F15 Down

[Bodhi]

Any person flying an aircraft in an experimental program in this day and age is not going to come out and publicly bash it.  It's not conducive to a long career.  Let's examine a few facts that are not being touted by the "rah rah" crowd, some have already been touched on in here.


It has a 600 mile range.  This is not conducive to CV ops as many anti-ship weapons can be fired from farther.  Legacy Hornets are more than double that at 1275, clean, ie. no drop tanks.  You put pylons and tanks on it, and then it is even more sluggish and it's main reason for being here (stealth) goes away.

Air to air, it is less maneuverable than the current Legacy fighters.  It is no match for the F-22.  It was billed as being able to be on an even plane with 5th Gen Chinese and Russian Fighters.

There has been documentation of cracks in separate areas indicating inadequate structure.  These areas will have to be beefed up, which increases weight and degrades performance.  The aircraft had to be limited to 3.5 G's because if this.

Engines are not delivering as expected.

Computer software is not delivering as expected and is now expected to not be finalized out to 2017 or further.

Helmet targeting system not working as advertised.

Cost.  $80 million to start.  $140 million or more now.  These costs are only going to go up as it becomes further evident that the aircraft has to be further modified and fixed.


These are just a few facts that are widely known so you can google if you want to for sources.  I'd suggest staying away from Lockheed for facts, they are neck deep in this fiasco and are not going to bad mouth it.  Personally, I would have been ecstatic had this aircraft performed as advertised.  It doesn't and is probably going to be double or more on the cost.  That alone should have anyone questioning why we have a less capable aircraft than the F-22 when we could have had a far more capable aircraft in the proposed F-22B. 

[RTR]

I'm not a fan of the F35 either and hope we (Canada finally scrap the project).

Can't run, can't fight, can't hide. there is some truth to that.

I think once they get the major bugs worked out it will make a decent strike aircraft, but it is going to need fighter protection. It will never be a multi role fighter.

Before the BVR crowd comes in.....that has to work as advertized every single time. Can't see that happening, at least not with the F35.

I would rather see Canada buy into the Super Hornet and outfit a squadrons strength with the Growler. At least the Hornet can defend itself.

just my humble $0.02

RTR

[GScholz]

Any person flying an aircraft in an experimental program in this day and age is not going to come out and publicly bash it...

It isn't an experimental program. Hasn't been for nearly two years since the USAF started receiving F-35A's at Nellis. I've personally spoken to two Norwegian pilots who have flown it and are part of the RNoAF F-35 training unit. Both are F-16 veterans and both love the F-35 and its capabilities. And before you accuse them of being corrupt career chasers... Our armed forces don't work like that. Once their 12 years of obligatory service is up they're out and flying commercial. Don't confuse other countries air forces for the corrupt corporate forces you call a military.

Here's what the RAF has to say about the F-35B... You'll probably think he's on the payroll too.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLSsLCMsCrM


And btw. they're not supposed to take-off with stores on. They take off with a short deck run, but land vertically.

[Bodhi]

Gscholtz,
As always it is a waste of time to talk with you.  You have your opinions and that's that.  You talked to some pilots at an airshow and they told you they like the plane.  Awesome.  Then you put  words in my mouth regarding what I said about pilot's in the program.   You're wrong, but don't let that stop you.  Lastly, you make a bs statement about our military in favor of other military forces.  It's per the usual m.o. for you.

How about this, you address the facts Vraciu and I posted?  As for the vertical take off comment, that's foolish because no one has brought it up.

[GScholz]

You haven't posted any facts, nor has Vraciu. You've only posted your own opinions; facts require sources. And no, I haven't just talked to "some pilots at an airshow". I had the privilege of attending their lecture on the F-35 program and the Norwegian part of it here at the airbase in Bodø. I'll take their word over yours, Vraciu's, Sprey's or anyone else that does not have first hand knowledge of the aircraft.

[GScholz]

And of course beau32 was here on the BBS last year when we did this...

"Always amazes me how many people just trash something that they probably dont know anything about. Yes, they fixed the carrier tail hook and it will start carrier testing later this year. Things are looking good for the program. All testing is going good here. Yes there are hic-ups, but what program didnt. My plane is flying great. We are hitting many test points, and the ones we miss, we are going back, making sure we get it right, then fly it again. The F-35 is twice as loud as an F-16, and I would compare it to a F-22 taking off noise wise. How is it a waste of taxpayer money? Do you have proof? How did it fail? Proof? Just curious how people make these claims, but no proof to back it up. Apparently we are doing something right, Turkey just secured a order of 100. Japan has bought 50. South Korea just placed an order. From what I have seen, the flanker will never know the F-35 is there till its too late. This plane has a lot of amazing things going on with it, its a shame the general public only knows little of it....

BTW, if your curious about how I may know this. I am a Crew Chief on the F-35 at Edwards AFB, AF-03 is my bird. "


... but he's probably on the take as well, right Bodhi? 

[Vraciu]

Gscholtz,
As always it is a waste of time to talk with you.  You have your opinions and that's that.  You talked to some pilots at an airshow and they told you they like the plane.  Awesome.  Then you put  words in my mouth regarding what I said about pilot's in the program.   You're wrong, but don't let that stop you.  Lastly, you make a bs statement about our military in favor of other military forces.  It's per the usual m.o. for you.

How about this, you address the facts Vraciu and I posted?  As for the vertical take off comment, that's foolish because no one has brought it up.

You got that right.

[GScholz]

Oh no! What will I do?! 

[DaveBB]

History is repeating itself.  The F-35 is going back to the missile carrier concept of the 1950s.  "We'll shoot them BVR, no need for thrust vectoring or good aerodynamics".  And forcing the same aircraft on 3 services; that has ended in disaster so many times.  Even the F-4, the most successful of the tri-service aircraft, was average at best.  Only through excellent pilot training was it used to any degree of the success.  

As much as people dislike him, Pierre Sprey is right.  Aerodynamics are fundamental.  This is why the F-15, even with its huge RCS is such a success.  Same with the F-22, and the F-16.  The F-35 is overweight and relies far too much on electronics to make up for its flight shortcomings.  

[Vraciu]

It isn't an experimental program. Hasn't been for nearly two years since the USAF started receiving F-35A's at Nellis. I've personally spoken to two Norwegian pilots who have flown it and are part of the RNoAF F-35 training unit. Both are F-16 veterans and both love the F-35 and its capabilities. And before you accuse them of being corrupt career chasers... Our armed forces don't work like that. Once their 12 years of obligatory service is up they're out and flying commercial. Don't confuse other countries air forces for the corrupt corporate forces you call a military.

Here's what the RAF has to say about the F-35B... You'll probably think he's on the payroll too.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLSsLCMsCrM


And btw. they're not supposed to take-off with stores on. They take off with a short deck run, but land vertically.

Yeah, cuz they realized it couldn't do it.   So the Marines have screwed the entire program with their worthless love affair with VTOL.   And it still requires specialized landing pads that are bigger than anything we can carry.    Also, nobody has figured how to forward deploy the ridiculous fuel load this thing will need to drop two bombs.


The stealth was compromised when the bay was redesigned not to mention that the threats themselves have evolved since the original design was completed.  Hence, while front aspect stealth is decent, all other aspects are not.   This thing will be seen on radar from three directions.   Gad help you when it goes into afterburner with that single gigantic engine lighting up every IR seeker on the planet.


It is low, slow, short-legged, has no payload, cannot turn, and is not a fighter by any measurement.

Also, it is an experimental program guised as something else.   The F-35s being delivered go immediately to depot for refit.   They are catching fire for no reason.    Engine casings are flexing even under the restricted 3.5 G envelope resulting in failures.   It cannot fly in IMC.  It cannot fly within 100 miles of thunderstorms.    A recent cross country flight of four Jets resulted in three in-flight aborts.    

Not experimental?

[Vraciu]

History is repeating itself.  The F-35 is going back to the missile carrier concept of the 1950s.  "We'll shoot them BVR, no need for thrust vectoring or good aerodynamics".  And forcing the same aircraft on 3 services; that has ended in disaster so many times.  Even the F-4, the most successful of the tri-service aircraft, was average at best.  Only through excellent pilot training was it used to any degree of the success.  

As much as people dislike him, Pierre Sprey is right.  Aerodynamics are fundamental.  This is why the F-15, even with its huge RCS is such a success.  Same with the F-22, and the F-16.  The F-35 is overweight and relies far too much on electronics to make up for its flight shortcomings.  

The JSF is a pig.   It will always be a pig.   It will help the services keep their flying club and that's about it.

The F-4 was actually a better three-service design precisely because it DIDNT START OUT AS ONE.   We never seem to learn.

Also, in the Navy's version of the Joint Strike Failure the gun is optional.   So we are exactly right back to the F-4B--except the F-4 carried a far larger payload and had WAY WAY WAY better performance than this POS.

Sprey is exactly right as you said.   The geniuses GScholz leg humps are the same ones trying to dump the A-10 (again) and who ceased F-22 production because it was "too expensive".   Yeah....I believe in their judgment--not.

[GScholz]

Why should anyone believe you or value your opinions in any way whatsoever? I prefer to get my information from the people who actually know what they're talking about. People like beau32, and the pilots and other personnel that actually work with the aircraft. You, Bodhi and all the other conspiracy theory nutjob naysayers are irrelevant. Just as you were irrelevant when the F-16 was the over-budget, doomed to fail project that every taking-head and naysayer were lamenting 30 years ago.

[Vraciu]

Why should anyone believe you or value your opinions in any way whatsoever? I prefer to get my information from the people who actually know what they're talking about. People like beau32, and the pilots and other personnel that actually work with the aircraft. You, Bodhi and all the other conspiracy theory nutjob naysayers are irrelevant. Just as you were irrelevant when the F-16 was the over-budget, doomed to fail project that every taking-head and naysayer were lamenting 30 years ago.

If ONLY this was an F-16.

The cheerleaders are misguided or lying.   The numbers do not support their assertions.  Or yours.

I fly with a guy who left the Pentagon in the middle of this mess.  He was an F-22 Wing Commander before his stint in the Puzzle Palace.  Without revealing anything classified he has made it quite clear this program is dysfunctional and effectively beyond hope.    A lot of pilots are gonna' get killed in it should we ever face first tier opponents.

I will also go along with a Bill Sweetman and others, because not only do their assertions fit with my colleague's, but they can do basic math.

Member nations are dropping like flies and hedging bets.  They see the writing on the wall...

[GScholz]

Nevermind...

[Vraciu]

Nevermind...

 

Well, let us hope the helmet works someday as the six view is positively Russian.