More F-35 woes...

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby Russ on Sat 24 Dec 2016, 3:36 pm

st24 wrote:
vulcan558 wrote:He met with all the UASAF leader's the other also.

OK Rich, y'got me- United Arab Supporters Air Force? University Air Squadron Air Force? Union of Army Supers Air Force?? Upset Army of Silly Anal Farmers??...?

:lol:

Rich, that's just random words.
User avatar
Russ

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby vulcan558 on Sat 24 Dec 2016, 10:33 pm

United States Air Force.
:lol: merry crimbo.
vulcan558

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby lambo17841 on Sun 25 Dec 2016, 8:39 pm

Unless May gets on with article 50 we could yet have Boris to add to the chaos.

John in Seaford
lambo17841

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby Burleysway on Sat 21 Jan 2017, 4:50 pm

A US Air Force General has made the claim that older jets ‘such as the F-16 and F/A-18’ can’t match the F-35, even with upgrades.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/usaf-ge ... atch-f-35/
User avatar
Burleysway

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby Russ on Sat 21 Jan 2017, 8:06 pm

Talk about stating the bleeding obvious. That said, we probably need to dumb things down to that level so President Trump can understand.
User avatar
Russ

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby MarkL on Sat 21 Jan 2017, 11:03 pm

Russ wrote:That said, we probably need to dumb things down to that level so President Trump can understand.


Hmmmm.

What do you think he doesn't understand that you do ?

Not trying to be argumentative, but a guy that has made $4.5b in business and somehow managed to get himself elected as one of the most powerful men in the world may have some skills the rest of us on this forum lack?

Can't particularly say I'm a fan of his but, as an American friend said to me, I would rather a corrupt businessman in charge than a corrupt politician.
HTAFC
User avatar
MarkL
UKAR Supporter

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby Russ on Sat 21 Jan 2017, 11:12 pm

Given he believes, naively or perhaps unbriefed, that am upgraded Super Hornet can do the same role. Nobody appears to be in agreement with this.

As for a successful businessman, maybe. But he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and has still managed to go bankrupt on no fewer than six occasions.
User avatar
Russ

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby Russ on Tue 31 Jan 2017, 2:29 pm

He seems to like it now...

Trump Says He Fixed F-35 Program in Two Months

“The F-35 fighter jet — a great plane by the way, I have to tell you, and Lockheed is doing a very good job as of now,” Trump said Monday at a meeting with small business leaders at the White House. “There were great delays, about seven years of delays, tremendous cost overruns. We’ve ended all of that and we’ve got that program really, really now in good shape, so I’m very proud of that.”


Bless. :grin:
User avatar
Russ

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby aceyone on Tue 31 Jan 2017, 3:11 pm

Well you've got to hand it to the Don,only a couple of weeks in the job and he's already sorted out the whole F35 program ,what a guy !
Don't know about those jets ,they spoil a very nice place
User avatar
aceyone

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby john001 on Fri 03 Feb 2017, 7:32 pm

Good news for once - the low rate initial production lot 10 as been agreed and that includes 3 F35Bs for the Uk at a rate that is 6.7% lower than the last lot. They are now just USD122.8m each and the great deal is thanks to Donald as LM says:

President Trump’s personal involvement in the F-35 program accelerated the negotiations and sharpened our focus on driving down the price.
john001

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby HeyfordDave111 on Fri 03 Feb 2017, 10:39 pm

As he's such a loose cannon on twitter etc, maybe we will at last learn what they are doing at The ranch and dugway? Also he may release video of all those aliens they have got there too. :grin:
Got to love Russianhardware
HeyfordDave111

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby Stagger2 on Sat 04 Feb 2017, 11:00 am

He's highly unlikely to release any details on Alien life-forms for fear of 'outing' himself! :whistle:
It's a well-guarded secret that since Donald the Trumpeter was abducted for advanced sexual experimentation, he wasn't the same man when they returned him to Earth.... Oh Not at all!
You have to understand that following several foiled attempts of said Aliens to populate Earth, they have changed their modus operandi. Since the landing accident at Roswell (a small 'bottle-to-throttle' indiscretion) & the secluded landing-spot at Woodbridge, UK. incident, where they alighted in the middle of the weekly dogging-meet, a quantum change of thought was initiated.
With the dubious Trump inauguration completed the final piece of the Alien jigsaw is now in place, with several members of the Iranian Government, Ayatollah Khamenei & Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani for sure plus Vlad Putin all being alien clones, their job is done!
All they do now is have a quick 'Alien Siesta' whilst these muppets orchestrate Armageddon, then just move-in unopposed? Some say that 'Melania' is a product of Putin's stag-night in Kiev, others say she's a gift to DT. from a 'stock' of Vlad's 263 cousins, sisters, half-sisters & sheep! All we know is...she's fit! :wink:

PS:- Anybody got Ridley Scott's phone number??
Stagger2

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby john001 on Mon 20 Feb 2017, 11:44 am

Another little gem creeps out

The head of the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) says the outer wings of 32 carrier-based C-models need to be replaced to carry the Raytheon AIM-9X Sidewinder, the aircraft’s primary dogfighting weapon.
The U.S. Navy variant experienced an undisclosed amount of oscillation or turbulence during flight trials with the AIM-9X in December 2015, and Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan says aircraft already delivered need to be retrofitted with strengthened wings.

“It was discovered the outer, folding portion of the wing has inadequate structural strength to support the loads induced by pylons with AIM-9X missiles during maneuvers that cause buffet,” Bogdan says in written testimony to Congress on Feb. 16.
john001

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby ericbee123 on Mon 20 Feb 2017, 2:50 pm

john001 wrote:Another little gem creeps out

The head of the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) says the outer wings of 32 carrier-based C-models need to be replaced to carry the Raytheon AIM-9X Sidewinder, the aircraft’s primary dogfighting weapon.
The U.S. Navy variant experienced an undisclosed amount of oscillation or turbulence during flight trials with the AIM-9X in December 2015, and Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan says aircraft already delivered need to be retrofitted with strengthened wings.

“It was discovered the outer, folding portion of the wing has inadequate structural strength to support the loads induced by pylons with AIM-9X missiles during maneuvers that cause buffet,” Bogdan says in written testimony to Congress on Feb. 16.


It's a good job we stuck with the B model then and didn't convert our carriers to 'Cat and Trap' otherwise we wouldn't have anything to fly off the first of them next year.
Disclaimer-I have spell/grammar checked this post, it may still contain mistakes that might cause offence.
User avatar
ericbee123

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby Russ on Mon 27 Feb 2017, 5:34 pm

Strangely, this hasn't been posted yet. :whistle:

F-35 dominates exercise Red Flag, earns 20-to-1 Kill Ratio
User avatar
Russ

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby DamienB on Mon 27 Feb 2017, 8:00 pm

If an F-35 can't swat a 40 year old opponent from the sky I would be seriously worried. I'm sure a Tornado F.3 can put up a decent fight against a Vampire F.1...!
User avatar
DamienB

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby john001 on Mon 27 Feb 2017, 8:33 pm

Russ wrote:Strangely, this hasn't been posted yet. :whistle:

F-35 dominates exercise Red Flag, earns 20-to-1 Kill Ratio



There is some debate as to whether F22s are flying top cover for the F35s in these exercises.
john001

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby speedbird2639 on Mon 27 Feb 2017, 9:11 pm

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/74 ... red-flag''

Given that I seem to remember that they said the F16 had never been beaten in a real World combat scenario I don't know who they Yanks think they are going to encounter that will require a F22/ F35. More likely to be a fella on a plane with a box cutter or a bloke on a train with a back pack. There was a piece on the news the other night showing film of ISIS using commercially available drones to drop small bombs onto targets - do you really need a state of the art supersonic supercruise plane to take out a £50 mailorder drone?

I'm guessing the military manufacturers are hoping the US will rush to replace their perfectly good and fit for purpose F16s with the latest unnecessarily complex and expensive kit. Rinse and repeat.
User avatar
speedbird2639

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby john001 on Mon 27 Feb 2017, 10:10 pm

Well Trump is expected to put forward a 9% increase in defence ...on the other hand from Aviation Week

U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein is expected in the next few weeks to green light a study on a potential low-cost, light-attack fighter fleet to augment the A-10 Warthog and other aircraft flying close-air support (CAS) missions in Iraq and Syria, a top general says.
Meanwhile, the service will abandon plans to immediately pursue a more robust one-for-one Warthog replacement, as the venerable attack plane will continue flying well into the 2020s.
john001

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby Russ on Tue 28 Feb 2017, 9:16 am

DamienB wrote:If an F-35 can't swat a 40 year old opponent from the sky I would be seriously worried. I'm sure a Tornado F.3 can put up a decent fight against a Vampire F.1...!

Not a very good comparison really. The F-16 has been continuously upgraded and is still a very capable platform. Don't underestimate the highly experienced aggressor pilots either. Of course you would expect them to win, but 20:1 is still very impressive.

speedbird2639 wrote:Given that I seem to remember that they said the F16 had never been beaten in a real World combat scenario I don't know who they Yanks think they are going to encounter that will require a F22/ F35. More likely to be a fella on a plane with a box cutter or a bloke on a train with a back pack. There was a piece on the news the other night showing film of ISIS using commercially available drones to drop small bombs onto targets - do you really need a state of the art supersonic supercruise plane to take out a £50 mailorder drone?

Do you honestly think, particularly with the current US President, the next war will be against insurgents like ISIS? Or more likely a somewhat more capable adversary? They've already been using the F-22 over Syria/Iraq for a number of years.

It's a bit like saying, what's the point of using any new technology at all? :dizzy:
User avatar
Russ

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby Tim N on Tue 28 Feb 2017, 11:13 am

john001 wrote:Well Trump is expected to put forward a 9% increase in defence ...on the other hand from Aviation Week

U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein is expected in the next few weeks to green light a study on a potential low-cost, light-attack fighter fleet to augment the A-10 Warthog and other aircraft flying close-air support (CAS) missions in Iraq and Syria, a top general says.
Meanwhile, the service will abandon plans to immediately pursue a more robust one-for-one Warthog replacement, as the venerable attack plane will continue flying well into the 2020s.


There was a time where the Hog was destined to serve until 2028 but that plan was binned when the USAF brass wanted to sacrifice the A-10 to pay for the F 35.
My problem has never been with the F35 itself but the short sighted plan to divest the A-10 to pay for it.
Even an AFM reading plane enthusiast could see long ago how conflicts were heading.
The A-10 has,and is playing a major role in the war on terrorism.
Tim N

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby Ouragan on Tue 28 Feb 2017, 12:22 pm

An impressive achievement for sure, but I would like to know more about rules of engagement. The F-22 notched up an impressive 221:0 kill ratio in its first Red Flag against teen series fighters, but against a 4th-generation opponent such as the Typhoon it was not as clear cut. Luftwaffe Typhoons recorded a number of kills against the F-22 in 2012 at Red Flag Alaska, and even now the true story of those encounters is not mentioned much.

Yes, the F-35 should win against its opponents with its capabilities, and I am very glad that something that a lot of my taxes have been going towards is turning about to be as good as it seems to be, but one should not assume it will always happen that way. Ask Lt. Col. Dale Zelko about how supposed technological invulnerability can sometimes -literally- fall to pieces around you. And remember too that the enemy may not read the same rule book as you do.
User avatar
Ouragan

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby vulcan558 on Tue 28 Feb 2017, 9:43 pm

15.1 ratio or 20.1, some conflicting figures.
Agree the A10 in the CAS roll is hard to beat, look how many hits they have encountered from small arms fire.
F35 is an expensive bit of kit to be downed by a 10pence bit of lead from a lucky shot from mr AK47.

Not sure hoe they patch up holes in tye F35, and how safe is the cockpit, we know the A10 jock sits in a titanium
Tub for protection.
vulcan558

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby bigfatron on Wed 01 Mar 2017, 10:59 pm

vulcan558 wrote:15.1 ratio or 20.1, some conflicting figures.
Agree the A10 in the CAS roll is hard to beat, look how many hits they have encountered from small arms fire.
F35 is an expensive bit of kit to be downed by a 10pence bit of lead from a lucky shot from mr AK47.

Not sure hoe they patch up holes in tye F35, and how safe is the cockpit, we know the A10 jock sits in a titanium
Tub for protection.


As I think has already been said earlier in the thread, chances are that the F-35 (or anything else that's not the A-10 for that matter) wouldn't even try to carry out the CAS fight in the same way as an A-10 does. I doubt an F-16 would fare any better against heavy small arms or AAA fire than an F-35 would for instance. And whilst an F-16 costs less than an F-35, the pilots all cost about the same.
User avatar
bigfatron

Re: More F-35 woes...

Postby speedbird2639 on Thu 02 Mar 2017, 11:04 am

And whilst an F-16 costs less than an F-35, the pilots all cost about the same.


This is a valid point - surely we should be looking to move on from the 20th century idea that the pilot has to be in the plane for the plane to do its job. Originally there was no alternative but now with virtual reality etc can the pilot not be sat in a control room hundreds or even thousands of miles from the combat zone? Drones have been employed for years for taking out cars full of terrorists can a similar technology not be rolled out for fighter jets? Spending all this money on what is basically obsolete technology just seems a huge waste.

The remote pilot could be in a nice comfy chair in a nice air conditioned room where he doesn't have to worry about 'g' forces and he doesn't have to worry about getting injured as he is miles from the action. He would be able to see all the information fed back from the plane on his display and with a selection of HD/ 4k cameras on the plane have as good if not better view of any combat arena(though I'm not sure that is a massive need as missiles have been 'beyond visual range' for years.
User avatar
speedbird2639

PreviousNext

Return to Aviation Waffle

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Frogfoot, Rob.Brindley and 22 guests