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.
As long as the RN/RAF both want F-35 its safe IMHO.
Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by justwokeup
As long as the RN/RAF both want F-35 its safe IMHO.
The reality is that the F-35 has little to offer than an updated F-5E wouldn't. Basically - you can take the avionics developed for the F-35 and drop them into an F-5E airframe and call it good; for a fraction of the cost of continuing development on the F-35 and working out the kinks. Retooling some of the F-5's airframe to accept parts already run with the expectation of meeting F-35 production quotas could also be done (Just call the revision the F-5G).
I highly doubt you could do that without *significant* reworking of the F-5 airframe - by integrating an avionics and systems package several generations newer than the F-5 was designed for, you will have weight issues, stress issues, power issues, bus issues and a tonne of other things - you will basically be touching on everything from the airframe to the engines just to get the package working on the aircraft.
This isn't like changing out a motherboard on a PC - aircraft avionics are highly specific to the airframe, hence why the term "integrated" is used. While the avionics themselves may be "off the shelf" in one form or another, you can't just plug them into the aircraft and off you go.
I doubt it would save any money at all.
Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by RichardPrice
I highly doubt you could do that without *significant* reworking of the F-5 airframe - by integrating an avionics and systems package several generations newer than the F-5 was designed for, you will have weight issues, stress issues, power issues, bus issues and a tonne of other things - you will basically be touching on everything from the airframe to the engines just to get the package working on the aircraft.
No offense, but your age is showing.
This has not been true of aircraft designed post-1985.
That method of design has been largely abandoned. Firmware and software is used to tailor the settings, and connections have mostly been standardized - especially in fighters designed for the export market (like the F-5E/F-20).
Well.. It's hard to tell. How much longer is the F-35 going to sit in the over-budget, behind-schedule, pre-production blues? No one can really answer that, and many of the estimates have continually been shown to have been horribly optimistic (three years ago).
If you have people like myself on a restructuring of the F-20 (I will admit that when I mentioned the F-5E, I was picturing the F-20 - which is a substantial difference) - we'd have a weapon-ready prototype inside of a year. Tool up and pre-production inventory runs would take about another year - and your first squadrons would receive their aircraft a year later - a three year production cycle, and I'd shoot to have tool up and enough inventory run up to start assembly three months after getting the green light (and I'd be shooting for a flying, weapon-ready prototype at six months).