Do people think its true that the F35 is junk

a reply to: penroc3

What do you think of this in.rbth.com...

a reply to: Barnalby

and what about that one with the F-117. all good bombers have fighter/ecm escorts if they cant do it them self's that is.

a reply to: imod02

honestly i dont know much about it, so you have given me my afternoon reading adventure. ill let you know when i know

a reply to: Aliensun

The F-15E is one of the best tactical bombers ever built. It has a huge payload, is great at low level, and can carry every weapon in the inventory, including the kitchen sink. It also carries air to air weapons, such as the AIM-120, and AIM-9. Even though it's based on the F-15 airframe, which is the greatest fighter built in the modern era, the F-15E can't dogfight to save its life. It can hit you from a distance, but get it into a knife fight, and despite having power, and maneuverability, and it's dead.

The F-35 is designed to hit you from BVR ranges, and will have the sensors and weapons to do it. Later aircraft will be able to dogfight better than the current aircraft, due to being lighter and having better software, and possibly a better engine, but it's not going to be a dogfighter on the order of the F-16 or F-15. In a no holds barred fight, where target identification isn't an issue, the combination of F-22 and F-35 is going to be deadly. For everything else, there are F-22s for escort, and the F-35s can defend themselves as necessary.

The 35 & 22 are in my top 3 most beautiful pieces of "junk" in the WORLD.

I'm just goin' on record.

a reply to: RoadCourse

It's nicer looking in person. The tail makes it very distinct, although from certain angles it's hard to tell at first it's an F-35.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: RoadCourse

It's nicer looking in person. The tail makes it very distinct, although from certain angles it's hard to tell at first it's an F-35.

I've been around them a time or two, Z.
I do appreciate your willingness to point things out though.

a reply to: RoadCourse

I can't keep track of who's done what anymore. Too many new faces around here.

a reply to: Zaphod58
No worries.
You couldn't have known anyway...I try to be a secret squirrel.

a reply to: RoadCourse

We were lucky out at Edwards. We caught one that had a problem with the nose gear door problem coming back from his mission.

If you zoom in on it, you can see the door hanging open.

Creating a stealth platform with limited dog fighting capabilities is great if opponents cannot implement a counter-stealth response but that's a $1.1 trillion gamble that's guaranteed to loose. So rather than continually throw money at the military industrial complex for stealth planes that arn't any better in a combat situation than cruise missiles they should have spent the 1.1 trillion rebuilding US crumbling infrastructure that would have created a great many more jobs

The ASCE estimates that the U.S. would have to invest $3.6 trillion in order to bring our infrastructure up to simply good repair by 2020
link

a reply to: Zaphod58

a reply to: imod02

It doesn't really matter in my opinion, currently there are only a few ways to achieve VTOL in jets and all include a form of thrust vectoring.

Actually the lift fan is quite unique, it reads the yak carries extra engines for the lift at the front.

As far as the reference to burning concrete or carrier decks, duh! If you put any jet engine verticle against a carrier it would burn through the deck!

a reply to: RoadCourse

Your countries military must have some seriously epic black project aircraft for you to call the F-35 and F-22 junk.

a reply to: imod02


Oh man there is a good documentary on youtube from Australia I believe and they are not happy with it's performance. Seems like those pilots who have flown F-15 and Falcons are not pleased with the handling of the aircraft. So from what I have heard it's inferior to some of our aircraft of old...Russia doesn't need to speak for other countries...

I do work with a coworker who's husband works on the planes and is being trained to service them very soon...I have already tried to pick her brain on her husbands opinion...

a reply to: Danke

The junk was sarcasm. That's why it was in quotes.

a reply to: chrismarco

It's not going to perform up to F-15 or F-16 standards. It was never going to. Both of those are fighters, with the F-16 having a secondary ground attack role added on. The F-35 is a strike aircraft with a fighter mission added on. When used the way it's supposed to, in exercises it's done very well so far, including during Green Flag.

a reply to: Zaphod58

i forgot if i read that our carriers are getting new decks or the new carriers will have them and we are just gong to patch the older ones as needed, from the VTOL mode of the 35.

i know its allot less harsh then the AV-B or at least that's what i read but i would still think over time the older decks will take a pounding.

a reply to: penroc3

They've got a new deck coating that the Navy just developed that will be added to the older LHD/LHAs as they go in for refit. It stands up to the punishment of the F-35 exhaust quite well they say. They'll share that with the UK for the Queen Elizabeth ships to help protect their decks.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Is the UK getting the full bore version of the F-35? i think Australia wasn't to happy that they were not getting the full Monty so to speak