for the Average American household of the time. General Secretary Nikita Khrushchev and then Vice President of the United States of America Richard M. Nixon broke out into a debate. Khrushchev made a statement along the same lines stating that in 42 years Russia would surpass the Us. well the debate was 1959 and 42 years after that would have been 2001, I think the results speak for themselves.
[video=youtube_share;-CvQOuNecy4]http://youtu.be/-CvQOuNecy4[/video]
[video=youtube_share;Mm0yQg1hS_w]http://youtu.be/Mm0yQg1hS_w[/video]
So lets hold back on the predictions. unless of course you have a pebble in your shoe.