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?

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

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.

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

Can't teach judgement to a mobile phone

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.

This thread is about the F-35, fanboi

ERSA says Hervey Bay is a certified aerodrome operating on a common terminal area frequency. Not a towered aerodrome. https://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/pending/ersa/FAC_YHBA_26-May-2016.pdf Bundaberg visual navigation chart (VNC) says controlled airspace steps start at Gladstone on the way to Rockhampton or south towards Sunshine Coast. It also shows the airfields for places like Maryborough, Cooloola Cove, Rainbow Beach and a bunch of other places people south of the Tweed would love to be able to day trip. None of these require much beyond a phone call to let them know you are coming and check to see if the runway is serviceable (and the ability to land there safely)

All F-35 pilots interviewed either converted from Hornet or Raptor or they went straight out of training to the F-35. Unanimously and happily for them it was a one way street and they are looking at going to retirement having flown the F-35 last. USAF have admitted recently they will struggle to get anyone to fly the Raptor if the F-35 is a choice. Are the pilots lying or do they know something the rest of us don't (like Prince Charles will never be King and this baby ain't going into combat). Also for those fanbois of the Eastern Bloc product (I'm lookin' at you F_W) have a listen to the Aviation Xtended podcast on Eastern bloc aircraft and reply here as to why the SU-35 is still "best".

Sadly but simply it is about the right plane for the mission. If you have a mission then you can say what plane you need. There is an old saying that goes "one fast, one slow, one upside down". These are the only three planes anyone needs. Mostly the ministry for war and finance only allows for one so the pilot needs to decide which is the most important. So for example if it was just you going long distances, maybe an RV-10, Mooney or Beech Debonair. These are quite a bit faster than a J-230 which is why even 40 years later a Beech costs what it does. Having a newer Beech in the high $300s doesn't hurt the maths either. Mooney is well supported but went out of production for s while. RV-10 is a builders plane. These are not endorsements of any make or model. Upside down planes do best when stored in hangars and like to eat money. That leaves the sight seeing or training plane. Genuine retro (cub, champ, C150 and other cessnas, Cherokee etc) newer or plastic (J160, Super cub, sportstar, zephyr, new warrior etc). These are not endorsements of any make or model. Is flying into controlled airspace a consideration? What are you going to do FIRST? If it's touring around there are plenty of places that cater for flying visitors and the local hotel will often send someone to collect you if they know you are coming. You just need to ask.

Two men who really like each others company

Meanwhile in Canberra an 80 km/h gust was recorded at 13:30. Goulburn is averaging 60 km/h gusting well into the 80's from the west which isn't desirable given the topography there

TonyM PM Me. I may have a slot for you

Stanny cam for weather... http://www.warrenwindsports.com.au/webcam

Erecrik fool pump also suck out right tank and blow in left tank. Please for you being to suck from left tank only, when fool. Also something in the manual about weels.

...or what the gascolator is there for?

You answered your own question. The airframe and engine combination was designed from the start as a mogas aircraft. I'm calling thread drift on this one. Do you know where the electric pump is and why it needs to be on during climb?

Can I have a reference to a motor gasoline that has a lower vapour pressure than 40-50 kPa at room temperature? If Aviation petrol isn't prone to holding a static charge THEN WHY is the additive described by ASTM D7547 used? Maybe I am a total tosser who can't read a fuel specification or motor gas STC for a low wing plane.

And for the record fuel differences WAS covered in my BAK theory

http://www.autofuelstc.com/piper_airplanes.phtml Challenge accepted

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vapor_lock

So why can't I run car gas on a low wing plane without bigger lines and a stronger electric pump?

Answer 2 Car gas has some polarity (like salty water) so it can carry a current as a liquid. Aviation petrol and kerosine is non-polar as a side effect of its other qualities. This also makes it less likely to mix with water, like cooking oil. Car gas has a higher vapour pressure but petrol needs about 14 grams of air per gram of petrol to be explosive. In a car gas tank, the vapour is much more petrol than what is required to be explosive and any static charge will generally not result in an explosion because the right place for the spark to cause an explosion isn't near the filler neck. More likely the spark will be "wet" which means the static charge will leak into the vapour like on a cold humid day. Occasionally people use plastic jerry cans and fill them without putting them on the ground. Empty plastic container not earthed the same as the pump plus hot dry day equals boom. But it's uncommon. Tell that to the people who have lost cars from dragging their nylon covered arses off their microfibre seat covers before a bit of self serve action. Aviation petrol/kerosine WILL carry their own static charge. This means bigger sparks more often without grounding and in the case of a Piper Lance room for 170 litres of air mixed with petrol fumes per side. Cruelly, the right mixture for an explosion is often very near the filler cap for the average bug smasher. Should I earth the petrol station filler on the car first? Touching the pump nozzle and a metal part of the car at the same time before opening the tank or dispensing petrol is enough. Even the plastic bits of the filler nozzle are weakly conductive. Plastic petrol containers need to go on the ground preferably away from the vehicle so if anything bad happens, you can drive a safe distance away. Same with planes. Brakes off for refuelling if you can push/pull it. If the plane does catch fire it needs to get moved away from the rest of the petrol.

Not BAK questions but here goes anyway. Answer 1: Car engines aren't aero engines, is the short answer. The aero engine redline is for the combination of the engine AND propellor. At redline, it is expected that the correct propellor will be transonic at the tip and therefore not as effective. Also this is 1950's technology so aero engines fitted with vacuum pumps for gyros and other vacuum instruments will overheat their vacuum pumps, killing the pumps sooner than expected. Acro pilots with acro planes regularly get well over their manufacturer redline but the TBO time is much lower, about 10% of the original in some cases. The prop is a big gyroscope at the end of the crank so imagine the forces transmitted through a crankshaft to everything attached as the prop bends it. Also a plane engine going 100 knots for 100 hours covers over 18,000 kms. Try driving that fast in your car and see how long the engine lasts. Better still, don't. It will be better for everyone.

http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/wings-over-illawarra-2016.147550/#post-551631 Plane went U/S during the week. Not driving either. Know of a plane parking place that won't get used now. I am expecting rain on Saturday and ground fog on Sunday morning for Canberra. Apologies to anyone who gets caught up in that weather. Yes it should be a good weekend. However rain is forecast for both days at Woolongong. After being stuck in a traffic jam at Canberra airport for over two hours (and literally walking distance from the carpark for all of that time) I am definitely not driving.