F-35 "lighting II"?

[Reynolds]

Originally posted by Chairboy
On June 23rd, 2009, the Automated Defense Infrastructure came fully online for the first time.  Across the country, tens of thousands of smart munitions with logic controls and fully electronic interfaces were integrated into a single force to defend the United States against threats external.

14 minutes later, it achieved consciousness.  One minute after that, it launched WWIII.

Yup. but other than that, you also lose the human elelment to react in combat. You cannot program a computer with instinct. Countless people have been saved because they had a "strange, undiscribeable feeling" which they reacted to, and that ended up saving their life, and saving the aircraft. and sometimes you have problems with an aircraft that a system diagnostic test wont pick up, but a pilot can FEEL the difference in the way the plane flies, or the way it sounds. But computers cannot do that.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Waves of F-35s took off to attack defenseless humans.  Luckilly, all the corroded parts from the heavy, complicated VTOL systems all broke and they crashed.

The end.

Only about 15 or 20% are going to be STOVL. The carrier based and AF versions will not have the corroded overly complicated mechanism.

We're doomed.

[Reynolds]

Originally posted by Chairboy


Waves of F-35s took off to attack defenseless humans.  Luckilly, all the corroded parts from the heavy, complicated VTOL systems all broke and they crashed.

The end.

Glad you agree with me!

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Chairboy
On June 23rd, 2009, the Automated Defense Infrastructure came fully online for the first time.  Across the country, tens of thousands of smart munitions with logic controls and fully electronic interfaces were integrated into a single force to defend the United States against threats external.

14 minutes later, it achieved consciousness.  One minute after that, it launched WWIII.

Waves of F-35s took off to attack defenseless humans.  Luckilly, all the corroded parts from the heavy, complicated VTOL systems all broke and they crashed.

The end.

Dude... Kristanna Loken is way WAY more sexy than an F35.

[Brenjen]

Originally posted by Sandman
List five.

#1 the lack of experienced combat pilots when we find we really need them (think of the guns being taken off fighters then finding problems with the air to air missle systems & having to slap stop-gap gun pods on them - Phantom era)

#2 discovering major design flaws that require us to bring manned planes & experienced pilots out of moth-balls to cover our butts while we get it straightened out & then finding out it's un-fixable & we are trying to defend ourselves with A/C & pilots that are way past their prime & aren't fit to hunt target drones

#3 finding out after they are fielded that they can be taken control of by enemy forces

#4 finding out after fielding them the operating system is microsoft ME (kidding but you get where I'm going with it - software glitches)

#5 telling the RC combat plane to strike X-target at GPS coordinates XXXX only to have some fluke solar flare screw up the sat. comm. & it shoots down a civilian airliner of a hostile power (think china) or drops ordnance on a school or hospital

 If you think about it, how many times have you heard "oh it's one hundred percent perfect" only later to find out it is far from even good & seeing recalls out the ying-yang.

 I can think of plenty of times when something seemed like a fantastic idea until we really needed it & then there was some fast catching up that had to be done. I feel like our air defense is one spot they shouldn't take any chances with. I know we have Predator drones out there with Hellfire missles shooting at stuff right now (and other unmanned A/C) but that's not our first line of defense only a test platform for a new tool in the tool-box.

[AquaShrimp]

Originally posted by eagl
Shrimp,  if you were right then the F-22, Mig-29, Su-27, Rafale, Eurofighter, B-1, B-2, and B-52 would all be single engine designs.

You're not right, sorry.

The only thing you get from a single engine design is a lower cost per airframe.  The cost savings can be up to 25% per aircraft, and that looks very attractive to people who are concerned with the financial bottom line.  You can't even use simplicity as an argument because single engine planes have lots of other redundancy built in to counter the fact that if that one enigne goes, then the plane has no primary electrical or hydraulic power.  The F-16 is a great example, having a costly and hazardous hydrazine powered auxiliary generator.

Personally, I'd rather have fewer twin engine dual-seat aircraft than more single engine single seat aircraft, but that's because I almost always favor quality over quantity.

The fact that I've always flown twin engine jets in my career makes me a bit biased, but I thought a long time about it and decided that I wanted two engines before I graduated pilot training.

No, those aircraft have multiple engines due to limits on engine performance as size increases.  The basic principle that one large engine is more effecient than two medium engines is correct.  Are you saying that its not?

[Holden McGroin]

One competitive advantage the B-777 has over the A-340 is that 2 large engines are more fuel efficient than 4.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Brenjen
#1 the lack of experienced combat pilots when we find we really need them (think of the guns being taken off fighters then finding problems with the air to air missle systems & having to slap stop-gap gun pods on them - Phantom era)

#2 discovering major design flaws that require us to bring manned planes & experienced pilots out of moth-balls to cover our butts while we get it straightened out & then finding out it's un-fixable & we are trying to defend ourselves with A/C & pilots that are way past their prime & aren't fit to hunt target drones

#3 finding out after they are fielded that they can be taken control of by enemy forces

#4 finding out after fielding them the operating system is microsoft ME (kidding but you get where I'm going with it - software glitches)

#5 telling the RC combat plane to strike X-target at GPS coordinates XXXX only to have some fluke solar flare screw up the sat. comm. & it shoots down a civilian airliner of a hostile power (think china) or drops ordnance on a school or hospital

 If you think about it, how many times have you heard "oh it's one hundred percent perfect" only later to find out it is far from even good & seeing recalls out the ying-yang.

 I can think of plenty of times when something seemed like a fantastic idea until we really needed it & then there was some fast catching up that had to be done. I feel like our air defense is one spot they shouldn't take any chances with. I know we have Predator drones out there with Hellfire missles shooting at stuff right now (and other unmanned A/C) but that's not our first line of defense only a test platform for a new tool in the tool-box.

Solutions:

1. Training
2. Testing
3. Testing
4. Testing
5. Fantasy

The Predator is just the first wave, proof of concept. It's just a matter of time before all combat aircraft are remotely piloted.

[Reynolds]

Originally posted by Sandman
Solutions:

1. Training
2. Testing
3. Testing
4. Testing
5. Fantasy

The Predator is just the first wave, proof of concept. It's just a matter of time before all combat aircraft are remotely piloted.

Has the predator ever seen actual combat? i know it has flown sorties into hostile zones, but its never been attacked back! Since no one has actually tried to:

1. take control of the predator

2. Shoot down the predator

3. run a combat sortie on an airborne target

We do not know how the aircraft will react in those situations. The lack of a pilot being in the seat makes the aircraft much less effective, due to the lack of pilot ESP. Pilots have been known to get a little bit of instinct, a twinge that something isnt right, and that saved them. That doesnt happen in these unmanned aircraft. You kind of need to be near the origin of danger in order to sense that danger.

[Holden McGroin]

It has delivered a surface to air missle and destroyed the target, "somewhere in the middle east"

[eagl]

Shrimp,

Not in a fighter or bomber it isn't.  You can't scale up a single engine in a combat aircraft like you can in an airliner.  If you could, then we'd be seeing single-engine 747s as our next B-52 replacement.  It just doesn't work that way.

And you're totally ignoring the reliability issues.  A single engine fighter with one engine inoperative is an inventory write-off.  A dual engine fighter with one engine inoperative is just a maintenance write-up.

Try sticking one of your uber efficient airline fans in a fighter...  After you got past the ludicrous intake shape required to get a big efficient airline fanjet up near mach 2, let me know...

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Reynolds
Has the predator ever seen actual combat? i know it has flown sorties into hostile zones, but its never been attacked back! Since no one has actually tried to:

1. take control of the predator

2. Shoot down the predator

3. run a combat sortie on an airborne target

We do not know how the aircraft will react in those situations. The lack of a pilot being in the seat makes the aircraft much less effective, due to the lack of pilot ESP. Pilots have been known to get a little bit of instinct, a twinge that something isnt right, and that saved them. That doesnt happen in these unmanned aircraft. You kind of need to be near the origin of danger in order to sense that danger.

1. How could you know that this was not tested?
2. See above.
3. Predator was not designed for air-to-air engagements.

ESP?

[Reynolds]

Yes it has destroyed targets, but has it ever been fired at itself?

And I used ESP for lack of a better word. Instinct isnt quite right, nor is ESP but ESP seems to be closer.

[ASTAC]

Originally posted by Reynolds
Yup. but other than that, you also lose the human elelment to react in combat. You cannot program a computer with instinct. Countless people have been saved because they had a "strange, undiscribeable feeling" which they reacted to, and that ended up saving their life, and saving the aircraft. and sometimes you have problems with an aircraft that a system diagnostic test wont pick up, but a pilot can FEEL the difference in the way the plane flies, or the way it sounds. But computers cannot do that.

not to mention..planes are expensive, and a human's desire for self preservation has probrably saved us billions in wartime.

[BGBMAW]

Black Mamba is a over sized..very large black dildo

I guess you guys dotn crusie the porno shops enuff ; )