The F-35 Thread

[mvsgas]

This stuff makes me laugh. So a couple of years ago (and several hundred post back here) there where a couple of articles written on how the F-35 could not get near any thunderstorm etc, etc.

Looking at the F/A-18 NATOPS that has been floating around I saw this on page I-4-4

4.1.3 Prohibited Maneuvers.

4. Flight in lightning or thunderstorms.

 

So it appears F-35 is like other aircraft, Who would've thunk it?

[aaron886]

Thunderstorms are no-go for any airplane. Hail, lightning, and turbulence don't care if you're a fighter or not. The F-35's (temporary) restriction was to stay a full 25 miles from thunderstorms due to fear of combustion of fuel vapors in the tanks. They redesigned the tank inerting system to solve that problem.

[mvsgas]

For me it was just people in general making something out of nothing like the always do on this aircraft, while completely ignoring all the other aircraft with similar problems.

[aaron886]

For me, a legitimately serious problem fixed in testing as it should be. Potato, potato. :)

[gospadin]

So it appears F-35 is like other aircraft, Who would've thunk it?

 

Most fighters aren't FIKI either. =P

[mvsgas]

Potato, potato. :)

Agreed

 

On another note;

Click on image to enlarge

10,000th F-35 Sortie

 

Lt. Col. Robert Miller, 62nd Fighter Squadron pilot, lands the 10,000th F-35 Lightning II training sortie at Luke Air Force Base, Ariz March 29, 2017. The 5,000th training sortie was flown in May 2015 marking more than 5,000 sorties flown in 10 months as Luke continues to build the future of air power. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Alexander Cook)

 

Click on image to enlarge

I think there are more F-35 in Luke AFB than in some countries that bought it:

63rd Fighter Squadron receives its first F-35

 

Airman 1st Class Joshua Cote, 61st Aircraft Maintenance Unit F-35 Lightning II crew chief, marshals an F-35 Lightning II March 20, 2017, at Luke Air Force Base, Ariz. This is the first F-35 for the 63rd FS and marks the 51st F-35 for Luke. (U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman James Hensley)

Edited July 6, 2017 by mvsgas

[Rangi]

 

I think there are more F-35 in Luke AFB than in some countries that bought it:

 

Definitely, only country I know of that has F-35s permanently at home is Israel and they only have 5. All the other countries that have ordered and received F-35s keep them in the training pool at Luke AFB.

[mvsgas]

Definitely, only country I know of that has F-35s permanently at home is Israel and they only have 5. All the other countries that have ordered and received F-35s keep them in the training pool at Luke AFB.

 

I thought the Dutch (RNLAF) had some at Leeuwarden AB

 

RAAF also seem to have some

RLQMDXMFUJ0

 

RAF

k9Vr2ijhzEs

9v8b7Y80ff0

RAF trains with the Marines at MCAS Beaufort, Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron 501

 

There is an assembly line in Italy correct?

6ZadLEy0Flg

And Japan

Xr93kaLfdUo

Edited July 6, 2017 by mvsgas

[probad]

Agreed

 

On another note;

Click on image to enlarge

 

is it the lighting or is this the new coating? looks like a more uniform finish than usual.

[mvsgas]

is it the lighting or is this the new coating? looks like a more uniform finish than usual.

 

Maybe both :dunno:

[ST0RM]

is it the lighting or is this the new coating? looks like a more uniform finish than usual.

 

I was just out at Luke last week, photographing the jets. I did not see any of the F-35s (US or Int'l) with the new uniform paint scheme. Might just be the back lit photo and nose high angle that hides the pattern on top.

 

However, one of the latest Israeli jets was photographed at JRB Ft Worth with the new scheme, so it appears the line has made the change.

[Hummingbird]

Why do people keep using "Rmin" in here? In the world of western fighter aircraft, that's a missile's minimum launch range.

 

It's the common math expression for minimum radius, thus if understandable when taken in context I think it's a ok to use ;)

[gospadin]

It's the common math expression for minimum radius, thus if understandable when taken in context I think it's a ok to use ;)

 

rmin would probably be more accurate, since radius is usually written 'r' instead of 'R'

[Rangi]

@mvsgas, I am not sure about the Italian and Japanese ones, but as far as I know the the RAF, Dutch and raaf came home for air shows and test deployments but then flew back to the training pool in the US.

[mvsgas]

Ok thanks

[Hummingbird]

rmin would probably be more accurate, since radius is usually written 'r' instead of 'R'

 

Perhaps, but I think we both got the message across :)

[Emu]

Chute test.

 

[Rangi]

Italians love their paintjobs....

https://theaviationist.com/2017/06/27/here-are-the-worlds-first-f-35a-lightning-ii-stealth-aircraft-with-special-tail-markings/

[garrya]

A Closer Look at Stealth, Part 5: Nozzles and Exhausts

F135 Engine

In designing the nozzle of the F135 engine that powers the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, Pratt & Whitney aimed to rival the low signature of the nozzles on its previous F119, while beating it on maintenance costs. The F135 nozzle comprises two overlapping sets of 15 flaps, offset so outer flaps are centered on the gaps between the inner flaps. The inner flaps are thin, have metallic exteriors and straight sides and terminate in inverted “V”s. The sides create rectangular gaps between them with the nozzle fully diverged. The outer flaps, which Pratt calls “tail feathers,” are thicker and covered in tiles with blended facets. They terminate in chevrons that overlap the ends of the inner flaps to create a sawtooth edge. Toward the fuselage, the tiles end in four chevrons and are covered by additional tiles (not attached to the engines in this photo) that terminate fore and aft in chevrons and interlock with adjacent tiles in sawtooth-fashion.

 

The F135 nozzle likely suppresses IR signature using multiple methods. The trailing-edge chevrons create shed vortices, shortening the plume, while their steeper axial angle likely directs cooler ambient air into the exhaust flowpath. The inner surfaces of both sets of flaps are white and covered in minute holes similar to those on the F119, which might supply cooling air. The space between the tail feathers and the trailing chevrons may also contain ejectors to provide even more cooling air. The tiles and inner flap surfaces are likely composed of low-emissivity, RAM composites."

http://aviationweek.com/defense/closer-look-stealth-part-5-nozzles-and-exhausts#slide-3-field_images-1655211

[Rangi]

It wasn't so long ago that even taking photos of the F-35s rear end was prohibited, I guess the copy cats already have that information now. What kind of marketing moron came up with that rediculous, jingoistic "powering freedom" slogan, hello, the 1950s called, they want their mottoes back.

[Esac_mirmidon]

You know, american marketing from the land of the free.

[gospadin]

You know, american marketing from the land of the free.

 

rawr, 'murica!

[Rangi]

Interesting F-35 article and video link, including helmet cam footage.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/12297/navy-presents-new-f-35-helmet-display-videos-and-flight-test-dangers

[mvsgas]

Cool, the presentation showed some example of crew resource management, or lack thereof.

http://www.crewresourcemanagement.net/

[Mezelf]

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/341312-pentagon-predicts-f-35-program-costs-to-jump-by-27-billion-report

 

The total acquisition cost for the Lockheed Martin-made F-35 is predicted to spike about 7 percent to at least $406.5 billion...

 

An extended production of the Air Force’s 1,763 F-35A models could also add to the new cost estimate, as could additional Marine Corps and Air Force F-35 variants.

 

Prior to his inauguration, Trump tweeted that the costs of the program were “out of control.” He then took credit for a price decrease in the Pentagon’s February agreement to buy 90 more planes for $728 million less than the last batch.

Experts have said the price per plane was already on the decline.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-lockheed-fighter-idUSBRE82S03L20120329

 

The U.S. government now projects that the total cost to develop, buy and operate the Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will be $1.45 trillion over the next 50-plus years, according to a Pentagon document obtained by Reuters.

 

The Pentagon still plans to buy 2,443 of the new radar-evading, supersonic warplanes, plus 14 development aircraft, in the coming decades, although Air Force Secretary Michael Donley last week warned that further technical problems or cost increases could eat away at those numbers.

 

The new estimate... includes operating and maintenance costs of $1.11 trillion, including inflation, and development and procurement costs of $332 billion.

So the Reuters article is from 2012, and they reported the acquisition cost to be 332 billion. It's now 2017 and the latest report puts it at 406.5 billion... The total cost for the F35 is now 1.5 trillion USD... For a plane...

This is @#!$ing (not sure yet if I'm allowed to swear here) insane. Is America preparing to take on the world or something? Most of the countries under attack by America don't even have an airforce.