It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
reply to post by Iwinder
The weight reduction wasn't so much so it could fly, but to meet range/speed parameters closer than it was.
The F-35’s standard weapons payload is two guided air-to-air missiles and two guided air-to-ground bombs. They can carry additional weapons externally under their wings, but at the expense of their stealthiness, Smith said.
The $392 billion program is seven years behind schedule. The military has not allowed the fleet to fly at full throttle. Or within 25 miles of lightning. Or with weapons.
reply to post by beckybecky
And you are showing yet again your utter lack of knowledge. The aircraft is still in testing. That means identifying and fixing these problems.
You act like these problems are unsolvable, and will always be there.
This aircraft is the most complex aircraft ever built. That means a lot of problems. None of them are unsolvable.
The aircraft has been haunted by what the report calls “fatal flaws” that make even the first configuration. An operational evaluation of the F-35A ”Joint Strike Fighter” by the Department of Defense’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, the aircraft was considered “unacceptable for combat” and even “unfit for training”.
USAF test pilots have noted a lack of visibility from the F-35 cockpit during evaluation flights and said that this will get them shot down in every combat. Defense spending analyst Winslow Wheeler concluded from the flight evaluation reports that the F-35A “is flawed beyond redemption”.
On 22 February 2013, the U.S. fleet of F-35s was grounded after a routine inspection of a F-35A at Edwards Air Force Base found a crack in an engine turbine blade.
The report also identified a host of additional problems, including:
Aircraft software is inadequate for even basic pilot training.
Ejection seat may fail causing pilot fatality.
Multiple pilot-vehicle interface issues exist, including feedback failure on touch screen controls.
The radar performs poorly, when it works at all.
Engine replacement takes an average of 52 hours, instead of the two hours specified.
Maintenance tools do not work.
Elements of the helmet made it harder, not easier, to see outside the aircraft
In short, the F-35 is a failure of enormous proportions, and the colossal waste of money is difficult to justify.... cost for just the F-35 alone, which has been termed “flawed beyond redemption”, might well have been saved, but for the arrogance and willful extravagance of those who put this program into action.
Oh beckybecky, ye of short sight.
That's one plane. Do you think they'll fly alone?
I'd bet there'd be a few F-22's in formation somewhere not too far, and probably some expendable F-15's not far way, along with AWAC and other support.
Judging from what I've read of your posts, you'd throw away the whole picnic table if one ant were found on it.
Now THAT is pathetic.
Performance—where the chickens come home to roost. The intended performance envelope for the F-35 is, roughly speaking: altitude capability of 50,000 feet; 700 kts./Mach 1.6 airspeed; maximum g rating of 9.0 (-A), 7.0 (-B), 7.5 (-C) ; turn performance of 5.3 sustained g’s (-A), 5.0 sustained g’s (-B), and 5.1 sustained g’s (-C); acceleration from Mach O.8 to Mach 1.2 intended to be within 65 seconds (See Aviation Week.); angle of attack (AoA) capability to 50 degrees.
At the moment, however, this all seems wishful thinking. Undeveloped software, combined with disappointing results in real-world flight tests (“results of air vehicle performance and flying qualities evaluations” (30) ) have triggered flight restrictions and rolled back overly optimistic Key Performance Parameters (KPPs). For these and a variety of conditions that should not be occurring, flights are limited to top speeds of 550 (not 700) kts. (38) and altitudes of 39,000 feet (38) rather than 50,000 feet; AoA to be no greater than 18 degrees (vs. 50 degrees)…as well as the imposition of other “aircraft operating limitations that are not suitable for combat” (38). KPPs for sustained g’s in a turn have been weakened—by 20 percent for the –A (5.3 down to 4.6)(30), by 10 percent for the –B (5.0 down to 4.5) (32), and by 2 percent for the –C (5.1 down to 5.0) (33). Transonic acceleration from Mach 0.8 to M. 1.2 suffers significantly: with the –A version, it takes 8 seconds longer; 16 seconds longer with the –B; and a worrisome 43 seconds longer with the –C…an increase of about two thirds. Although the F-35 is essentially a strike aircraft, acceleration capability could be critical in combat.
Transonic roll-off (where one wing loses lift sooner than the other when a shock wave forms at the top of the wing as the airflow reaches the local speed of sound) and buffet (or shaking of the entire aircraft) as more surfaces form shock waves and boundary layer flow becomes turbulent—both were more serious than expected in the –B and –C versions, especially with the latter, whose wingspan is greater than that of the other variants: another possible problem in a combat situation.
Some fighter pilots offered their comments on FlightGlobal: ” ‘What an embarrassment, and there will be obvious tactical implications,’ another highly experienced fighter pilot says. ‘[It's] certainly not anywhere near the performance of most fourth and fifth-generation aircraft.
‘At higher altitudes, the reduced performance will directly impact survivability against advanced Russian-designed “double-digit” surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems such as the Almaz-Antey S-300PMU2 (also called the SA-20 Gargoyle by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization), the pilot says. At lower altitudes, where fighters might operate in the close air support or forward air control role, the reduced airframe performance will place pilots at increased risk against shorter-range SAMs and anti-aircraft artillery” ( See GlobalFlight).
Insert utter biff here
reply to post by beckybecky
I will admit you are right when you can show aircraft that were ready for combat prior to IOC and at the same stage of development.
You seem to think they should go from first flight to combat and since they didn't it sucks.
Why do you think it takes so long to develop aircraft now? They're so complex it takes this long to work problems out.
As for harping on reliability, look at the F-22 and B-2. They both are lucky to hit 70%.
As for the other quotes, for every negative one, I can find one that raves about it.
I fear you have been watchimg too much top gun or that firefox film by client eastwood.
All the people involved say it is a turkey including the pilots.
The Marine Corps’ top F-35 trainer, Col. Art Tomassetti, said young aviators don’t need to learn to read analog gauges and memorize unsafe RPMs or temperatures the same way they used to; instead the F-35’s glass cockpit has green, yellow and red indicators that give such info in a second. And BAE’s test pilot, Peter Wilson, a longtime British Harrier driver, said flying the B was simply “magic.”
Wilson described how much work it took monitoring the Harrier’s controls, controlling its power, and generally trying to put the airplane where he wanted as he hovered and landed. (“You had to be an octopus to fly the Harrier,” Tomassetti quipped.) With the F-35B, Wilson said, he pushes a single button, and the jet can slow from 200 knots to a hover by itself, “as the airplane looks after you.”
“Just flying F-35 is the highlight of my career, so being able to come to the USS Wasp and fly F-35 from an LHD class Marine ship is staggering,” says Royal Air Force Sqdn Ldr Jim Schofield. “I’m very excited about what [the F-35] is going to bring the UK and all the partner nations in terms of capability.”
Royal Navy maintainer LtCdr Robin Trewinnard-Boyle added, “For the U.K., this is the future of our aviation… The aircraft is performing fantastically out at sea. What we’re seeing is the aircraft is much easier to fly but as far as I’m concerned much easier to maintain as well. This aircraft has very much been designed with the maintainer in mind. All the components we need to change, the work we have to do is considerably easier and quicker.”
I have been vindicated again.This time by the chinese.
the chinese who stole a copy from lockheeds database after hackimg it.
they built it.
found it had FUNDAMENTAL FLAWS and was a turkey.
They have ditched it already and are trying to flog it to the export market.
its called the j20 or j31.
There is a thread here on ATS about it.
i win again.
The biggest role for the F-35 is going to be a counter for certain threats.