It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pentagon Grounds F-35 Fleet After Runway Fire

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: FraternitasSaturni

That's because most of the people saying it have no idea what they're talking about. There are technologies on it that are desperately needed.




posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: FraternitasSaturni

I have read the F35's Pratt Whitney engine was a political decision over the GE engine. I can't remember where that I read it but the OP was very critical on the selection of the P&W engine. All new planes have teething problems that nearly cancelled their production like the P51, F4 and F14.



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: buddah6

Something caused the engine to come apart on the takeoff run. Probably a manufacturing issue, but FOD is definitely on the list.



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: buddah6

Something caused the engine to come apart on the takeoff run. Probably a manufacturing issue, but FOD is definitely on the list.

Aliensun mentioned FOD and you had written that the failure was in the aft portion of the engine. I was just pointing out the ingestion of FOD usually goes through the compressor before the turbine section. The compressor would have failed not the aft part of the engine.

It's my best guess, that since the F35 was in afterburner while in take off mode it maybe a good place to start your investigation. If any of the AB plumbing would fail it could generate an explosion and fire. One thing that is for sure is the pilot did a good job keeping it on the runway. I'm absolutely sure his pucker-factor was off the chart.



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
I have heard some sober reasoning why these planes are not what would serve our (Canadas) best interest .Cost and maintenance being only just one .So far they they seem to have issues and really haven't been worked as hard as they may be required to in the future .They have only been shadow boxing up until now .What happens if and when they really need to out perform the other guys chops ?


The Canadian version of the F35 is a bad joke.

It's a cut rate version that can't do what the US version can do.

It would be the equivalent of buying Harrier's, but without the vertical take-off or landing capability.

Totally idiotic to purchase a plane whose level flight characteristics are severely compromised for VTOL, but WITHOUT the lifting fan.

The latest Russian and even Chinese fighters will fly circles around it.

Harper's decision clearly indicates his subservience to the American MIC and the corruption in our government.



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: buddah6

Oh, I'll almost guarantee that it was a manufacturing defect in a blade, and it let go under the pressure of take off power. But FOD can't be conclusively ruled out yet. It may have been a compressor blade that came apart and went down the engine causing more damage.

Personally my money is on a faulty turbine blade from when the engine was built though, with this being a recently built example.



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 11:32 AM
link   
The F35 is the Edsel of fighters jets it's a lemon. Hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollar has been wasted on this jet it's just one problem after another.
F-35 fighters plagued with delays, cost overruns, federal report says



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 12:30 PM
link   
Maybe you should retrofit a proper engine to that F-35 lemon of yours?

May I suggest the Saturn AL-31f:



It doubt the AL-41f1 is for sale:



Oh, wait! Those are Russian engines...




posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 12:31 PM
link   
From Busters link:

Initially, the planes were also expected to be operational by 2012. The program has also seen cost overruns. In inflation-adjusted dollars, the cost of F-35 development has risen from an estimated $306 billion in 2001 to an estimated $390 billion now.

And while the cost increased, the military also reduced the requirements for the planes, accepting longer takeoff distances and a reduced combat radius (the furthest point that the plane can effectively go to and patrol.)

Given that, some security experts said the latest software-based delays did not surprise them.

“These are nothing new. This aircraft has been in trouble both with cost and performance since the start,” Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies told FoxNews.com.


Yikes..patch work project.
edit on 4-7-2014 by Tucket because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: buster2010

Agreed theres only one thing it does well and that is making a motza for Lockheed Martin



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
I have heard some sober reasoning why these planes are not what would serve our (Canadas) best interest .Cost and maintenance being only just one .So far they they seem to have issues and really haven't been worked as hard as they may be required to in the future .They have only been shadow boxing up until now .What happens if and when they really need to out perform the other guys chops ?


The Canadian version of the F35 is a bad joke.

It's a cut rate version that can't do what the US version can do.

It would be the equivalent of buying Harrier's, but without the vertical take-off or landing capability.

Totally idiotic to purchase a plane whose level flight characteristics are severely compromised for VTOL, but WITHOUT the lifting fan.

The latest Russian and even Chinese fighters will fly circles around it.

Harper's decision clearly indicates his subservience to the American MIC and the corruption in our government.


Where did you get the data that says the Chinese or Russian planes can out flying the F35? Have you flown ACM against these aircraft? Can you provide some data that can used in comparison between these fighters?



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 12:43 PM
link   



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: buddah6

Oh, I'll almost guarantee that it was a manufacturing defect in a blade, and it let go under the pressure of take off power. But FOD can't be conclusively ruled out yet. It may have been a compressor blade that came apart and went down the engine causing more damage.

Personally my money is on a faulty turbine blade from when the engine was built though, with this being a recently built example.


My accident was a compressor disk failure which was uncontained. It shot hot metal through the cowling into the fuselage...I was lucky to get it to the ground! Things get real ugly when the engine comes apart.



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Chiftel

Yeah, let's put Russian engines on it. Considering that I had a Russian pilot telling me about how they would sit for two minutes at the end of the runway at full power, and brakes on. If they didn't have an engine failure in that time, they took off.



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: buddah6

The video I posted was for you it makes the comparisons you were asking for



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: buddah6

Yeah, it's always a big mess when that happens. One of the only times we had a -135 come back with an actual fire, after a fire warning light, the hydraulic pump had come apart, and fluid hit the outside of the combustion chamber and ignited.



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: khnum

Based on simulations, using public, and manufacturer data for all platforms. The F-35 isn't even close to being ready to start testing its WVR capabilities or doing DACM.

It's funny that the same people saying this about the F-35, praise the F-18 WVR capabilities, when it suffers the exact same problems they bring up about the F-35.
edit on 7/4/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

This guy designed the F16 and A10 heres his analysis of the F35




posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: khnum

That's almost funnier. He wants them to cancel the F-35 and buy more F-16s. If he had his way, the Air Force would only fly F-16s. He's convinced that it's the best plane to ever fly.

The F-35 isn't going to be a great fighter, there's no way around that. But, and this is a big one, it's absolutely necessary. It will be able to do things nothing else in the inventory, even the F-22 can do, using equipment that can't be refitted onto older platforms. If they were to cancel it now, it would set the Air Force back at least 10 years, probably more. Some of what's on the F-35 can be put into UAVs, but not all of it. It's an absolutely necessary platform.
edit on 7/4/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 01:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: buddah6

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
I have heard some sober reasoning why these planes are not what would serve our (Canadas) best interest .Cost and maintenance being only just one .So far they they seem to have issues and really haven't been worked as hard as they may be required to in the future .They have only been shadow boxing up until now .What happens if and when they really need to out perform the other guys chops ?


The Canadian version of the F35 is a bad joke.

It's a cut rate version that can't do what the US version can do.

It would be the equivalent of buying Harrier's, but without the vertical take-off or landing capability.

Totally idiotic to purchase a plane whose level flight characteristics are severely compromised for VTOL, but WITHOUT the lifting fan.

The latest Russian and even Chinese fighters will fly circles around it.

Harper's decision clearly indicates his subservience to the American MIC and the corruption in our government.


Where did you get the data that says the Chinese or Russian planes can out flying the F35? Have you flown ACM against these aircraft? Can you provide some data that can used in comparison between these fighters?


Thanks to Khnum for posting the vids.

Buddha, designing a plane for multi purpose roles is a compromise. Neither the Sukhoi or Chengdu need to sacrifice air-superiority for vertical take-off.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join