F/A-18E vs. F-35C

[Ack-Ack]

There is a time to prove Jeremy Clarkson wrong, and there is a time to ignore what he said in the first place.

I'm allowed to poke fun, goes with the territory.


ack-ack

[Rob52240]

I'm allowed to poke fun, goes with the territory.


ack-ack

Excellent point <S>

[Krusty]

Some folks don't know what a malcontent and troll Bodhi is. They're new and haven't had the displeasure to experience it.

I've been following a number of discussion threads on the F-35 in other forums and some of them quite lengthy (90 pages+) and some including current pilots (one forum has a current day F-22 pilot that chimes in at times). The majority of all the negative press on this plane is unjustified. There are a lot of egos being bruised, a lot of palms being greased, a lot of politicians posturing for their states (which is false posturing since THEIR STATE is creating jobs by helping build the thing) and the end result is the ****-storm of negative press. None of it means a hill of beans.

This WILL be our frontline fighter for a generation to come. That's already been decided. The rest is just Fox News and BS posturing. Don't believe me? Do the research yourself. Just don't take Bodhi's comments to mean anything.

[Baumer]

I have and I find you position lacking Krusty. It is far from certain that the F-35 will fill all the roles it was intended to. It may eventually, and it may do them well, but there are significant issues that need to be overcome. And those concerns are from people within the program office, not outside.

Modern defense programs are never a done deal anymore until the product has been delivered.

[morfiend]

 So Baum are you suggesting that Canada should rethink it's purchase of F35's?

  Of course we dont have a carrier so the inability to land on 1 is not a concern.


  It's been a huge debate up here but I think the decision has been made to go ahead with the purchase.





   

[Babalonian]

Looks like they should of stuck with the Super Tom Cat.   

That being said, this is going to be a really BFD to the F-35 program, what a basic but serious goof on the aircraft designers.... I personaly thought the F-35 always seemed to short, stout and compact of an airframe for a work horse... but don't tell me my speculations are gonna start having sound justification now.

The F-18E is probabley gonna be around a lot longer now.  The Navy was really going for focusing on equiping F-18F (they are leaning twords prefering nothing but two-seaters, it gets really busy up there these days) and F-18Gs (two-seat, Growlers, to replace the ancient outdated Prowlers) in the meantime, I've been told very recently they very strongly desire to get away from 1-seat configurations... so given that holds true and the F-35 didn't have any problems arise... they might still of been looking to replace it (or not relyed very heavily upon it as a work horse) as soon as deliveries began.

[RTHolmes]

So Baum are you suggesting that Canada should rethink it's purchase of F35's?

its ok for you guys, we've already thrown billions of £££s into its development



btw is there anything else out there with the 35s capability? I'm not aware of any

[beau32]

Just like a lot of things in life, everyone wants it perfect now now now. Not gonna happen. We are doing things with the F-35 that have never been done before. This will take time to do. The F-35C will be the first truely capable Stealth plane launched off the carrier. A amazing concept. but its going to take time to get everything correct. Things with the F-35 are not the same with conviential aircraft. So it will take time to modify and adjust to get it to work right.

The F-35 is no different from other aircraft in that it has growing pains. Out here at Edwards, we are hitting test points everyday and bringing this plane closer and closer to seeing service. Some days are good, some days are bad. My plane has been down over a month due to mods, but they want to make sure its all good before they give us the flight clearance we need to fly again. Who knows when we get it.

In the end, I guess I am saying just sit back and watch what is happening with the program. Watching a Aircraft mature is quite intresting to see.

My plane (AF-03) in formation with AF-02 and AF-04

[Tank-Ace]

btw is there anything else out there with the 35s capability? I'm not aware of any

Depends on what you're refering to. The F-22 is almost certinally a better air-superiority fighter. The F-15E is probably comperable as a strike aircraft. Clearly theres the F-18E/F for carrier opps.


But I don't think theres currently an aircraft out there that quite as versatile as the F-35 is.

[Melvin]

The F-35C will be the first truely capable Stealth plane launched off the carrier.

I just found this statement kind of funny.

"We're gonna launch this really stealthy aircraft that nobody can detect from this enormous freaking aircraft carrier !"

 

Carry on Gents.  

[PR3D4TOR]

I seem to remember the same gripes and whines back in the '70s and '80s with the F-16, F-15 and F-18. "It's over budget!", "It's not going to perform as planned!". They turned out alright... Better than alright in most respects, and outstanding in others.

Sheeple never change.

[MK-84]

I just found this statement kind of funny.

"We're gonna launch this really stealthy aircraft that nobody can detect from this enormous freaking aircraft carrier !"

 

Carry on Gents.  

Right....but after the aircraft launches you then have to track where it goes (hence the stealth) and then shoot it down, which part of the "stealth" makes it harder for infrared and radar seeking missiles.

Question, why is the paint in the pics different shades of grey around details?

[Rich52]

I just found this statement kind of funny.

"We're gonna launch this really stealthy aircraft that nobody can detect from this enormous freaking aircraft carrier !"

 

Carry on Gents.  

In a battle group that basically controls every inch of air and sea space, from sea bottom to atmosphere top, for 600 miles around it. And moves at 30+ knots while operating day and night. Yes, the USN CV/Battle group, a total failure as a weapons system.

[Babalonian]

Depends on what you're refering to. The F-22 is almost certinally a better air-superiority fighter. The F-15E is probably comperable as a strike aircraft. Clearly theres the F-18E/F for carrier opps.


But I don't think theres currently an aircraft out there that quite as versatile as the F-35 is.

I'll repeat - the versatality/usefulness of the F-35, by the time it's finally going to be delivered, is ALREADY starting to be seriously questioned - if for no other reason than its single-seat configuration and the limitiations already being had by existing fighter aircraft with that configuration, in active use, today.  There's just too much s!@# going on up there for a single pilot to handle ontop of aviating, navigating and communicating these days - especially with those units assigned to CAGs.

OK, so it does have stealth, lets see how long/popular that flavor lasts after they develop the next greatest and coolest thing in military aviation - very very likely to be some comlpex high-tech deivce/system requiring idealy a weapons officer/back seater to effectively operate while flying and to use in combat.

[RTHolmes]

Depends on what you're refering to. The F-22 is almost certinally a better air-superiority fighter. The F-15E is probably comperable as a strike aircraft. Clearly theres the F-18E/F for carrier opps.

But I don't think theres currently an aircraft out there that quite as versatile as the F-35 is.

I agree, and I should have been more specific - similar performance, stealth, radar, bombload and most significantly of all a massive great gap in the middle of it for spooky stuff.

for every other role we could easily navalise the typhoon, but its ability to carry a huge generator and plenty of equipment for various C&C/weapon systems in a fighter is unique afaik. and by weapon systems I mean ECM/laser/microwave/EMP/other physics stuff, the kind of thing we cant hang off a hardpoint yet.