UK news F-35 fighter makers leap to its defence after it loses dogfight to 1970s jet

This was our envelop expansion aircraft DA-2.

It's painted black because we stuck hundreds of pressure sensor pads on it and it looked bloody ridiculous (but also gave away where the pads were) so the painted it all black, and what's that on its tail - an anti spin gantry



Sorry I can't embed on this stupid ipad, will correct later.

There is a picture of the F-22 one too.

So this is fitted because the aircraft was flying to the limits of its airframes capability and flight envelope. If the aircraft loses aerodynamics and goes into a spin (or gets a flameout) they deploy the chute from the gantry, it puts the aircraft in a dive, they have canisters of some proppelant in the system to relight the engines and DA2 comes home and the pilot has just had a truly amazing adrenaline Rush.

I worked on DA2 and we had delivered aircraft to the RAF when this was still flying, if they had put one of those RAF aircraft up against a Tornado it would have lost at the flight envelope it was able to do!

a reply to: crazyewok

Exactly, and that is a lesson from history that the U.S. and Britian would be wise to learn before it`s too late.

remember all that fancy high tech military equipment Germany invested in during WW II? well it all got wrecked by the much crappier lower tech equipment that the allies were using. How were the allies able to accomplish that?
simple, massive overwhelming numbers.
A tiger tank was a fearsome foe but it was no match when it was outnumbered by the crappier Sherman tanks.
The germans had bigger, better and faster everything but what they didn`t have was numbers.
An elephant is a big impressive animal but given enough time and enough ants, the ants can eat an entire elephant.

a reply to: Tardacus

And in WWII, they didn't have SAMs that could hit an aircraft at 80,000 feet. Or missiles that could hit an aircraft, before the aircraft even knew it was coming.

Your forgetting the Raf has also the Taranis UCAV which from what Ive heard is up there with the X47 in terms of capabilities.

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: crazyewok

Exactly, and that is a lesson from history that the U.S. and Britian would be wise to learn before it`s too late.

remember all that fancy high tech military equipment Germany invested in during WW II? well it all got wrecked by the much crappier lower tech equipment that the allies were using. How were the allies able to accomplish that?
simple, massive overwhelming numbers.
A tiger tank was a fearsome foe but it was no match when it was outnumbered by the crappier Sherman tanks.
The germans had bigger, better and faster everything but what they didn`t have was numbers.
An elephant is a big impressive animal but given enough time and enough ants, the ants can eat an entire elephant.

Whilst your elephant theory stands true, the problem Germany had was it had no allies and backed itself into a corner.

When NATO stands up it is just like the ants but these ants have laser beams and the enemies elephant is sick and hungry and has short legs.

originally posted by: Blackfinger
Your forgetting the Raf has also the Taranis UCAV which from what Ive heard is up there with the X47 in terms of capabilities.

No the tiara is is a concept demonstrator built by industry and government to offer the defence ministry solutions for the future.

Tarantis is likely to be one platform only.

The UK and France have been looking at some tim for a FOAS future offensive air system, likelihood is that if the future defence requirement is for an unmanned deep strike aircraft, then Taranis will have told the UK, we can do it, so you can consider it.

France have similar platforms and an Anglo-France alliance is a possibility.

Taranis has hawk under carriage, thyphhon fuel system and a host of other boxes, it's like the EAP of its time.

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: crazyewok

Exactly, and that is a lesson from history that the U.S. and Britian would be wise to learn before it`s too late.

remember all that fancy high tech military equipment Germany invested in during WW II? well it all got wrecked by the much crappier lower tech equipment that the allies were using. How were the allies able to accomplish that?
simple, massive overwhelming numbers.
A tiger tank was a fearsome foe but it was no match when it was outnumbered by the crappier Sherman tanks.
The germans had bigger, better and faster everything but what they didn`t have was numbers.
An elephant is a big impressive animal but given enough time and enough ants, the ants can eat an entire elephant.

WW2 was 70 years ago........Times have changed and nowadays 1 person put down a lot of hurt. Technology has changed everything including war.



Ray Kurzweil......Check him out and see what the future holds.

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: hutch622
a reply to: crazyewok

if it came to heavy air to air combat

I think the idea is not to get into that situation .

# has a habit of happening.

The designers of the F-4 found that out.

I can't imagine a scenario where the UK is fighting an enemy with those capabilities without the US standing by her side. As a US citizen the idea of that horrifies me. Doesn't mean you don't have a point, just wanted to toss that out.

a reply to: crazyewok

This story has some legs and keeps making the rounds........I wonder who is profiting from the f-35 failing the most. Maybe.....Just maybe people are being played.

a reply to: SubTruth

I have read numerous UK pilots rave about the F-35.

If you put a man with a gun against a man with a sword, but don't give the gun any bullets does that show you which one is a better weapon?

After a month flying the F35B Lightning II – the most advanced stealth fighter in the world – Lieutenant Commander Ian Tidball has given the aircraft a glowing testimonial.

www.royalnavy.mod.uk...

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I agree with everything you posted......In today's arena if it becomes a dogfight your plane is a failure.

a reply to: SubTruth

How about we wait until we give the gun some bullets before we see how it does in today's arena

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: SubTruth

How about we wait until we give the gun some bullets before we see how it does in today's arena

Agreed but I still think if it comes down to an in close plane to plane fight it should be considered a failure. That being said I do not think it would ever become a close in plane to plane fight with the F-35.

a reply to: SubTruth

So would a gun. It's still the superior weapon. It's nice to supplement it with a close combat weapon though.

The EU should be forbidden from buying or having F-35s or similar aircrafts, as the EU's allegiance in the struggle against terrorism is very dubious.
For example you can see here a swedish website ( privat.bahnhof.se... ) it very obvious the material scientific and even psychological support offered to terrorists.
I let you imagine if any such "terrorist" received some of the low radar visibility material that is used to build the F-35, and then the terrorist group builds a semi-submersible suicide boat, with its very top being covered with the stealth material. What happens to liner/cruise ships? Will current corvettes/frigates radars be able to see that little exposed surface?

I'm not saying the F-35 is perfect, modern russian SAMs will make a short work of it, but the reuse of that technology can lead to tricky consequences if it ends up in the hands of a bunch of burocrats ready to do anything to keep their asses attached to their brussels seat.

originally posted by: Tardacus
a reply to: crazyewok

Exactly, and that is a lesson from history that the U.S. and Britian would be wise to learn before it`s too late.

remember all that fancy high tech military equipment Germany invested in during WW II? well it all got wrecked by the much crappier lower tech equipment that the allies were using. How were the allies able to accomplish that?
simple, massive overwhelming numbers.

The Soviet T-34 tank was pretty damn good for its role, and the Soviets made a #-ton of them. As was the IL-2 air-to-ground attack aircraft.

Allied technological superiority in radar and code breaking was critical to victory.

a reply to: Flanker86

Good luck with your submarine, let me know how well that works for you.

I'll let you know as soon as I am done building it

In the meantime I would remind the US, that states or groups of people giving material support to terrorism, including through websites, should be sanctioned by the treasury department!

And in WWII, they didn't have SAMs that could hit an aircraft at 80,000 feet. Or missiles that could hit an aircraft, before the aircraft even knew it was coming.

The Germans had trialled SAMS very late in WW2,Wasserfall comes to mind but were never used in action IIRC.Also both the Germans and the USA had "smart bombs" in operation at the end as well.
With the F35,they are spending a lot of money pushing it as the next level tech.Problem is getting the rest of the armed forces up to scratch with its capabilities.When the B-21 comes online the F35 will have tested the mettle a lot as well as the tech from the B2,F117 and F22.

Done: www.youtube.com...

Not yet built/coated with F-35 stealth material, but still a good demonstrator.