Ye Olde Rocket Forum

Go Back   Ye Olde Rocket Forum > Weather-Cocked > FreeForAll
User Name
Password
Auctions Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 01-11-2018, 12:28 AM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is offline
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 8,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ltvscout
We're getting a squadron of them at Truax Field in Madison.

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/lo...12e96b1831.html

The first thing you'll notice is how fat she is...well, the first thing after how loud she is. Unlike the F-16, which is sexy from every angle, the F-35 is kinda fugly. It looks decent from a couple angles, head on probably being the best. It does look better in person than in photos. It has better skin than the F-16.

__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-11-2018, 11:10 AM
Chas Russell's Avatar
Chas Russell Chas Russell is offline
Retired Missile Technician
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 868
Default

Specifically it is the F-35B. The Marines bought the STOVL (Short Take Off Vertical Landing) version for use on smaller helicopter and amphibious landing ships. The Brits and others have also bought the "B".
The Air Force buys the "A" model and the Navy has the "C" model with a larger wing and a tail hook for carrier use.

Chas
__________________
Charles Russell, MSgt,USAF (ret.)
NAR 9790, Lvl 1
SAM "Balls Three"
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-11-2018, 02:01 PM
ghrocketman's Avatar
ghrocketman ghrocketman is offline
President, MAYHEM AGITATORS, Inc.
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 8,833
Default

The USAF F-35A version has the highest performance numbers, and even that one will not reach Mach 2 in clean configuration.
Mach 2 has been an unwritten "requirement" of front-line USAF fighter aircraft since the days of the F-104, F-105, F-106, and F-4.
The cost of this thing is astronomical for an aircraft that does not even meet a basic requirement of designs from 60+ years ago. Ridiculous.

They should have spent the money on purchasing more F-22's and upgrading existing F-16, F-15, and F-18 platforms.

I would rather see them taking F-111's, F-14's and F-4's out of mothballs than spending a dime on the F-35.
__________________
When in doubt, WHACK the GAS and NEVER touch the brake !!!
No Harm=NO Foul advocate

If you are NOT FLYING LOW in the left lane, you need to GET THE #$&@ OUT of it !

Yes, there is such a thing as NORMAL
, if you have to ask, you probably aren't
!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-11-2018, 06:11 PM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is offline
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 8,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghrocketman
The USAF F-35A version has the highest performance numbers, and even that one will not reach Mach 2 in clean configuration.
Mach 2 has been an unwritten "requirement" of front-line USAF fighter aircraft since the days of the F-104, F-105, F-106, and F-4.

That would have been no problem to accomplish if not for the mandatory requirement of JSF....building something to replace the F-16, A-10, F/A-18, and the AV-8B Harrier. Two of these are subsonic, one is Mach 1.8.
__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-11-2018, 06:23 PM
ghrocketman's Avatar
ghrocketman ghrocketman is offline
President, MAYHEM AGITATORS, Inc.
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 8,833
Default

The F-16 is a Mach 2 aircraft when "clean".
That should be a basic MINIMUM for any aircraft costing 25% of this unneeded boondoggle.
__________________
When in doubt, WHACK the GAS and NEVER touch the brake !!!
No Harm=NO Foul advocate

If you are NOT FLYING LOW in the left lane, you need to GET THE #$&@ OUT of it !

Yes, there is such a thing as NORMAL
, if you have to ask, you probably aren't
!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-11-2018, 06:59 PM
tbzep's Avatar
tbzep tbzep is offline
Dazed and Confused
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: TN
Posts: 8,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghrocketman
The F-16 is a Mach 2 aircraft when "clean".
That should be a basic MINIMUM for any aircraft costing 25% of this unneeded boondoggle.

The issue is the bean counters didn't learn from the F-111 and the F-4 where you find that a jack of all trades is truly the master of none and is very expensive. The F-111 never made it as a navy plane and they had to find roles for it in the AF. The F-4 started out a big fat dud, but eventually became a good bombing platform and a decent air superiority fighter when they added a cannon, improved missile tech, and they optimized tactics for it's superior vertical performance and top speed.

Considering what the JSF is required to do, it's amazing that it's as fast as it is and is as cheap as it is.

The JSF should have never happened based on the history of multi branch endeavors. Updating the current fleet is ok and the F-16 is still being produced (will begin in NC soon), but if they just have to replace them, it should be three separate specialized airframes for the F-16, F/A-18 and the Harrier (design and build with Hawker to share costs). The A-10 should never be replaced as long as there is need for close air support and tank busting. Just like there's no substitute for cubic inches, there's no substitute for 30mm depleted uranium!!!
__________________
I love sanding.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-11-2018, 07:08 PM
jetlag jetlag is offline
Old BAR
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,063
Default

GH
A lot of what you say is true, but only one other aircraft can do what this one does. The electronics warfare capability is unprecedented. All of the aircraft you mention get blown out the sky at the same time, and they do not know where the missile came from until it's too late.
We have to be ahead of the Chinese and the Russians.
While I'm with you, they should go faster, they will get there quicker and need a lot less fuel. You should brush up on some of the tactics; they are different now. But you're right, if they try to turn and burn with an SU-35, the odds aren't necessarily in the F-35's favor. However, we don't know all the capabilities yet.
If you recall, the F-104 was faster, but I don't think you'd want to go to war with a squadron of those. And because of the smoke trail and a turning radius analogous to a semi truck, an F4 won't work either. Generation 5 fighters will outclass a G4 most any time. Whole squadrons of F-15s and F-16s were 'destroyed' by one F-22, multiple times. I'm not saying we don't need A-10s, F16s, F-15s and F-18s, but their utility is rapidly coming to an end.
The A-10 should stay a long time!
Allen
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-11-2018, 09:31 PM
mojo1986's Avatar
mojo1986 mojo1986 is offline
Master Modeler
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kingston, CANADA
Posts: 1,656
Default

The A-10 is indispensable as long as it has air cover. And speed at altitude is no longer the thing. Electronic warfare is. If you're flying a fast plane but you're taken out before you ever see the enemy, what's the good of your speed?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-12-2018, 06:33 AM
mycrofte's Avatar
mycrofte mycrofte is offline
Trust me, it'll work!
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,654
Default

They have been trying to get rid of the A-10 for years. I watched a documentary on them mention missile tech made them obsolete.

One general insisted they keep them after he saw the morale boost it gives ground troops knowing they are circling the area.
__________________________________
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-12-2018, 02:56 PM
ghrocketman's Avatar
ghrocketman ghrocketman is offline
President, MAYHEM AGITATORS, Inc.
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 8,833
Default

Agree on the A-10.
That thing has no equal for it's role and should never be replaced.
Their pilots love them and so do the ground forces they support.
Never understood why the USMC did not procure them also.
__________________
When in doubt, WHACK the GAS and NEVER touch the brake !!!
No Harm=NO Foul advocate

If you are NOT FLYING LOW in the left lane, you need to GET THE #$&@ OUT of it !

Yes, there is such a thing as NORMAL
, if you have to ask, you probably aren't
!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:55 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Ye Olde Rocket Shoppe 1998-2018