The F-35 is not dead

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by Rockie »

trampbike wrote:
Rockie wrote:including the single engine in case anyone forgot my opinion on that...
Good thing most guys who will actually end up flying whatever Canada buys don't share your opinion on this subject.
None of them have ever flown a single engine fighter up north unless they were in a CF-18 and already lost an engine. Ask the ones who have no problem with it the question again after the first one defies Peter Mackay's bold promise that the engine will never quit and see if they still feel the same way.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
trampbike
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1013
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 8:11 am

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by trampbike »

Don't worry, nobody will ever ask you to fly a single-engine fighter in the future, you'll be just fine.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Think ahead or fall behind!
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by Rockie »

Nice deflection but the challenge stands. Check back with them after the first guy jettisons the airplane because the engine quit.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
trampbike
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1013
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 8:11 am

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by trampbike »

Turns out I'm one of "them". You're not anymore. The fact that you perceive the single-engine thing as an unacceptable risk is irrelevant, since you are not the one having to weight those risks against the advantages, and you are not the one who would take whatever risks are related with flying a single engine.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Think ahead or fall behind!
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by Rockie »

trampbike wrote:Turns out I'm one of "them". You're not anymore. The fact that you perceive the single-engine thing as an unacceptable risk is irrelevant, since you are not the one having to weight those risks against the advantages, and you are not the one who would take whatever risks are related with flying a single engine.
First of all congratulations. I'm sure you'll do us all proud and I mean that. Second, when the first guy dumps the jet because the engine stopped working (hopefully not you) come back here and tell me how you feel about that.

I must also disagree with your opinion that my opinion doesn't matter anymore. Having done your job I know the risks probably better than you do since over all I have a lot more total experience than you do. I also have an evolved knowledge of military usage beyond what I had since I was in by virtue of a couple of decades of thought and a point of view as a Canadian citizen augmented by having served.

As a civilian now and one of the people charged with not only paying my government's bills, but defending your safety on levels you may not be aware of, I cannot support this airplane.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
trampbike
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1013
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 8:11 am

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by trampbike »

PM sent. Cheers
---------- ADS -----------
 
Think ahead or fall behind!
MrWings
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1004
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 10:35 am

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by MrWings »

---------- ADS -----------
 
teacher
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2450
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:25 pm

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by teacher »

I've also said this in a previous post.
I find it a very hard sell that 65 F-35s will be a better solution for Canada that offers more flexibility and capability than 80 Advanced Super Hornets, 36 stealth UCAVs and a dozen Growlers. A total force of 128 aircraft in all. Seeing as the future of air combat is surely unmanned, hedging Canada's manned fighter buy, which is supposedly going to have to be relevant for the next 30-40 years, with some extremely stealthy UCAVs makes a ton of sense. It also provides a medium endurance, low-observable surveillance platform to provide everything from intelligence gathering to network connectivity functions for Canada's "total force."
An interesting read:

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-ri ... 1587492909

Also an interesting read:

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/pierre ... 1592445665
---------- ADS -----------
 
https://eresonatemedia.com/
https://bambaits.ca/
https://youtube.com/channel/UCWit8N8YCJSvSaiSw5EWWeQ
frosti
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 459
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:25 pm

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by frosti »

Oh christ, quoting these two irrelevant morons again. :roll: I have an internet blog so I must know what I'm talking about. Right? :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
teacher
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2450
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:25 pm

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by teacher »

I said interesting not accurate.
---------- ADS -----------
 
https://eresonatemedia.com/
https://bambaits.ca/
https://youtube.com/channel/UCWit8N8YCJSvSaiSw5EWWeQ
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by Rockie »

From the latest FAO report published in April 2015:

"The F-35 program continued to experience development and testing discoveries over the past year, largely due to a structural failure on the F-35B durability test aircraft, an engine failure, and more mission system test growth than expected."

"In June 2014, an F-35A engine caught fire during take-off. As a result, the entire F-35 fleet was grounded for nearly one month and then placed under flight restrictions for several additional months. A root cause analysis conducted by Pratt & Whitney determined that excessive heat caused by rubbing between engine fan components ultimately led to parts of the engine breaking free at a high rate of speed, resulting in a fire."

"Follow-up inspections conducted by the contractor identified 22 engines with evidence of overheating."

"The program has a long way to go to achieve its engine reliability goals. Reliability is a function of how well a system design performs over a specified period of time without failure, degradation, or need of repair. During system acquisition, reliability growth should occur over time through a process of testing, analyzing, and fixing deficiencies through design changes or manufacturing process improvements. Once fielded, there are limited opportunities to improve a system’s reliability without additional cost increases and schedule delays. Currently, the F-35 engine’s reliability is very poor and overall aircraft reliability growth has been limited. Improving engine reliability will likely require additional design changes and retrofits."

It's pretty clear that the unqualified confidence in the F-35's engine expressed by Peter Mackay and others is seriously unjustified. What is it anyway, do they beat any sense of self-preservation out of new fighter pilots these days in Cold Lake? They never used to and believe me, this is an issue we would have been extremely concerned about back in my day. But what I found most surprising in the report was this:

"In addition, in September 2014, we reported problems with the F-35 software reliability and maintainability. Specifically, we reported that the program continues to experience both hardware and software reliability issues, but DOD had no processes or metrics that provide sufficient insight into the impact of software reliability and maintainability contributing to the overall aircraft reliability."

There are serious issues with the airplane, and nobody except the USGAO seems interested in measuring the impact it will have. For sure Harper and bunch haven't. Astounding.
---------- ADS -----------
 
2R
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4318
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: left coast

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by 2R »

The Yugoslavia campaign saw the early retirement of the "Stealth" F117A, the Syrian campaign may see the early retirement of the F-22. The deployment of anti-aircraft missiles in the theatre will enable the Russians to begin killing all the irregular illegal combatants who have not run away to Kos .

By the time the Politicians make up their choice for a replacement fighter/bomber/multi-use /all purpose platform , WW3 will be over .Without a DOMINANT FAST INTERDICTION LETHAL CAPABILITY FIGHTER ,you might as well save money and get POM POMS :)

Euphemisms and politically correct male bovine excretions will not win the next big show :)
---------- ADS -----------
 
AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by AuxBatOn »

The reasons the F-117 got shot down isn't because it stealth didn't work but rather because they used the same route everyday into the theater. What stealth does is reduce (not eliminate) the range at which target tracking radar can have a track with sufficient quality to be able to employ weapons. Normally, that range is so small that by the time the enemy first detects the aircraft, they don't have the chance to set their systems up to pick the track up, identify it then shoot. If they know F-117s fly along the same route every day around the same time, all they have to do is set their radar up properly and as soon as the target return appears, engage it. When tactical unit do their jobs properly and use random routes, it becomes almost impossible to engage them. Look at Desert Storm.

Fast forward 20 years. The stealth technology evolved greatly further reducing the engagement ranges, making it that much more difficult to effectively engage F-22s. I commanded F-22s for several missions, some in training against very recent threats and during real combat operations with no kidding real missile batteries in the area of operations and I can guarantee that when used properly, stealth works.

But Stealth isn't quite why I think the F-35 is what we need. I am digging way more its sensors integration.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
2R
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4318
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: left coast

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by 2R »

Quintas : People should know ,when they are conquered

Maximus : Would you Quintas ? Would I ?

@ approx. 3 mins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZghMKa4jGo





The question that should be asked ,before agreeing to being "annexed" by another countries military industrial complex. And being sold second rate shit.

The second question would be : Do you like gladiator movies Joey ? :)
---------- ADS -----------
 
AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by AuxBatOn »

Second rate shit. I hope you have at least some solid knowledge of the program (not what's shown in the media) to say this. Otherwise you opinion is worth a big nothing.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
2R
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4318
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: left coast

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by 2R »

They will not sell us their first rate stuff like the F22 ,that proves they will only sell us second rate stuff.
If I was working procurement , I would be looking at the German response to the Mig 41 , it might not be as stealthy as the F22 but it will be faster and have some teeth.
The Germans did not invest in the worlds largest titanium forge to build children's toys ,like Krupps did prior to WW2.
Before anyone says they do not build the F22 anymore.All the tools and dies to make them still exist and a production run could be done in Canada .
Maybe one question might be : Why do they not trust us with the first rate stuff ?
---------- ADS -----------
 
frosti
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 459
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:25 pm

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by frosti »

2R wrote: The question that should be asked ,before agreeing to being "annexed" by another countries military industrial complex. And being sold second rate shit.
http://www.theonion.com/article/local-i ... ernet-2500
---------- ADS -----------
 
iflyforpie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8132
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
Location: Winterfell...

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by iflyforpie »

AuxBatOn wrote:Otherwise you opinion is worth a big nothing.
It's worth about as much as the 'argument from authority/I'd tell you, but then I'd have to kill you' opinions that you've been spouting.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?
AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by AuxBatOn »

At least mine is informed. You don't have to believe me.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
2R
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4318
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: left coast

Re: The F-35 is not dead

Post by 2R »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textron_AirLand_Scorpion

It can provide a decent target for the enemy to shoot at a fraction of the price of the other expensive targets .

Now where did I put my Kool-Aid :)
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”