Latest on the F-35

[M61A1]

Not making any claims about the F35 here, but to say that you got your "reputable" information from the ABC, is somewhat of an oxymoron.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

this has all been covered in this thread

 

http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/cant-turn-cant-climb-cant-run-f35-problems.136239/

 

the Australian senate inquiry had a retired F35 pilot give his opinion on the plane

 

 

[M61A1]

Same old crap every time we get a new airframe. Someone didn't get the one they wanted, so they tell the world how much it sucks. They rubbished the F111 when we got them, then didn't want to get rid of them. The didn't want Blackhawks because the didn't look like Hueys, now they don't want MRH because it's not a Blackhawk. The Tiger can do much more than the Huey ever could (combat wise), yet they bitch about 'Fumes", of which the Huey had lots.

 

We won't know hat we've got until we get it. If it's good, they're not going to tell you, because they want to keep it performance a secret, if it's crap they won't want you to know about it anyway.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

F35 is a great money spinner for LM, in the defense industry that's all that matters. The more expensive the platform, the harder it is to kill off.

 

 

[M61A1]

Can't complain about expensive when you gave the manufacturer the list of features you want. Doing stuff to a govt/military standard is bloody expensive.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Not making any claims about the F35 here, but to say that you got your "reputable" information from the ABC, is somewhat of an oxymoron.

It's only an oxymoron if you lean so far right that unbiased looks like left wing.

[fly_tornado]

Can't complain about expensive when you gave the manufacturer the list of features you want. Doing stuff to a govt/military standard is bloody expensive.

When Howard signed up, weren't they offered at $29M a pop?

I always thought it was the other way around with the milspec, you offer to build the basic package cheaply, based on modelling, then offer to make it work for a premium, based on testing?

 

 

[M61A1]

It's only an oxymoron if you lean so far right that unbiased looks like left wing.

While I agree I am biased slightly to the right (based on internet testing , which couldn't possibly be wrong), the ABC is VERY left. Balanced reporting to them means saying a little bit on a range of subjects, and very little about a balanced viewpoint. (blatantly obvious when you listen to the content of their news and reporting). Not that commercial stuff is much better, they are just held a bit more accountable.

[fly_tornado]

I think you need to check your bore water

 

 

[M61A1]

Yes, heard someone on about it on the ABC radio this morning. I'd love them to research further and see just what chemicals farmers have been putting in the ground water for years.

 

Sorry... I forgot that only Twitter has the only stuff worth noting.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

With the US's track record post WW2 with chemicals, I can safely say that you have nothing to worry about

 

 

[mnewbery]

This thread is about the F-35, fanboi

 

 

[Cloud Basher]

All that may be true but the airframe IS a compromise. You can't design one airframe to be either conventional or VTOL and expect it to have the same performance as one that is designed for one of those."Sensor, communications, intelligence, surveillance, weapons delivery platform" are all things that can be retrofitted to existing airframes, or at least designed into a new aircraft that has similar or better performance to existing aircraft. I wouldn't be brushing off the fact that this thing can have it's butt kicked in a dog fight. As per discussion on the other thread, once you've fired off all your million-dollar smart missiles and the remaining fighter is still coming at you, what point is all the technology if you can't win the dog fight?

Sorry Marty but ALL aircraft design is a compromise. I do agree that there are more compromises because it is one baseline fuselage with three designs. But your statement that "you can't design one airframe... And expect it to have the same performance..." Is based on 80's thinking and knowledge of airframe design.

You statement about retrofitting an existing airframe for the stuff I mentioned is categorically incorrect. Individual sensors can certainly be retrofitted, multiple sensors can be retrofitted, but they would never achieve what the JSF does in terms of fusion of all of these capabilities within a stealth airframe.

 

You seem hung up on one tiny portion of the operating envelope this aircraft is operating in. Do you not think that some smart people with much more knowledge of the operating requirements than you and I made the best possible compromises to achieve the best possible capabilities - as I said - some of which we are only now starting to understand what this thing is capable of.

 

And to say "once you have fired your smart missiles and the bad guy is still coming" shows little to no understanding of the networked and fully linked battlespace these aircraft will operate in.

 

I was hoping for an intelligent and cogent reply rather than simply using throw away lines to try and form an argument. Not necessarily your fault as you are simply regurgitating what the ABC and other media says and it is your only source of information. But I ask that you maintain a somewhat more open mind. Interestingly the aircraft has evolved, massively since the "ex-JSF test pilot" flew the aircraft and it was a dog. I do agree with him that initially it did not live up to its performance requirements. But the changes made now continue to add to the performance and capability. The aircraft he flew is not the JSF we have today and won't be the JSF we get delivered.

 

Anyway we can go backwards and forwards until our fingers bleed from typing but in the end it matters nought what you and I think, only what our war fighters can get out of it and how it links in with our modernized, fully linked and networked military capabilities.

 

Let me ask you this. Other than the C17, show me one major acquisition project in any arm of the Defence Force that has not had its naysayers and public floggings? In the end all these platforms have delivered the capability we wanted or more and the naysayers die off and look for the next horse to flog.

 

Cheers

 

CB

 

 

[mnewbery]

Current JSF test pilot Alan Norman is on the record noting that this year the controllability of all variants of the F-35 at 40 degrees angle of attack was validated. Because this is fly by wire any edge of envelope stuff needs to be validated and possibly the flight model tweaked to allow a wider protected envelope, or not. The model also needs to take into account things like current all up weight, centre of mass, current pressure altitude etc. The tests aren't simple and there are lots of tests. Once the new model is loaded into the auto flight control system, verification of the changes commences. Then they repeat for 45 degrees angle of attack and beyond until the instrumented test aircraft does something they don't want, like enter a spin or have the wings snap off.

 

Get it wrong and you will have your Brewster Buffalo. Get it right and the airframe will go to the edge of its envelopes safely and consistently. In summary the test pilots still don't know how far they can go and they won't know for quite a while ... Because they are doing their jobs properly without listening to "the noise".

 

On the software side, ALIS doesn't make the F-35 fly, it allows maintainers to provision, maintain and repair individual aircraft in an economical and timely way. It's a shame people are associating this issue with tactical abilities.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Consider the F35 like windows and cruise missile/drone technology like IOS and Android. Windows does everything but never does every at the same time properly, its just continuous cycle of patch, bugs appearing and repatching. Where as single use and single function devices evolve much quicker due to a narrower set of functions required to be considered a success. Once upon a time, DOS was narrowly focussed operating system installed off 3X 1.44M disks versus now and Windows 10 install is now up to 3,000,000,000M. Development of the airframe is straightforward, the software is a lot harder due to the complexity.

 

 

[mnewbery]

Can't teach judgement to a mobile phone

 

 

[fly_tornado]

You should see how high frequency trading has changed how stock markets function. Good code wins the day

 

 

[mnewbery]

I think F_W's mobile phone just pocket dialled his ill informed and off topic opinion again. Judgement. Possibly also situational awareness.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

The chinese managed to copy the F35 and improve it buy hacking LM and the pentagon's servers. The Chinese saved themselves millions of hours of design, coding and testing because the Americans don't get the nature of how conflict has evolved.

 

 

[mnewbery]

The pentagon hack occurred in 2013. Both Lockheed Martin and Boeing were hacked numerous times between 2009 and 2013.

 

The Chinese on the other hand, had nothing worth hacking or stealing because the Chinese ALREADY KNEW the Americans had successfully gone and had a look. They admitted to this when the Pentagon accused the Chinese of being behind the 2013 attack.

 

The Americans lost an F-117A over Serbia in March or April 1999. The aircraft appears to have stopped inverted but nearly intact. This gave the Russians a fairly good primer on where the Lockheed Martin state of the stealthy arts was, at the time. Then (some claim) the Chinese got hold of that data from the

 

Russians. Why steal when it falls out of the sky on you?

 

Conflict has evolved and in this case the US spies got in first, found nothing and wandered off. How does this show the Americans don't understand the evolved nature of conflict? All would agree having the design of the newest combat aircraft fall into the wrong hands is an own goal of sorts. This is not without historical president and not to be down-played.

 

Still the Americans and their allies persist in creating and buying stealthy, manned multi role aircraft which are not purely air to air or purely ground combat support. This is done specifically because the war of the future is not known, judgement and situational awareness are valuable plus cyber space is only one of a number of environments that America and its allies seek to dominate.

 

Seriously, how does this show the Americans don't understand the evolved nature of conflict? This time please don't let the mobile phone pocket dial the answer. Actually think before replying.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

The chinese are entering the arms market with a prestige product that matches the american product in a fraction of the time and cost. That's winning, the J-31, J-20 and J-XX will end up costing the americans and Europeans billions in lost sales.

 

 

[kgwilson]

Apart from all that the F35 is now some 9 years late, the cost has blown out by close to 200 billion to somewhere in the order of a trillion for the whole project. Even the helmet costs 3/4 of a million. These are insane costs for something that is not even fully proven yet. You may have faith in the product but how can the cost be justified? Just like the submarines none are ever likely to see combat so it is all a colossal waste of money which would be far better spent elsewhere. I thought we didn't see reds under the bed any more. If we had any sense we'd join Canada & pull out even if the decision is not yet final.

 

 

[mnewbery]

Like the SU-35 which will be ready for export by the early 2020s? The same one that is so complex it requires two people to fly it in combat?

 

Who are buying the Chinese aircraft and when? How many aircraft and who are they fighting against? Or possibly if the Chinese aircraft are so cheap these nations would buy Chinese where previously they could not afford any aircraft? Who will train the maintainers? Who will train the pilots?

 

*cough* Hint: Comac C919

 

 

[mnewbery]

When talking about cancelling the F-35 it makes sense to specify what else to buy, even if it's nothing. What is one currently available viable alternative to the F-35?

 

 

[Kiwi303]

Gripen