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.

 

Do people think its true that the F35 is junk

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Since one of my hobby areas is WW2 and short post war aircraft I cant give a oppion, so people is the F35 as bad as this or is it just propaganda, and if it is as bad as they say why are they still trying to sell it. There has been lots of stuff in the news non of it good
www.rt.com...




posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Did you think Russia today was going to say it's the best plane in the sky?



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

Nope thats why im asking people at ATS who know better than me



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: imod02

It has some problems but so does every other new aircraft.
Drop enough money into something and it will eventually overcome those problems



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: imod02

The more time and energy that rival countries use putting out propaganda against something, the more they are threatened by it.
edit on 14-8-2015 by Danke because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: imod02

I suggest you read all the threads in the aircraft forum relating to the f-35.

If you do you will find that at one time. The F-35 had it's share of development issues.

However for the past 5? or so years. The F-35 project has been steadily improving.

Right now it's at the point where the Marines have declared the plane ready.

And I think that in the future you will find this plane will be effectively deadly in combat.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Yes its junk period.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: imod02

Since rebaselining in 2010 the program hasn't missed a single major deadline or goal, including IOC for the B model. It has its issues, but there hasn't been a single program that hasn't had problems during development. That's pretty much the point of development, to find the bugs and work them out.
edit on 8/14/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   
Zap it took me a wile to remember where i read this, what do you think,
in.rbth.com...



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:51 AM
link   
It's the most advanced fighter in the world ( minus the f-22) so no, it's not junk.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: imod02

Eh, yes and no. They used some of the lessons learned from that, but the big help was actually from a UFO. The Avrocar and other disc shaped craft that they attempted to develop in the 60s, including by Lockheed, used a lift fan for the vertical lift. T



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I'm glad that you're here Zaphod because I have a few questions.

There are a few models of F-35s, each one has it's own roles- but from what I've heard they are less maneuverable in mock dogfights then the the super hornets. Is the F-35 a worthwhile investment?



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

The F-35 isn't supposed to be a dogfighter. It's supposed to hit you from far away, before you know it's there. It's a ground support aircraft, with air to air fighting ability.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

For obvious reasons, the USAF doesn't want to relate it to the F-111, but F-35 is really pretty much a 21st-century update of the F-111 and the EF-111 rolled into one.

Now my big question is whether the T-X program will evolve into a back-door proposal to update and replace the F-16 as an acrobatic low-cost A2A option that can do strike in a pinch, just as the F-16 was meant to complement the F-111 in the same way.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

The F-35 isn't supposed to be a dogfighter. It's supposed to hit you from far away, before you know it's there. It's a ground support aircraft, with air to air fighting ability.

That does not seem like a good idear, if the some one has a way of jamming the F35 attack radar then its in big trouble because it cant dog fight



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: imod02

It's not that it's junk, the propaganda is wholly misleading.

The problem is that this one single program cost you $3030.00.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: imod02

You have to see the radar to jam it, unless you want to blanket the entire area, and jam your own radar. And radar isn't the only sensor that the F-35 has to rely on.



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 12:49 PM
link   
YES



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 02:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

The F-35 isn't supposed to be a dogfighter. It's supposed to hit you from far away, before you know it's there. It's a ground support aircraft, with air to air fighting ability.


I would like for you to explain how the mix of those two capabilities work together as a sensible program. "Ground support" as I know it means taking out, say, an enemy patrol or even a single machine gun nest to save ground troops.

For it to also "hit you from far away," really does not fit into such a scenario. I know the thing is being fitted with all manner of racks, etc.--maybe some just for show? Seriously, it cannot be the best ever unit for all battles and at the tremendous cost it has been already, why should there be any thinking that it will shake the dog image and become a wondercraft?



posted on Aug, 14 2015 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: imod02

I DO!!!!!!!!!!



just kidding. It is an amazing aircraft and if you are and American you should be happy with what your tax $ got you, a good investment.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join