tflash

I really wonder on what data your claims are based Hummingbird. The idea that the F-35 would have no lifting body characteristics is strange, as much as not taking into account that the F-35 engineers not only had access to all necessary knowledge available for F-16 but could make use of tremendously higher computing power to calculate the lift. This allows for a very complex shape, not only optimized for stealth, but also for aerodynamics in a very broad flight regime span.

That would be a good explanation indeed!

The Dora flies very well indeed, also one of my favourite birds! Beautiful wing, nice cockpit ...

I wonder why so many of these 787's land with their Ram Air Turbine deployed? Problems with battery power ? See eg 00:42 onwards.

Well, I also had problems with the gunsight but it had nothing to do with V100 or reading the manual. It had to do with the viewpoint. I had to configure an axis for the absolute vertical shift and absolute horizontal shift views to have the right angle of view to see the crosshairs. In the standard view position I just didn't see the crosshairs at all, they were too low.

Great! Incredible engine sound also!

Qatar buys Rafale http://aviationweek.com/defense/qatar-s-rafale-order-helps-boost-french-defense-budget

The A-10 has proven in combat to be less, not more vulnerable to the manpads threat than faster jets like F-16/F-15. What we do know for sure is that the fuel-filled plastic jet F-35, if it ever were to need to go below the clouds to actually see anything on the ground, will be the most vulnerable airframe ever. So really, it will not go below the clouds and so will leave the troops on their own, period. (While currently Marine Harriers are exactly training to do that: go below the clouds when necessary). Airframe design sure evolved since the 70s, but that doesn't mean it is easy to come up with a better design than A-10. It was just the right airframe. Door handles didn't evolve much since ages either, because they simply have the right design. I think the F-35 is a very, very good aircraft that will redefine air combat, and sure it is your better Hornet, Viper and Harrier. But it simply isn't an A-10 replacement. Simply not. Hey, I like Boeing 787 also very much, and my bicycle; they are really super, but just like the F-35, they are not an A-10 replacement. I hope the A-10 will get the chance to retire before it really gets obsolete or simply starts falling apart, and a good solution comes up for the troops.

In the mean time I found out that differential braking really, really didn't work out in my car. I guess I played too much DCS:Mig-21bis lately :=)

V-22 Very cool V-22 vid:

And US air force fires General over A-10 remarks: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/10/air-force-fires-general-over-10-treason-remarks/?intcmp=latestnews

India to buy 36 off-the-shelf Rafales: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/11/world/europe/france-india-agrees-to-buy-36-rafale-fighter-jets.html

Great!

(I'm replying here since *this¨* is the F-35 thread!) The more I think about it I believe the F-35 is not a "jack of all trades". It is not meant to combine all the roles of 4th gen aircraft. It is a genuine 5th generation aircraft that fights in the electromagnetic spectrum and this way redefines all missions. It has everything it needs to do so. Problems of the past, such as aerodynamic concerns, have largely been overcome: the F-35 already accumulated thousands of flying hours without aerodynamic mishaps, compare this to the beginnings of Tomcat and F-16! In fact, aerodynamics has been completely mastered through computing. The F-35 must be one of the safest airplanes to operate ever. It flies as well as an F-15, F-16 or Hornet but much better controlled and safer, leaner, so more attention can go to the mission. Of course, consensus is growing that it will not replace the A-10, since that is really more a troop support plane than a genuine fighter aircraft. But all the other tasks now performed by different 4th gen fighters, I believe 5th gen warfare just obsoletes the differences, e.g. between SEAD, DEAD and Strike missions. These are essentially outdated concepts in the 5th gen battlespace, which is EM first. (And please stop about the limited payload nonsense: how many times do we have to repeat the F-35 has actually a higher payload than F-16, Harrier and Hornet, not a lower one? Lets focus on the fact that the former have zero, none, zil internal payload. )

^^+1

^^+1 !

^^supercool!

Follow-on for the A-10 ? http://aviationweek.com/defense/acc-chief-open-10-follow-platform

The F-22 and F-35 have a radar built by Northrop-Grumman, the Super Hornet has one from Raytheon.

Super!!!!! Congrats to ESA!!!

Oh yes I like this article!

^^ Nice pic Ross!

They also did not seem to "lock" the target as we do in the game but just tried to hold the pipper over it?

My MacAfee antivirus software gives me a warning not to visit the forum site, saying that it found "risky behaviours". A false alarm?

Do your really think that when there is still SAM coverage and CAP the F-35's will be used to destroy a vehicle nearby troops? What a nonsense. The whole argument that current CAS platform cannot do so in a high intensity conflict yet the F-35 would do so is completely crap, because in such a case CAS is nowhere a priority. The F-35's would go for the SAM and the CAP. You seem to think they will load Chuck Norris with a parachute in their internal bay to drop him over the troops in contact, but chances are they will prefer to load anti-radiation and air-to-air missiles and Chuck will have to take the bus.