The F-35 Thread

[tflash]

Do you mean sources like this? http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2011/pdf/navy/2011fa18ef.pdf

 

I wouldn't worry about that. Seems all normal to me. Same kind of reports that are taken completely out of context by the F-35 critics.

 

The same document, even the more critical one from 2009, states:

 

Overall, the APG-79 radar demonstrates improved capability

over the legacy APG-73 radar, providing longer-range

detections for air-to-air operations and improved synthetic

aperture radar performance for air-to-ground operations.

There were no recommendations to change anything to the deployed fleet, neither in 2009, or 2011. And BTW we are 2013 by now.

[tflash]

Here link to FY2012 report: http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2012/pdf/navy/2012fa18ef.pdf

 

Indeed still some criticisms of the radar performance, but nothing alarming, no? Funny: not much betetr than APG-73. We'll see if APG-81 can do better, but that will still be a long wait.

[GGTharos]

That funny part is the wrong part. People complain about the F-35 being over-priced, yet the APG-79 is not delivering. There's a problem there given that AESA radars are widely reported to be a significant upgrade over MSAs.

[tflash]

I'm not so sure other fighter AESA sets are "delivering": the AESA's on F-15 are also provided by Raytheon, with many parts in common. Don't forget the SH and Growler are operational with these kits, no one has called retrofit or whatever, not even these reports. They just keep up the validation work.

I would say that this maturation problem highlights the long road ahead for F-35: ther is no reason to believe APG-81 will work from the start as expected, quite on the contrary. It's the delay that plays in favour of SH, nothing else.

[GGTharos]

I'm not so sure other fighter AESA sets are "delivering": the AESA's on F-15 are also provided by Raytheon, with many parts in common.

 

F-18C'a and F-18E's have 'many parts in common', too, in theory :)

 

I would say that this maturation problem highlights the long road ahead for F-35: ther is no reason to believe APG-81 will work from the start as expected, quite on the contrary. It's the delay that plays in favour of SH, nothing else.

 

There's nothing out there that plays in the favour of SH, unless you're not the one flying the plane :)

[Isegrim]

If that's the video I think it is, it's hard to take seriously.

 

Yes it is this video, and its only part 1 of 6 (isnt it visible for you?)

 

And i dont know....maybe we can take it serious ...maybe not ....I dont know.

 

I like this Plane really!!!! More than the 22 ,which is IN MY EYES a little bit Close to a Fail especially against the Typhoon in Close air Combat.

 

When i was younger i did always think "YEAH THOSE US GUYS CAN BUILD PLANES!!!!"

 

Today i think "With sometimes restrictions that doesnt make their planes that good as suspected "

[Phantom88]

Lockheed Martin is hosting a Webinar on April 30th to promote The F-35 to Canada,Anyone can tune in but you need to pre-register.

 

https://event.on24.com/eventRegistration/EventLobbyServlet?target=registration.jsp&key=7126662B4532D1B55D61ACD48211259F&eventid=606258&sessionid=1&

[Phantom88]

F-35 Cost per hour

http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a6345dff9-c4c4-4298-b842-a4c806bdbc38

[Phantom88]

Just a Bump to see if anyone is interested in the F-35 Webinar tomorrow,You need to register beforehand,

Info in link above.

[Invader ZIM]

Did you get to see it Phantom88?

[Phantom88]

Yes,The test Pilot was Really trying to sell the PW F135,According to him,It's the best platform he's ever flown.

 

I was hoping for some info on F-35C version but since Canada won't be ordering these they never came up.

[tflash]

Nice article on F-35 capabilities: http://thediplomat.com/2013/04/25/game-changer-the-f-35-and-the-pacific/

[HiJack]

Nice article on F-35 capabilities: http://thediplomat.com/2013/04/25/game-changer-the-f-35-and-the-pacific/

 

Nice read.

"Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAMs) operate in half or less of the space which each F-35 can see beyond itself." :)

[topol-m]

[DiCE81]

F-35, botched job.

 

http://www.kpho.com/story/20640458/report-f-35-fuel-tanks-at-risk-of-explosion-in-storm

How to win a war , go to a storm :pilotfly:

[159th_Viper]

Sooooo......Dynamic weather is a no-no then :megalol:

[MTFDarkEagle]

Sooooo......Dynamic weather is a no-no then :megalol:

 

ROFL :lol: :thumbup: :joystick:

[Invader ZIM]

It will be patched in the next update. :megalol:

 

Seriously, fly over or around the thunderheads on your way to the target until then.

[NineLine]

[HiJack]

I would like to see how the missile launche handles from the bay in a high G turn.

[NineLine]

I would like to see how the missile launche handles from the bay in a high G turn.

 

Seeing as those are meant to be fired from some distance, would it be meant to deploy in a high g turn?

[HiJack]

Seeing as those are meant to be fired from some distance, would it be meant to deploy in a high g turn?

Most lightly not ;)

[GGTharos]

Given that it would be going in the correct direction to eject the missile from the bay, there doesn't seem to be a problem. AIM-9X goes on the wingtips though.

 

I would like to see how the missile launche handles from the bay in a high G turn.

[Brisse]

I would like to see how the missile launche handles from the bay in a high G turn.

 

F22 had trouble with that, did it not?

[NineLine]

I dont recall that, not that I follow everything written on the F-22 either, I really wonder if it would be that big of deal anyways, its still on a rack, even if it opens from the belly, you would think that you could still fire it off in a fairly high g turn....

 

F22 had trouble with that, did it not?