Report of F35A vs F16Cblk40 goes public

[PR3D4TOR]

A tie-in to your mentioning of the USS America:

http://thediplomat.com/2015/07/us-navy-builds-largest-ever-amphibious-assault-ship-for-f-35-fighters/

[bozon]

Current limitations and final performance estimates are obviously classified. Even if I were to come by a leaked document I would not help spread it. That would be a treasonous act in itself.

In other news, Israel is forming its first F-35i squadron.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/israel-to-form-first-squadron-in-preparation-for-f-35i-415143/

The F35 is controversial in the IAF as well. The biggest attraction for Israel is that they are getting their own custom version in which the plane will be adapted to carry Israeli equipment on the production line. The manufacturer had already backed away from some of the promises and the planes will be delivered with the original junk installed on them, that will have to be removed and the plane modified again.

[PR3D4TOR]

Pilot calls F-35 a threat to be feared

http://www.10news.com/news/pilot-calls-f-35-a-threat-to-be-feared-072915

[XxDaSTaRxx]

Don't bother with Predator's rambling. He hasn't a clue what he's talking about.

[PR3D4TOR]

You're right. I'm with the other clueless dolts in the USAF, USN, USMC, and the services of several other countries.

[DaveBB]

Even if the F-35 turns out to be mediocre, the U.S. has already dealt with that in the form of the F/A-18.  Short ranged, high drag, underpowered (compared to other 4th generation fighters).  But it has still done an excellent job at its missions and only one has been lost to a Mig-25.

[CavPuke]

A tie-in to your mentioning of the USS America:

http://thediplomat.com/2015/07/us-navy-builds-largest-ever-amphibious-assault-ship-for-f-35-fighters/

Ahhh the USN's other money pit aka the USS America. A ship designed and built expressly for the F-35B and as soon as it's finished with it's sea trials it's back to the drydock for billions more in upgrades cuz it can't handle F-35B operations. No wonder the USN can't sustain carrier ops in the Persian Gulf when it's blowing billions on fiascoes such as the F35 and America class carriers. Pretty soon we'll spend ourselves out of a military just like we did with the USSR.

The flightdeck heating issue has been an embarrassing one for the F-35 program. Early on, it was assured that the heat from the F-35B's massive engine would not require any modifications for amphibious ship operations. Where the AV-8B Harrier could go, the F-35B could go.

This turned out to be a farce. The F-35B's hot exhaust has the capability to not just scorch these ships existing decks, they can melt right through them like a cutting torch, the purpose built USS America included. As a result, intricate structural members have to be added underneath spots seven and nine (F-35Bs will only be able to land on these two spots!) aboard the America, and a new deck surface coating must be added in hopes of keeping the jet's high heat signature at bay.

Maybe what is most startling is that not only is the ship that was designed for the F-35 not prepared structurally to operate that aircraft, but intellectually the ship is not prepared to deal with it either.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/navy-builds-ship-for-f-35-ship-needs-months-of-upgrade-1697523492

[PR3D4TOR]

Just another know-it-all who thinks he has all the answers. Hubris is as hubris does.

[CavPuke]

Just another know-it-all who thinks he has all the answers. Hubris is as hubris does.

(Golf Clap) What a very eloquent, poignant rebuttal of the points the article brought up.

[Zimme83]

You're right. I'm with the other clueless dolts in the USAF, USN, USMC, and the services of several other countries.

There are complains in several of those countries about not getting what was promissed and politics still is a large part of it. Its not just the F-35, a country rarely buys the weapon system that gives them most bang for the buck. KC-46 is a very good example of that...
All countries and AF will say their plane is the best, its nothing new.
 

[PR3D4TOR]

(Golf Clap) What a very eloquent, poignant rebuttal of the points the article brought up.

That's the thing; he has no points. He cannot possibly know enough hard facts to make a valid point. If you want to listen and trust the opinions of people who have no way of knowing the facts, that's your choice. I prefer to stick with the people who actually know what they're talking about.

Welcome back Zimme, but didn't we finish that discussion on page 10...

[CavPuke]

That's the thing; he has no points. He cannot possibly know enough hard facts to make a valid point. If you want to listen and trust the opinions of people who have no way of knowing the facts, that's your choice. I prefer to stick with the people who actually know what they're talking about.

Actually he's made quite a few salient points backed by hard facts, yet you choose not to refute any of his sources or facts and instead attack the author.

Here is another hubris ridden critic:

James also agreed that an F-35A "didn't do so well" in mock dogfights with an F-16 last January. The test pilot's assessment, first reported by the "War Is Boring" blog, said that the F-35 lacked the maneuverability to keep up with the F-16 and the F-35 pilot's helmet cut down on his vision.
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/07/28/air-force-secretary-acknowledges-wide-range-problems-f35.html

The Secretary of the Air Force herself acknowledges the facts that the F35 is in trouble and the problems may result iin less aircraft being purchased. But what does she know? I'm sure she is an uninformed critic.

[Grayeagle]

I remember a *LOT* of negative rhetoric when the F-15 was first announced ..s'kinda funny in that it used all the same words .. overpriced, not as good as <insert any other fighter in the world here> ..ad infinitum.

And then the Bacaa Valley air war happened. What was it .. 80-1 kill ratio?
And the one that went down was an RF-4C ..shot down by a SAM.

First combat test of the F-15.

Then the same negative rhetoric began when the F-22 was announced.
-yawn-

And now it's the F-35's turn in the barrel.
-rolls eyes-

The capabilities of the design are interesting in that it is not an air superiority design ..it is multi-role in so many ways it boggles the mind. It appears they are trying to build the Swiss Army Knife of fighters .. I am sure it will do ok at whatever the mission is .. god knows if it is trying to fill the A-10 role it has some big shoes to fill.

-GE (just my 2 copper)

[bozon]

y air war happened. What was it .. 80-1 kill ratio?
[/quote]
Depending on whether you in clude the Mig25, it was 83:0, break down: 41 to F15, 41 to F16 and 1 to F4 Phantom.No planes were lost in combat.

One F4 was lost a few years later due to a malfunction - navigator was taken by Hizballa and later sold to Iran, never to be seen or heard again. The pilot was rescued by hanging on the skiis of a Cobra attack hellicopter and flown out under fire.

[PR3D4TOR]

Actually he's made quite a few salient points backed by hard facts...

No such thing as "hard facts". Something is either factual or not. Hard evidence is a different matter, but no: His "salient points" are not backed by any facts or hard evidence.

The Secretary of the Air Force herself acknowledges the facts that the F35 is in trouble...

No she does not. She acknowledges that there are teething problems with the aircraft, something anyone with any knowledge about aircraft design should expect. However she also said that the "the F-35 will be a different plane when it's fully operational." She also acknowledges that the production program has difficulties with its attempt at concurrency, which has nothing to do with the performance or capabilities of the aircraft itself.

I wonder what would have happened to these treasonous journalists like "foxtrotalpha" if they had published leaked test flight data and tried the same smear campaign back in WWII.