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.

 

Pilot says F35 CAN'T dogfight!

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:11 PM
link   
A pilot's review is tearing the F35 a new one...
medium.com...




posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
A pilot's review is tearing the F35 a new one...
medium.com...


Most expensive weapon at a trillion and it's not even versatile, tisk tisk. Wonder how much it will be to make a different version.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:20 PM
link   

edit on 29-6-2015 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:23 PM
link   
So an older, non-production standard goes up against one of the best dogfighters in the US inventory, at a range you're never likely to see, and had problems handling it, and this is a surprise because....

You know what else sucks in a dogfight? The F-15E.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Maybe if they stick a laser on it they will be OK...



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:24 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

You should at least get your numbers right. It's far below a trillion, and that amount was for something like a thousand total aircraft for 50 years.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

It hasn't been "a trillion bucks". The $1T was for 50 years for the entire fleet, and that's well down now and dropping.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Fair enough, so a trillion after all paid for promised commissioned aircraft? Maybe some improvements will be made, and if it did go up against our best... Being a high benchmark,and we have fifty years worth of commissioned F-35s, what if possible enemies take note and out perform in dogfighting?



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Honestly I've seen this story several times over the last couple years . I didn't even think the F 35 was designed to dogfight? I thought they were designed to blow the other guy up before he even knew they were there ?



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Zaphod58

Fair enough, so a trillion after all paid for promised commissioned aircraft? Maybe some improvements will be made, and if it did go up against our best... Being a high benchmark,and we have fifty years worth of commissioned F-35s, what if possible enemies take note and out perform in dogfighting?


We send in the f-22s.

End of dogfight.
edit on 29-6-2015 by johnwick because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

It's not supposed to be an incredible dogfighter though. Like the Strike Eagle, it's a bomb truck with self defense capability. It's not going to be going in all by itself having to fight through waves of fighters.

If you look at the Strike Eagle, it's based on the greatest fighter ever built, and has gone into combat with enemy aircraft in the area. Know what the ONLY air to air kill ever achieved by any Strike Eagle was?

An Iraqi helicopter that they dropped a laser guided bomb on while it was about to land.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

That's exactly what it's supposed to do, if it even engages in A2A combat.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

I am of the understanding, that the F-35 was designed in order to give the pilot the ability to choose his theatre of battle, and pound targets without them ever having picked the F-35 up on any of their equipment. I very much doubt that the test was actually designed to include the preamble to the dogfight. Simply put, if the F-35 had been in a scenario which included the ENTIRE preamble, its pilot should have been able to control the scenario to the point of the dogfight never having happened at all.

It IS important that the thing performs as it was designed to, but it is not necessary for it to do things that it was not designed to do.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   
I'll be the first to admit, I'm not a fan of the F35. Too much money for an aircraft that is trying to be too many things to too many missions.

But it was never meant to be a dog fighter. That's the F22's job.

MHO, of course.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

This is the one time I wish they'd release at least some of the classified information on what it can do.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:53 PM
link   
The A-10 sucks in air-to-air engagements too, but it's a hell of a machine when it's doing its actual mission.

That's what top cover is for.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58




An Iraqi helicopter that they dropped a laser guided bomb on while it was about to land.


That must have sucked knowing you were almost back down and you get hit with a laser guided bomb...



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Nah, they'll just keep letting people think it sucks until it gets time to cut its teeth on a real enemy.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

It was a great shot though. I saw the video. Put it right through the rotor hub.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:04 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

but but...it can do many things on many different missions.

I went to see them at Lemoore when they came in and they are pretty awesome. Not allowed to glimpse the cockpit and much was off limits for discussion but the pilots I met were giddy over the birds.




top topics



 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join