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: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: AlphaPred

Yep, and people a lot more knowledgeable about it have told me other things that have proven to be true.




posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: howmuch4another

I'm doing a lot of reading this afternoon...
.

My initial impression is, I may be wrong... From the sounds of it, the problems are bugs that any new technology is going to encounter.

Even Al-Jezzera (sp?) can't make it sound totally useless. ...since it's not operational yet, they've got time to iron 'em out.

Still reading... Only a couple of dozen articles to go...*sigh*.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

the big complaint on the Wasp is the sheer noise and the need to upgrade ear protection



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

The last 4 B models needed for IOC are to be delivered today or tomorrow. They have an upcoming ORI that if they pass, it will be certified and the first to achieve IOC.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: howmuch4another

If that ends up being the only complaint, they've got their monies worth...

Startin' to admit I might be wrong in my initial impressions... The pilot interviews I'm reading are pretty much glowing.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

to be fair to the OP though I bet they suck at dogfighting



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

What's impressive is when they start talking about vertical landing compared to the Harrier.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:56 PM
link   
That's incredibly confident considering the wide audiences and lack of knowledge of posters backgrounds
Would an armourers testament do?
How's about a program developer?
A test pilots spouse ?
An FAC who's been on the project 3 years?
Or someone standing to make a lot of money?
a reply to: Zaphod58


edit on 29/6/2015 by AlphaPred because: Coz I like it

edit on 29/6/2015 by AlphaPred because: Bloody auto correct



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: howmuch4another

Even I admitted it wasn't supposed to be a dogfighter.

That is, after all, what the Raptor is for. ...and there's little doubt that that particular little airplane can dogfight.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: AlphaPred

The people I'm talking about don't stand to make a dime on it. Some are on the pointy end, some are in planning and know everything about it.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: AlphaPred

I'm as critical as anyone of the program... But the pilots seem to like it. ...and all the descriptions of the bugs sound like rather typical bugs that will iron out with time and experience.

All weapon systems go through 'em.

Some get fixed. Some don't. Time will tell.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: AlphaPred

To be completely honest here, the V-22 Osprey was dogged as hard as any platform has been since ground forces transitioned from the M-14 to the M-16.

And now it's having a dramatic impact on the way the Marine Corps envisions and conducts amphibious warfare, training, disaster relief, rescue, etc.

I, for one, am not willing to junk the whole program already.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

I don't think the Marines could even envision doing without the Osprey now...

It's a quantum elevation in their capabilities.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 05:17 PM
link   
I agree to a certain extent with all of you
Let me put it this way
The m16 sucked donkeys after years of old schoolers throwing the thing in the bin and multiple issues they finally put their hands up and made the a2
A2 as "good" as it is it is still not fit for what it was originally designed for
Certainly not for Taliban at 250 on smack
The f35 I fear is destined to be the same
One day they'll get it all to work I'm sure, but not as advertised and no time soon
Hell remember the days when aircraft wasn't rolled out for all to see, and was developed in the quiet and even went operational before we got to see them

Not this very public PR stunt to demonstrate US air superiority that has dragged on and on
I've come to think of it like usafpr
I still have friends asking me " do they really have those jet powered drones like in the movies"
And let's not forget the FULLY operational f35 in die hard " wow they must be cool to call in"
I dont think there was more than 2 even flying at the time

Yeah the osprey was dogged with problems, a still has a few but inventive loadies and a few plasticuff/bungee fixes are on top of it
still the strangest sensation in the air, you'd expect it to feel like a heli, but it's not quite
edit on 29/6/2015 by AlphaPred because: Added



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Well this cannot be good news for us Canucks, Canada has ordered a fleet of these F35' to replace our current fleet of Hornets.
So I understand that if and when we take delivery of the new fighters the old ones will be DE-commissioned after the fact.
The problem is that Canada needs interceptors and dog fighters not stealth fighters that cannot out maneuver an invading jet in our territory.

We are not capable of bombing anyone, with the huge amount of our Landscape its basically impossible to just protect our own country let alone bombing the crap out of other Countries. We got sucked into going to Afghanistan and we had to rent German tanks and pay to have them flown in to the war theater. What I am trying to say is we don't "have a pot to piss in" and yet we are buying these jets that are useless for our needs in Canada.

Interesting thread and no insults intended in my post, I posted from the top left "Heart".

Regards, Iwinder



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Iwinder

In its defense, it is stealthy... If the bad guys don't see it coming, it doesn't really need to maneuver. BVR combat.

Oh, look at that... Pretending I actually know what the Hell I'm talkin' about...
.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Iwinder

The Canadian order was canceled and will have a new competition.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlphaPred

Hell remember the days when aircraft wasn't rolled out for all to see, and was developed in the quiet and even went operational before we got to see them

Not this very public PR stunt to demonstrate US air superiority that has dragged on and on
I've come to think of it like usafpr


Just to address this specific issue. You are right but they put it out there by design to market it to NATO. A Joint Strike Fighter would be top of the food chain in the STANAG arena and a boon to whomever ended up with the contract so they marketed the thing before, during and after the DoD procured it. I had the same bad taste in my mouth early on because of this exact point you make.



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: seagull

A year or year and a half ago I was screaming for this thing to go away, and do it as fast as possible. I hated the thing. Now? I've had my eyes watered with what it can do.


What is the one feature you think really sets it apart? You can be vague..



posted on Jun, 29 2015 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: MrMaybeNot

a reply to: seagull


you guys might like this thread by Boomer135 back at the beginning of the year. It was very informative.

www.abovetopsecret.com...




top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join