Jump to content

  • Log in with Twitter Log in with Windows Live Log In with Steam Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Photo
- - - - -

F-35 - An Eagle or a Turkey?


  • Please log in to reply
93 replies to this topic

#81 GregP

GregP

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,237 posts
  • Joined 13 Years, 11 Months and 19 Days
  • 224 topics

Posted 20 January 2017 - 09:00 AM

Hope not ... but, we'll see if we live that long, won't we?



#82 GregP

GregP

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,237 posts
  • Joined 13 Years, 11 Months and 19 Days
  • 224 topics

Posted 28 February 2017 - 03:32 AM

You should go read the other Modern Aviation forum on the F=35. These guys are funny, at least. The F-35 gets a tad bit of very unspecific press and they're ready to salivate!

 

The article said the Air Force side had very good success in a war game, but I heard in another article that the F-35s were not responsible for any air-to-air kills. It was all F-22s and F-15s! But you'd think the F-35 ship had landed!

 

It seems impossible to get an unbiased view of the aircraft because you're either very much FOR it or very much AGAINST it. I seem to be one of the few still on the fence and it's frustrating to be unable to get good information. With what we're paying for it, you'd think the government would want independent, realistic confirmation of the aircaft as priority number ONE, with reports to the DOD being transparent, at least to the DOD, even if classified. The issue seems to be getting the real information to the people making the decisions because the opinions are all either quite good or quite bad.

 

We the public do NOT have to KNOW the answers, but the DOD damned for sure should! And it should be communicated clearly that the plane is what they wanted it to be. I cannot understand how it IS, but I don't have to be brought up to speed on it if the players are satisfied and are FREE to speak their minds, even if not in public. With all the mixed reporting, there SHOULD be Air Force and Navy / Marine people all over the opinion map. Since that is NOT the case, either they have been ordered to be silent, to speak the company line, or maybe the plane IS what we need.

 

If it IS, that needs to be clear, and it isn't at all. We don't need all the details, but there should be a plan to utilize the capabilities we may not know about to win an engagement, a skirmish, a battle, a front, and a war. I wish I were sure the decision has been eth right one, but I'm not and am wise (or foolish) enough to know a "classified information runaround" when I hear one. What I don't know is if the classified opinion is good or bad.

 

At the price, I hope it is not only good, but VERY good. I still can't see how carrying only 2 A-A missiles is good in any way but, hey, maybe they're REALLY good missiles .... and THAT is the secret. Who knows?

 

Maybe the Russians and Chinese are really our buddies, too, and we just don't know it, yet.  :) And I have some Ocean Front property in Arizona, too, after California breaks off and slides into the Pacific!



#83 Rick65

Rick65

    Registered Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts
  • Joined 5 Years, 7 Months and 29 Days
  • 1 topics
  • LocationPerth, Western Australia

Posted 28 February 2017 - 04:58 AM

We know it is not an Eagle, many think it is a Turkey.

If anyone is actually sure they aren't allowed to say.

We are going to have a meet and greet to celebrate the arrival of our first two in Australia as they will

"go on public display at the Avalon Air Show in Victoria, where they are expected to be met by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Defence Minister Marise Payne."

http://www.abc.net.a...stralia/8308498



#84 flying kiwi

flying kiwi

    Regular Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 670 posts
  • Joined 7 Years, 7 Months and 2 Days
  • 5 topics

Posted 28 March 2017 - 08:00 AM

I found out that someone I know was part of the RAAF evaluation process that ended up with the F-35 buy. He is not a fan at all. He says the range is too short, it's got the manoeuvrability of the Hindenburg, and it doesn't carry enough of a load. It looks like the Australian decision, at least, was a political one.



#85 Paolo Tagliaferri

Paolo Tagliaferri

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 548 posts
  • Joined 16 Years and 26 Days
  • 142 topics
  • LocationLondon, UK

Posted 07 May 2017 - 05:26 PM

Here is a nice video of the F-35 in the Mach Loop in Wales (UK)


  • CORSNING likes this

Paolo Tagliaferri

Board Administrator

 


#86 Armand

Armand

    About the same age as another old Fokker: The F-27

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,592 posts
  • Joined 3 Years, 7 Months and 1 Day
  • 108 topics
  • LocationAbout 20 nm east of BLL

Posted 07 May 2017 - 10:16 PM

In the Mach loop:
I didn't realize that such many was operational or might it be 'Tordenskjolds soldiers'(*) :-/
But of course the debate mostly goes on the troublesome B-model.
(*): https://en.m.wikiped...er_Tordenskjold(last sentence)

#87 Rick65

Rick65

    Registered Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts
  • Joined 5 Years, 7 Months and 29 Days
  • 1 topics
  • LocationPerth, Western Australia

Posted 08 May 2017 - 10:44 AM

Don't know anything about the accuracy/stance of the link but they might have the basic number right

http://nationalinter...e-getting-20555

 

"Operational Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighters belonging to the U.S. Air Force deployed to Europe for the first time in late April.

According to the Air Force, eight of the stealthy single-engine strike fighters deployed to RAF Lakenheath in England as part of the deployment from the 419th Fighter Wing at Hill Air Force Base in Utah. The purpose of the deployment is not only to introduce European NATO allies to the new aircraft and its capabilities, but also to help deter Russia in the East."



#88 GregP

GregP

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,237 posts
  • Joined 13 Years, 11 Months and 19 Days
  • 224 topics

Posted 09 May 2017 - 06:28 AM

Had one of them at the Planes of Fame airshow this weekend. Wasn't particularly impressive, although it DID take off very short, no doubt because it was empty of weapons. It was not allowed to do any aerobatics, and was there for the heritage flight, which it flew very well. I'd be REALLY upset if it couldn't do that!

 

It showed a decent vertical capability at light weights on takeoff, which I expected. After all, it isn't going to fly an airshow with a full internal load anyway. Nobody does that.

 

Hope it turns out well since it seems we will be flying them. Other than that, I cannot have any comments since it was basically a formation flight that stayed in formation quite well. You definitely will NOT sneak past any people on the ground as the engine was decently loud. But that isn't a big deal. You don't hear it before it gets there. The F-15 isn't exactly a whisper-jet, either ... and IT has an astonishing combat record. So, while quiet may be nice, it is NOT a requirement, thank goodness.



#89 Armand

Armand

    About the same age as another old Fokker: The F-27

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,592 posts
  • Joined 3 Years, 7 Months and 1 Day
  • 108 topics
  • LocationAbout 20 nm east of BLL

Posted 28 June 2017 - 05:40 PM

Royal Navy just launched the first of two new aircraft carriers for it's maiden trip.
The design and build of the ship wich is bigger than any present RN carrier have lasted eight years and the F-35C for wich the ship is built (including the up-hill jump as earlier seen at the Harrier equipped British carriers!) was expected to be present for the launch - BIG GAMBLING! :-o
The price of the RN hardware is much discussed nationally and at the moment some claims that there isn't money to equip the two sister ships with the about 70 F-35's lacking!

#90 GregP

GregP

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,237 posts
  • Joined 13 Years, 11 Months and 19 Days
  • 224 topics

Posted 01 July 2017 - 07:15 AM

I'm thinking that if the politicians ever let the F-35 do what it does best, it may well win. That would entail:

 

1) Approval of BVR intercepts. That has never been as far as I know, but it what the F-35 was designed for.

2) Set the ROE and let the chips fall where the ROE cause them to fall. That means, if the F-35 has permission to defend, don't deny it the right to protect the defended area. The politicians seems to want to have final say, even in a hostile situation. The pilots need to either have permission to defend or not. None of the "call us for final approval" crap. If they don't have permission to fire if required, keep 'em on the ground.

3) Make information available to the press only after it is militarily useless. Don't give them  enough information to sink your ship before it fights.

 

If you make the F-35 close and identify, you have just made it a sitting duck. It's strength is to fight when the opposition doesn't know it is there.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users