Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Pentagon Grounds F-35 Fleet After Runway Fire

page: 9
7
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Matt1951
a reply to: C0bzz


Stealth - JSF not stealthy from the rear, or when carrying external weapons. Even the ancient Mig 21 will shoot down the JSF chasing from the rear as JSF returns to ship. New radars detect stealth.



No they cant..and its still stealthy, just not as stealthy from the rear as an F-22. It's over 10 times stealthier than the F-117.


Cost - Was supposed to be a low cost bomb truck, now the cost of the still non-functional JSF is rivaling the F-22.



see my post above on cost...not even close when the JSF line is in full swing


Can't supercruise



They may say this but Im pretty sure it can
I know for a fact the x-35 supercruised.




30 million lines (60 minutes) of software code. Years to go if this is every sorted out.


cant argue that. however when they get all the code done, no jet in the world will be as advanced as the F-35




posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 06:19 PM
link   
I've seen some diagrams which say the F-35 can carry atleast 4 AIM-120 AMRAAMs internally, which doesn't sound too bad.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: JimTSpock

According to this the C model in full air to air load out can carry 8 AMRAAM's and 4 AIM-9's Internally.



edit on 8-7-2014 by Sammamishman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

Check this out. A Lockheed Martin missile concept the CUDA BVR AAM. The F-22 and F-35 could carry up to 12 missiles internally and they can be launched 360 degrees around the jet even behind it, although I assume the range would be reduced a bit in that case. With 12 internal BVR AAMs it would be a bit of a psycho. That is a lot of weapons.

theaviationist.com...

www.scribd.com...



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: JimTSpock

I've always wondered why they never had rear-facing missiles on A2A dogfighting planes.

Even the USS Enterprise had aft torpedo launchers.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
So much for the UK trip. Stupid, it's a one off engine failure. It happens.


don't they always do this for a brief time until they can find out what happened, so it doesn't end up killing someone in the future?



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

There are aerodynamic issues involved with rear facing missiles, as well as most western aircraft not being able to see behind them. The newer missiles can be fired at targets behind them in an over the shoulder shot, but it has to be launched forward first.
edit on 7/8/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Well, maybe when they start putting lasers on planes they can have aft laser banks?



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Lasers like Guardian will be turret mounted with 360 degree coverage. Some will be directional, others will have total coverage.



posted on Jul, 8 2014 @ 08:17 PM
link   
The fire cause has been narrowed down to the engine, and reports are that it may be more serious than originally thought.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 12:41 AM
link   

While no one is predicting any drastic changes to the program, defense and congressional sources said the F-35's current engine problems could lead to a revival of the battle over whether General Electric and Rolls Royce should build a second engine for the plane.


www.foreignpolicy.com... utm_campaign=buffer
edit on 9-7-2014 by solidshot because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 05:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

www.hatch.senate.gov...
This source says $44k per hour.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 05:53 AM
link   
a reply to: boomer135

Slow top speed, slow acceleration, can't run away. Depends on other fighters for protection. JSF cheerleaders need to stop fantasizing. Can't be detected from behind? Can you share what you are smoking, it sounds pretty good.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 06:05 AM
link   
a reply to: boomer135

F-22 is being upgraded.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Other countries besides the US may not have other fighters in the area. Stealth is for x band radar, not really for infrared sensors. How is the JSF stealthy from behind?
JSF has put us in a hole. We have to stop digging. Any time you say legacy aircraft are no better than JSF in a given area, it also says JSF is no better than a legacy aircraft. We don't have good options because we put all our eggs in one basket.
As far as stealth outpacing counter-stealth, there are articles stating otherwise.
Do you feel US cannot detect stealth aircraft? Why do you feel that way?



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Matt1951

It won't be official until they're flying operational type missions, but it's still a lot cheaper than the F-22.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 06:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Matt1951

Since when do the media and people talking know everything there is to know? You can say it all you want but the reality is far different.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 06:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Matt1951

You just largely described the F-18.

Stealth moved beyond X-band years ago.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 12:53 PM
link   
The Marines want to put the NGJ in the F-35B. Since the Navy plans on upgrading and replacing the ALQ-99 in the Growlers with the NGJ, I'm having a hard time reading a Boeing advertisement as truthful. Can you expand on your thought using actual data points and not a Boeing hit piece that says its "better" I'd appreciate it. Better=cheaper? Better=uses less power? Better=less space/weight?



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 03:48 PM
link   
www.jsfnieuws.nl...
"Selex asserts that its IRST technology—also used on Typhoon—has detected and tracked stealth aircraft and can do so at tactically useful ranges. The Raven radar will be the first operational AESA to use a “repositioner”—a rotating mount for the canted array, which provides a wider field of regard than a fixed AESA. The jamming system—which is regarded as a major technological advance and will not be fully installed before 2023—will be able to generate high-powered, agile jamming beams over a wide spectrum. (…..)"

Gripen E costs around $5000 per hour (less than the F16 cost of around $7500 per hour). And then we have JSF at $32000 per hour.

Back to shooting down a JSF from the rear, My understanding of the JSF exhaust system, was that to reduce cost it does not contain infrared as well as the F-22.

And with the Selex technology, what good is the JSF?
edit on 9-7-2014 by Matt1951 because: (no reason given)
edit on 9-7-2014 by Matt1951 because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join