The F-35 Thread

So, what happens if there's a linkage failure on the new flappy-lid door, and it falls against the engine inlet? Does the jet implode?

I think they'll worry about that problem after they figure out how they're going to land the F-35C Naval version on an AircraftCarrier!;)

I think they'll worry about that problem after they figure out how they're going to land the F-35C Naval version on an AircraftCarrier!;)

Probably the same way they land any tactical jet on an AircraftCarrier.™ :doh:

Probably the same way they land any tactical jet on an AircraftCarrier.™ :doh:

A wee bit of info for you ;)

http://www.f-16.net/news_article4494.html

A wee bit of info for you ;)

http://www.f-16.net/news_article4494.html

Wow!

Nate

A little miss calculation there, wonder if they are getting closer to figuring it out.

The hook problem was adressed a probably already fixed. Thats such a small problem for the ammount of worry it recieved.

The hook problem was adressed a probably already fixed. Thats such a small problem for the ammount of worry it recieved.

I'm not so sure,With recent Defense Budget Cuts The Lockheed Martin PR Dept. has been in a Mad scramble to publicize anything at all positive about the new jet.I actually had a hard time finding the Tailhook trouble link as all Defense webpage deleted their stories about it.

I have to think the minute a F-35C Grabs a Wire even on Land Lockheed Martin PR will make it World-Wide News of the event

A wee bit of info for you ;)

http://www.f-16.net/news_article4494.html

An industry expert who is a graduate Flight Test Engineer (FTE) of the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School (USNTPS), Peter Goon, stated that, "Given the limited amount of suitable structure at the back end of the JSF variants, due primarily to the commonality that was being sought between the three variant designs and the fact that the STOVL F-35B JSF is the baseline design, there was always going to be high risk associated with meeting the carrier suitability requirements."

Peter Goon for those still watching is Karlo Kopps bum chum over at APA. ;)

I haven't heard anything about a (the) fix, I would think some news would be posted when/if it were fixed.

A wee bit of info for you ;)

http://www.f-16.net/news_article4494.html

Amazingly enough, I keep up with the F-35 program. :music_whistling: I find these stories rather boring and sensational.

Heaven forbid there be a test program with problems or potential problems. Also, let's just assume this is the "last straw" for the F-35C even though it hasn't been tested in that capacity. :lol:

I have to think the minute a F-35C Grabs a Wire even on Land Lockheed Martin PR will make it World-Wide News of the event

*Yawn.* Because people want to hear about a contested military project. Really do you put any thought into your comments?

Peter Goon for those still watching is Karlo Kopps bum chum over at APA.

Hahaha yeah. What a couple of windbags. Amazing how easily you can pass as an "expert" if you loudly proclaim to everyone within earshot "I AM A DEFENSE EXPERT!"

This is the equivalent of not sending spacecraft beacause the ball pen doesnt work in 0G :D

Hahaha!!!;) Do I put any thought into my comments???

Originally Posted by aaron886

Probably the same way they land any tactical jet on an AircraftCarrier.™

Obviously I pointed something out you lacked knowledge of or would you of made "THAT" Statement? ;)

If you don't understand and grasp the importance of good PR for a huge influential company such as LM,Well........I can't help you:)

The C Variant of the F-35 is Designed and engineered to do 2 things other than Fly,Deploy weapons and land on an aircraftcarrier,If it still can't do the latter as squadrons are taking delivery of the F-35 A and B I'd say that's a significant problem.

I'm sure Lockheed Martin will eventually find/engineer a fix but the more time goes by the worse it appears.

And this going on when other countries who have made commitments to buy are going through their own defense budget cuts

The first attempt will be to change the shape of the hook. The part that catches the wire is rounded, since it doesn't wear out the wire as fast. But because the wire doesn't have time to come off the ground after it goes under the F-35's main gears, they will change the shape to be sharp at the bottom end and thus scoop the wire up off the deck.

If that works, it'll be like using an old hook type, and will probably result in more arresting wire maintenance.

If it doesn't work, they'll probably have to resort to something drastic like re-designing part of the plane.

I haven't heard anything about a (the) fix, I would think some news would be posted when/if it were fixed.

Obviously I pointed something out you lacked knowledge of or would you of made "THAT" Statement? ;)

Keep digging that hole. :doh:

The fix:

http://www.dailytech.com/Lockheed+F35C+Tailhook+Getting+a+Redesign+after+Landing+Failures/article23812.htm

EDIT:

Old video but I had not seen this.

Never read a sentence as devoid of meaning as this one:

“What we are trying to do is make sure that we got the actual design of the hook is optimized so that it in fact repeatedly picks up the wire as long the airplane puts itself in position to do that,” he said.

So, they are trying to fix the problem. I would have guessed so.

Many in the airspace industry also try to design an aircraft so that it flies, (at least repeatedly, and of course when the pilot puts the plane in a position to do so). And then there are those that try to design a gun so that it shoots.

Lockheed-Martins truly amazing advances in aviation engineering really keep my heartbeat up!

Keep digging that hole. :doh:

Your ignorance and lack of maturity on this subject is quite obvious to me and anyone else reading this thread,I'd suggest you limit your comments in things you know nothing about to keep your reputation from further sinking in to the abyss of stupidity.;)

The first attempt will be to change the shape of the hook. The part that catches the wire is rounded, since it doesn't wear out the wire as fast. But because the wire doesn't have time to come off the ground after it goes under the F-35's main gears, they will change the shape to be sharp at the bottom end and thus scoop the wire up off the deck.

 

If that works, it'll be like using an old hook type, and will probably result in more arresting wire maintenance.

 

If it doesn't work, they'll probably have to resort to something drastic like re-designing part of the plane.

This design flaw with the F-35 C Variant has been publicly known since late last year,I have to believe if a simple fix of using a different type or shape of tail hook would of worked it would of been publicized by now.

Just my opinion

The first attempt will be to change the shape of the hook. The part that catches the wire is rounded, since it doesn't wear out the wire as fast. But because the wire doesn't have time to come off the ground after it goes under the F-35's main gears, they will change the shape to be sharp at the bottom end and thus scoop the wire up off the deck.

 

If that works, it'll be like using an old hook type, and will probably result in more arresting wire maintenance.

 

If it doesn't work, they'll probably have to resort to something drastic like re-designing part of the plane.

Another problem is the geometry and placement of the landing gear; but yeah; people attack the program a lot.

I wouldn't worry too much though, there is little doubt they will eventually fix the hook problem. Much of the heated debate on F-35 has not much to do with the aircraft itself or its performance, but with the risky economics of concurrency between testing and production. Each major design problem that emerges during testing has a potential costly outcome if you want to retrofit delivered aircraft.

To be honest, as we look into the Eurofighter and Rafale programmes, something similar has been the reality: although there was minimal concurrency, the specifications of the first tranches were so narrow, that you ended up buying aircraft only capable of training flights and very symbolic air defense.

This has meant France has had to pay a lot of money to upgrade its first batches of Rafales, and that both UK and Germany are now trying to get rid of their first tranches of Typhoons, since they are honestly not very multimission capable and would need very costly upgrades.

Another problem is the geometry and placement of the landing gear; but yeah; people attack the program a lot.

People have and will attack every program like this. They all go over budget and take many years to design, test and build. There is no way around it, look at cars, they are climbing in price and have always been. The more modern things get the higher the price soars! That's the price you pay for if you want the best.

C'mon Brosephinas. It's a hook. It's not a warp drive. LM will fix it. Might cost another 20 billion, but they'll get it done ;)

I find this video of the F-35C Amusing in light of the Tailhook conversation;)

First UK plane flies! And its a B model. Shes a looker!