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.

 

F35 scared of Sparrows

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 10:01 AM
link   
Sunday Express .:. March 27 2005

"The Latest jet fighter aircraft supposed to make the RAF and Royal Navy Pilots the kings of the sky could be blown out of the sky by a humble sparrow!"

The MOD will admit this week that the JCA, being developed in the US, could crash if it was based at RAF airfields where there are a lot of birds.

Insiders say that the aircraft, which is costing £9 Billion, is so high-tech it uses just one engine to take off and land vertically but makes it particularly vulnerable to even a sparrow.

Geoff Hoon has already had to admit that britains new aircraft carriers will be without new aircraft for two years, as the JSF will not be ready for 2012.

British Defence chiefs are locked in a battle of wills with the Americans over the new planes because the pentagon is refusing to release the electronic codes without which the jsf will be unable to fly, forcing the MOD to consider other options.

------

I have just posted the main points but I will post the rest if I get a chance tonight.

One point, what other aircraft do you think they could be considering?

- Philip




posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 10:17 AM
link   
This is no big deal. Harrier would do the same thing if it got a bird sucked up its intake.



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Its the fact that they are having issues with the US, by being able to repair the F-35 without support and then that they are being forced to consider other options due to it, that is what is interesting to me.

- Philip



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 12:40 PM
link   
I've just read the story. WOW! A next generation VSTOL bird eater! How utterly amazing! And those friggin, crazy yanks won't give us any more codes! Amazing!

Sounds like one of my threads - another absolute waste of money - all £9B of it!

Thank god the little sparrows are few and far between around Britain's airfields.

Crows on the other hand................................................................



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Birds have always been a threat to jet engines.

Single engined planes have a slightly higher level of 'risk' but the F35 is no more at risk in the hover mode than Harrier pilots and in the 35yrs+ Harriers have been operating (40+ if you count the Kestrals) you will not find ingesting birds has been a regular occurance.

(and by the way......

..... there is no way on earth that these alternatives you imagine to be being considered include that ancient if attractive Su27-35 series aircraft
)



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 05:46 PM
link   
How may birds are there around aircraft carriers? I don't think they will be at risk when their out on the ocean but at air bases they can be. I think Modern Airbases have ways of keeping birds out of their air space.
And the Pentagon is just making sure that the codes for the F-35 don't get into the wrong hands.



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Um, how many engines does the MoD think that the Harriers have? How is that any different?



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 08:50 AM
link   
I think the British MOD should drop the F-35 and all technological and finincial support for the project...

the US wants it's cake and to eat it too, unfortunately treating friends this way will get you a slap on the wrist.

Didn't BAe systems have their own proposal for an F-35 type aircraft?... or was that something else



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Come on guys, think a bit ok? They will get the codes just like the last time they purchase US aircraft.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 06:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
Come on guys, think a bit ok? They will get the codes just like the last time they purchase US aircraft.


- Would this be the kind of reasonable conclusion anyone would draw after the latest Chinook flight code debacle? After that one why should anyone trust the US over the F35 coding?

Sorry mate but although it may turn out that we in the UK may be contracturally lumbered with F35 (and if so we will clearly have to bite the bullet and create our own software or stomach cancellation of the program) I think this episode like the - Boeing Chinook one - has just conspired to leave the US on it's own wallowing in it's own loopy administration's defence/business paranoia from now on.

No cost-sharing partners and heavily restricted high-tech high-cost exports.

Welcome to the world you guys have created all on your own.

[edit on 29-3-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 01:18 PM
link   
The F-35 debate sure is a good one, unlike the aircraft!

I saw a telly programme on Sky year b4 last, about the development of the JSF [or whatever the yanks call the thing] and it was a three horse race.

Those sneaky buggers out at Groom Lake - sorry - Lockhead/Martin, Northrup/Grumman and BAe/Boeing [Not too sure]

Anyway I was amazed that somebody could adopt a single engined power plant for what essentially is the long awaited replacement for the Harrier GR7.

Unlike the Harrier which has several engine exhausts, the F-35 for hovering purposes, has this massive exhaust cowling which can be vectored to produce the downwards thrust required for hovering. Apparently exhaust gas is bled off to a second exhaust cowling just behind the cockpit. Not a very satisfactory arrangement. I would imagine if your exhaust cowling got jammed in the wrong position, you'd be up the creek without a paddle.

Like so many other Brit tax payers, I'd like to tell the yanks to get stuffed. Why we should prop up their ailling arms industries at our cost and be treated so shabbily, I still don't know.

YOU are to blame! You voted for the bludgers - so you got what you voted for!



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Goos, why did you create tis thread in two different forums?


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Here's a picture of an AV-8B Harrier that hit a Canada Goose. A bit bigger than a sparrow perhaps, but it did penetrate the metal inlet lip and blew out the suction door behind it on the way out. It also holed a fuel feed tank, so he lost a lot of fuel. Some goose parts and metal bits went into the engine, but it continued to run and the pilot made a successful emergency landing.

in all honesty. Multi-engine aircraft have the same thing to worry about and often with a serious FOD ingested into the engine you are going to have some catistrophic damage to the engine. Even airliners, c-130s and B-1B are known to have crashed after thier engines injested birds.

single/multiple engines was the greatest debate for the JSF, and both teams decided to go with a single engine mainly due to it's low cost and maintinace



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Solution - Falcons, which are already used at numerous airports and air force bases around the world.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Falcons, that's old school. There are high powered lasers now that can be seen as a line that birds are afraid to cross. I think lasers are better what if on a bad day the falcon meets the engine of jet that is landing?



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 04:01 PM
link   
I just got an evil idea! Why not use sparrows as weapons. No, pigeons! Train them to fly to an enemy airbase and get sucked into the F-35s and blow them up. Cruel but cost effective.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by fritz
The F-35 debate sure is a good one, unlike the aircraft!

I saw a telly programme on Sky year b4 last, about the development of the JSF [or whatever the yanks call the thing] and it was a three horse race.

Those sneaky buggers out at Groom Lake - sorry - Lockhead/Martin, Northrup/Grumman and BAe/Boeing [Not too sure]

Anyway I was amazed that somebody could adopt a single engined power plant for what essentially is the long awaited replacement for the Harrier GR7.

Unlike the Harrier which has several engine exhausts, the F-35 for hovering purposes, has this massive exhaust cowling which can be vectored to produce the downwards thrust required for hovering. Apparently exhaust gas is bled off to a second exhaust cowling just behind the cockpit. Not a very satisfactory arrangement. I would imagine if your exhaust cowling got jammed in the wrong position, you'd be up the creek without a paddle.

Like so many other Brit tax payers, I'd like to tell the yanks to get stuffed. Why we should prop up their ailling arms industries at our cost and be treated so shabbily, I still don't know.

YOU are to blame! You voted for the bludgers - so you got what you voted for!



You must be smoking some 'bloody good' pot 'across the pond' ! A single engine is fine, they have become so reliable now. They test these things for thousands of hours. JSF like Harrier, has multiple exhaust thrusters. Beside the 2 main ones, it has 1 smaller one on each side of the aircraft. 'ailing arms industries' who are you kidding? They haven't been in this good of a condition since the Reagan build-up. From what I hear though, its the British arms industries that are starting to hit some rough waters. Though we American taxpayers are bailing them out, because Uncle Sam is also buying more foreign made arms.

Oh and one last thing, to put you in your place. Even though the international version of the JSF, which is what everyone else will be getting, is going to be a little less stealthy than the American version, for security reasons. It will still be more stealthy than the Eurotrash Typhoon.

[edit on 29-3-2005 by NWguy83]



new topics




 
0

log in

join