F-35s at Red Flag

Cool stuff

I don't understand the need for this plane. Why not just buy some sopwith camels? They are cheaper and unlike the fancy pants F-35 you will be flying slow enough and low enough to see the whites of your enemies eyes. The A-10 is another option if you are against antique bi-planes for some reason but it still flies too high and too fast for my tastes.

a reply to: Azure

You're serious, aren't you?

a reply to: Caughtlurking

Absolutely. The sopwith camel is a proven fighter and has scored many kills in actual combat. Fancy pants F-35 is only good at hiding, cowardly plane! Don't let Lockheed propaganda fool you



Interesting article

a reply to: Azure

Phew. Pew pew pew.

Can't wait to read the obligatory F-35 has been burned by the F-15 in dogfights at redflag article on warisboring. We will see but I have a feeling things are probably going better than expected. I refuse to believe the aerodynamics are that bad and that it's that much of a dog with that great powerplant and massive amounts of thrust. I love how a lot of pictures you see of the F-35 are compressed in a way that make it look fat.

a reply to: Caughtlurking

I've been reading all kinds of comments. It's almost funny. Most of the headlines ignore the 15 for the 1. There was even one comment that it's never won a fight in a war game.

Oh look, another "unbiased" site. There was an article posted to Facebook from The Aviationist that the F-35 had a 15:1 kill ratio, but it was probably because of the F-22s, and it wasn't clear if that was strictly the F-35 or a "team" ratio.

So generally, the plane seems to be living up to expectations.

15:1 is pretty darned impressive.


a reply to: Azure

Yeah, no. The A-10 is a viable platform only in conditions of near air dominance. In this era of vastly improved ground to air weaponry? The warthog would suffer losses of an unacceptable number.

Even if it had f-22 support..15-1 is like takinf out two squad of sum country..The plan prices it's gonna work an that it not just sum fat pig. was the 35 not built to complement the f22 ?

a reply to: Slys13

Your Chinese is showing through .

a reply to: hutch622

Read texting and replying while driving !!

a reply to: Slys13

Texting while driving , not cool man , not cool at all .

Well THIS is certainly surprising. Tyler Rogoway's latest article about the F-35. "Well the reports are good, but......"

www.thedrive.com...

I said it before, and I'll keep saying it. The mental gymnastics to keep hating and bashing the F-35 are amazing.

a reply to: Zaphod58

It's almost not even worth commenting or responding on those sites anymore. I guess because the more they talk about it they more we click. Even the photographs of the F-35 will be skewed against it. The pictures are often cropped and squished to make the plane look fat and not aerodynamic. In person and in properly proportioned pictures it looks much more similar to an F-22. It costs too much, but that's pretty much true of anything anymore.

a reply to: Zaphod58

That was some serious twisting and turning in that article.

The only folks whose opinion truly matters about this bird, the pilots, seem to love it. Some issues, yes. Not unexpected since the plane is breaking new ground...but the overall consensus seems to be "We've got a winner here!!".

What do these "experts" have against successful airplanes that make it much easier for the boys and girls flying them to come home?

Some of these objections are getting rather stupid. There's nothing else other than that to call 'em.

a reply to: Caughtlurking

I've noticed that, too.

Some of them are so altered that when you look at them, vs an unaltered F35, you almost think you're looking at an entirely different aircraft.

a reply to: Caughtlurking

I was in an argument with a guy one day, his argument basically boiled down to, "It's not a good fighter, because it's fat". No matter how many pictures were used showing it's no fatter than an F-22, he kept up with "it's too fat to be a good fighter".

Another great article about Red Flag 17-1.

theaviationgeekclub.com...

a reply to: Caughtlurking

You are right.
It's very simple to edit any picture using modern graphic programmes like Photoshop and so on. There are many F-35 pictures that seems to show different aircraft because of the fact that the pics are cropped and editied before they put out.

Here is F-35 with F-22

(Photos from Wikipedia)

They are similar when we are talking about overall dimensions.

originally posted by: Caughtlurking
a reply to: Azure

Phew. Pew pew pew.

Can't wait to read the obligatory F-35 has been burned by the F-15 in dogfights at redflag article on warisboring. We will see but I have a feeling things are probably going better than expected. I refuse to believe the aerodynamics are that bad and that it's that much of a dog with that great powerplant and massive amounts of thrust. I love how a lot of pictures you see of the F-35 are compressed in a way that make it look fat.

I watch these things fly over my house dozens of times a day (live just north of Luke AFB). They are one of the ugliest planes ever built, and you don't need to compress anything to make them look fat. I have no doubt they are the greatest plane flying publicly right now.