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.

 

laughable UK press!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2004 @ 08:43 PM
link   
The other day I read a shock horror report on the 'failure' of the F-35 "Navy's new jet doesn't work!"
The JSF winner was lambasted because *gasp* it can't take of vertically from the Royal Navy's ships! Aparrently "this is a major worry to defence chiefs who are depending on the new jet to replace the Harrier in the next few years".

Well, its only a worry if the defence chiefs are stupid! When did a sea Harrier ever take off vertically from a ship? What do they think the ski jump is there for? Or maybe they just don't know what STOVL stands for? It must be because their criticisms of the Typhoon don't stand up anymore so they have to find a new target?




posted on May, 30 2004 @ 09:10 PM
link   
Actually if you read the article properly

"Britain is building two new aircraft carriers for the Royal Navy - but the runways will be too short for the jets to take off normally"

That means the ski jump

news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on May, 30 2004 @ 09:19 PM
link   
I did read it properly, did you?

And I quote; I"f the weight problem is not resolved, the jets will be unable to achieve the vertical take-offs that are the trademark of the Harrier Jump Jet.....The carriers would probably need to be redesigned if the jets could not take off vertically"

Is that not what I said?

Besides, it was reported slightly differently in the paper, with the correct sentence you quoted removed , maybe someone realised both statements couldn't be right but remove the wrong one.




posted on May, 31 2004 @ 09:02 PM
link   
Here is proof of its hovering abilities:




It can hover and if it can not do it well right now it is not that big of a deal. The program is only a few years in and it still has a few years left until it is completed.



posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
Here is proof of its hovering abilities:

It can hover and if it can not do it well right now it is not that big of a deal. The program is only a few years in and it still has a few years left until it is completed.


The photo is of the X-35, which was just a prototype lacking all the avionics and weapon systems necessary for a combat aircraft. The F-35 is a different beast since it must include all those items. And it is a pretty big deal that the F-35B STOVL variant is several thousand pounds overweight. At the very least, the problem has pushed the program back by a year as Lockheed attempts to redesign the plane to save weight. At worst, it could mean that the F-35B will be unable to meet requirements. I suspect the latter will probably be the case because the requirements were rather overly optimistic in the first place. I wouldn't be surprised if the B model ends up having reduced range, reduced payload, or both.



posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 12:47 AM
link   
The problem is that this news shows up no where. It is the same as you with the JASSM. You were the only one that said it was crap. All other sources said is was performing well and now the US Airforce just ordered full high rate production. Hundreds will be built.



posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 12:50 AM
link   
Speaking of laughable U.K press :

www.thesundaysport.com...

Its not njust for sport but for reading crap if you like to read crap that is



posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 10:34 AM
link   
It aint even about sport, it's basically soft-core porn.



posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Oh last time i saw it, it had sport in it, mind you that was about 8 years ago



posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 10:45 AM
link   
Guys or cross dressers what exactly is wrong with soft porn


It isnot read by people who want to read the news.You would go to a whore house just for a beer would you!

[Edited on 1-6-2004 by weirdo]



posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
The problem is that this news shows up no where. It is the same as you with the JASSM. You were the only one that said it was crap. All other sources said is was performing well and now the US Airforce just ordered full high rate production. Hundreds will be built.


Shows up no where? Are you insane? You should crack open a copy of Aviation Week or Flight International sometime. It's all they talk about! The F-35 design review was originally scheduled for this past April, but has been delayed until spring 2005 because of the weight problems. Although the subsequent schedule still anticipates the aircraft entering service in 2010, most people in the program are convinced that the delays in design reviews and first flight will likely push that date back as well.

Check out the following sites for additional information.

House Rpt.108-187 - DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL

The JSF's preliminary design review (PDR), scheduled for completion at the end of March 2004, remains open due to the identification of a number of items requiring corrective action, many of which are considered critical. The most significant critical design items that remain open are associated with weight of the aircraft at PDR.

The aircraft weight estimates presented at PDR exposed 'uncertainties' in the ability of the program to meet schedule and threshold requirements. The most extreme of the weight issues is with the STOVL variant, which is approximately 1,200 to 1,500 pounds over the PDR target weight, nearly the Initial Operating Capability (IOC) target weight. The historical growth in aircraft weight is 4 to 6 percent from PDR to IOC. If the weight cannot be constrained at PDR, the STOVL variant could be as much as 2,000 pounds over the required weight at IOC--the weight of one of its required weapons.

At the end of the March PDR meeting, the Department made a decision to hold the PDR open for the vehicle systems, mission systems, airframe, and air systems, pending completion of a Blue Ribbon Action Team (BRAT) review. Until design impacts can be identified and the baseline program adjusted to the BRAT review, JSF is constrained from moving to the next design phase.

Critical design review (CDR) scheduled for the 3rd quarter of 2004 and first flight scheduled for the end of 2005, have not yet been rescheduled. The Committee believes it most likely these milestone events will indeed be rescheduled and recommends a $45,000,000 reduction to the JSF program based on its judgment that these milestones will not occur as planned in fiscal year 2004.




Air Force Association article from March 2004

"My two biggest concerns are weight—because that’s one of the drivers for performance—and software," Hudson told Air Force Magazine in January.

Every additional pound limits performance, but contract specifications primarily are directed toward achieving certain performance requirements for each individual system, not toward maintaining a specific weight for those systems.

"The empty weight of this airplane is about 27,000 pounds—it's a pretty good size airplane," Hudson said. That is without weapons or gas. "When you put 18,000 pounds of gas in it, two 2,000-pound bombs, two air-to-air missiles, ... you are up to about 50,000 pounds at takeoff or around the low 40s at maneuvering weight," he added.

Hudson projects that the Air Force's CTOL version will be "about 1,400 pounds heavy" when it becomes operational. He said that the Navy's CV aircraft probably will also be about 1,400 pounds beyond its target weight and the Marine Corps' STOVL version about 2,200 pounds overweight.

Those extra pounds translate into reduced capability in a key performance parameter—combat radius. The KPP requirement for the Air Force’s CTOL combat radius is 590 nautical miles. At its target weight, said Hudson, that version of the strike fighter would actually have a radius of about 660 nautical miles. However, he said, "If we’re at the 1,400 pounds heavy figure, we're at about 640 [nautical] miles."

...

All these current program challenges led the Office of the Secretary of Defense late last year to direct a slow down—beginning with the Fiscal 2005 budget—in the F-35’s development program. The delay has forced the program office to move funds from production accounts into development. That means fewer aircraft will be built in this decade than originally planned.

[Edited on 1-6-2004 by aerospaceweb]



posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
Here is proof of its hovering abilities:

It can hover and if it can not do it well right now it is not that big of a deal. The program is only a few years in and it still has a few years left until it is completed.

1. That's the X-35
2. It can LAND vertically, but it can't take off that way.



posted on Jun, 1 2004 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by InvaderZoch

1. That's the X-35
2. It can LAND vertically, but it can't take off that way.


It can also TAKE OFF vertically, I've seen a video of the start. I don't know how many wepons it can carry but it CAN take-off that way.



posted on Jun, 2 2004 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by longbow
It can also TAKE OFF vertically, I've seen a video of the start. I don't know how many wepons it can carry but it CAN take-off that way.


Any videos or pictures you might have seen of the JSF in flight are of the X-35 prototypes. The F-35 hasn't been built yet. Construction began on the first F-35A airframe last fall, and the first flight isn't planned until 2006.

www.airforce-technology.com...

The X-35 was purely a technology demonstrator and not a true military prototype. During the design process, both contractors were specifically instructed not to do any weaponization of the X-32 and X-35 aircraft. The planes also lacked many avionics systems needed for a combat aircraft. As a result, the JSF demonstrators weighed considerably less than the F-35 production fighter that will ultimately enter service.

Operators of the STOVL version intend to use the aircraft similarly to how the Harrier is used today. Vertical takeoffs will rarely be flown, and will not be possible with a full loadout of payload and fuel. The aircraft will instead perform short takeoffs with the help of the lift fan and aft rotating nozzle to provide propulsive lift. Like the Harrier, the STOVL JSF will be capable of performing vertical landings since the aircraft weighs much less at the conclusion of its mission.



posted on Jun, 2 2004 @ 12:51 PM
link   
after the libyan bombings the USAF sent SR_71 flights over for post analysist of the strikes. After one flight came back to Britain , the pilot turned on the tv and saw Qadafi ducking after hearing the SR-71's sonic boom. The reporter then added about the blackbirds ability to DROP BOMBS.




top topics



 
0

log in

join