The F-35 is not dead

[frosti]

More excuses.

[Rockie]

More excuses.

Excuses for what?

[Mostly Harmless]

Mmmm... popcorn....

[frosti]

Anyway....

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-0 ... anada.html

Gotta love politics and a retarded media, just so we can waste more money to arrive at the same conclusion and "prove" what we already know.

[Rockie]

If you don't mind my asking frosti, why do you continually quote the media if you think they have nothing of value to add to the issue?

[Old fella]

Oh.......oh.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03/06 ... lots-warn/

[frosti]

"...The aircraft also experienced difficulties when the overnight temperature dropped below 15 degrees Celsius — an occurrence that will be extremely common in Canada. To mitigate this problem, maintenance crews put jets in heated hangars overnight,”

So just like every other Air Force, like us, do with their fighters when its cold out. Everything else in that article is non sense and is exactly what should be happening when a fighter is being developed. Last time I heard, the Eurofighter is a bigger lemon than the F-35 is.

[Rockie]

It's a PENTAGON report frosti not the National Post's, plus much of the criticism comes from experienced fighter pilots whose opinion you not so long ago put absolute faith in.

You also choose to focus on the cold weather problem as if every aircraft suffers the same. They don't and you know it. Minus 40 - yes, minus 15 - no.

There's also that pesky issue of the United States going broke and beginning to scale back on expenditures. Your right wing buddies in the Republican party ensured that cutbacks would be targeted at the military rather than raising taxes, so expect Congressional enthusiasm for the most expensive weapons program in the history of the entire world to ebb significantly.

[frosti]

It's a PENTAGON report frosti not the National Post's, plus much of the criticism comes from experienced fighter pilots whose opinion you not so long ago put absolute faith in.

Experienced fighter pilots? Didn't say anything about that. Pilots from Eglin AFB are inexperienced students, not test pilots.

"engine starts had to be monitored with a special equipment to reduce the likelihood of a fire." - No idea what the hell this is supposed to mean.

“Aircraft operating limitations prohibit flying the aircraft at night or in instrument meteorological conditions,” They seem to fly just fine at night... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr1ibsrSu2A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODtINLhwWYM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5DNV99KEZc

“These restrictions are in place because testing has not been completed to certify the aircraft for night and instrument flight,” - So there are restrictions on an aircraft in development in place because it hasn't...been developed and cleared yet?

“does not yet have the capability to train in . . . any actual combat capability, because it is still early in system development.” - More of the same non sense.

"The pilots, all of whom had at least 1,000 hours in other U.S. fighter jets, complained that the radar was often not working, their state-of-the-art helmets gave them double-vision or blurry vision, and their flight suits were too hot." - New aircraft in the testing phase with problems? No...way. First time in aviation history has that happened.

“The head rest is too large and will impede aft visibility and survivability during surface and air engagements,” one pilot was quoted as saying. “Aft visibility will get the pilot gunned (killed) every time.” - If the bad guy is right at your 6 and gunning you, you already screwed it away and deserve to be gunned. This can all be easily fixed, it's called rolling onto your wing, pretty much like 90% of the pilots do now because trying to turn your head that far is nearly impossible anyways. Yes, the latency issue while using the night-vision mode of the helmet is bad. It's being worked on and if they can't fix it in time, they already have a work around in mind. The engineers were very worried about this aspect of the helmet because they knew the technology didn't exist yet for this requirement. The headrest thing shouldn't be any new thing....its the standard ACESIII seat.

"For example, mechanics are supposed to be able to remove the aircraft’s engine and install a new one in two hours, but the mean time was 52 hours — or more than two days." - Shit happens and you run into problems on a new aircraft. Hell, quoted time to R/I a F404 is 8 hours. Never seen that happen in that short amount of time.

“To mitigate this problem, maintenance crews put jets in heated hangars overnight,” the report reads. - This is probably the stupidest thing in the article. It's like heated hangars will be some sort of a luxury in Canada.

“Moving jets in and out of a hangar to keep them warm involves five personnel for three to four hours per shift. The parking of flyable jets in hangar also interfered with maintenance because these flyable jets occupied space that would otherwise be used for jets requiring repair.” - Standard practice at any fighter squadron that is located in colder climates.

There's also that pesky issue of the United States going broke and beginning to scale back on expenditures. Your right wing buddies in the Republican party ensured that cutbacks would be targeted at the military rather than raising taxes, so expect Congressional enthusiasm for the most expensive weapons program in the history of the entire world to ebb significantly.

Somehow I doubt the US will significantly cut a program that will be the benchmark and replacement for fighter jet aviation in the US for the next 30-40 years. There is nothing new on the horizon and starting all over would be THE biggest waste of time and money. Considering all the international partners involved along with the millions of jobs on the line, this program isn't going anywhere.

[Rockie]

Experienced fighter pilots? Didn't say anything about that. Pilots from Eglin AFB are inexperienced students, not test pilots.

This, contradicted by this:

"The pilots, all of whom had at least 1,000 hours in other U.S. fighter jets,

"engine starts had to be monitored with a special equipment to reduce the likelihood of a fire." - No idea what the hell this is supposed to mean.

Me neither.

“Aircraft operating limitations prohibit flying the aircraft at night or in instrument meteorological conditions,” They seem to fly just fine at night... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr1ibsrSu2A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODtINLhwWYM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5DNV99KEZc

This, contradicted by this:

“These restrictions are in place because testing has not been completed to certify the aircraft for night and instrument flight,” - So there are restrictions on an aircraft in development in place because it hasn't...been developed and cleared yet?

“The head rest is too large and will impede aft visibility and survivability during surface and air engagements,” one pilot was quoted as saying. “Aft visibility will get the pilot gunned (killed) every time.” - If the bad guy is right at your 6 and gunning you, you already screwed it away and deserve to be gunned. This can all be easily fixed, it's called rolling onto your wing, pretty much like 90% of the pilots do now because trying to turn your head that far is nearly impossible anyways.

So now a mechanic is telling a fighter pilot how to do ACM properly or he deserves to get gunned? That takes some balls. However I agree the headrest may not be all the problem. The airplane fuselage is also in the way and it really doesn't matter how small the headrest is the pilot still won't be able to see behind him. A simple comparison of the F-35 to the F-22, F-15, F-16, F-18, A-10....the list goes on....makes that obvious to even a casual observer. And could you tell us again how much experience you have looking back between the tails at an airplane behind you?

Somehow I doubt the US will significantly cut a program that will be the benchmark and replacement for fighter jet aviation in the US for the next 30-40 years.

They already did with the F-22 which wasn't as expensive as the F-35, and was developed before the United States realized they are broke.

I get the feeling if Lockheed Martin itself came out and said the F-35 was an obscenely overpriced failure you would still defend it. You must have a lot at stake personally to explain such blindness to its shortcomings.

[Colonel Sanders]

You must have a lot at stake personally

which I why I stopped talking to that "expert" at least 10
pages ago. Suggesting to "frosty" that the F-35 might
not be the best choice is like suggesting to Lindsay Lohan
that crack and meth might not be the best choice for her.

I don't know why you'd bother wasting your time on either.

[Rockie]

don't know why you'd bother wasting your time on either.

Mental exercise to keep the noodle from getting too soft at my advanced age. I was just pondering my question to him asking how much experience he had looking back between the tails at aircraft behind him, and couldn't help but reminisce at my own experience doing the same...which is to say too much. Many instances too embarrassing to relate.

[Colonel Sanders]

how much experience you have looking back between the tails at an airplane behind you?

Yes, you did set yourself up for this reply: "None!!"

[frosti]

Thankfully all the non sense is coming from people who have no direct weigh-in on the program. Those who do have influence, favour the F-35. In Europe people take to the streets in protests, in Canada they just whine away on internet boards. The government has all their bases covered to confuse the wogs and stymy the morons in the cnd media. Why this "reset" crap was put into place, to slip it past the seatbelt challenged media and opposition. They seem to have taken the bait.

[Rockie]

The disgraceful thing about this is that the government clearly shares your obvious contempt for the taxpayers.

[frosti]

The disgraceful thing about this is that the government clearly shares your obvious contempt for the taxpayers.

People deserve the government they get.

[Rockie]

The disgraceful thing about this is that the government clearly shares your obvious contempt for the taxpayers.

People deserve the government they get.

Case proven.

[trampbike]

... and closed?

[2R]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnmJKkWV0Uo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCwLirQS2-o



Just thought some face slapping and the fish slapping dance might might break the tedious tiresome tone of this boring thread
The fish slapping dance has some very interesting military clothing and submarine hunter killer tactics.

Once they perfect the ion engines all these aircraft that use fossil fuel will be redundant.I was told that in 1980 that it should take about three years ,and yet here they are still making engines that burn dead dinosours and diesel

[frosti]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnmJKkWV0Uo

C'mon, you know better than that...


25th? (BF-25) F35 comes off the line.

[Expat]

I just read a report on a financial site,Bloomberg, why the F-35 should be scrapped in the US, and why it probably won't be. Lockheed is employing around 130,000 staff in many states to make it, and the representatives of these states will never allow the program to die, for political reasons. Instead, the report said, the Pentagon will continue to fund this sink hole, and cut on salaries, flying hours, etc...

1. Ground the glitch-ridden F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program. The F-35 was supposed to produce state-of-the-art stealth jets. It is seven years behind schedule and 70 percent over cost estimates. At almost $400 billion, the F-35 has become the most expensive weapons system in U.S. history and one that offers only marginal improvements over existing aircraft, according to Barry Blechman, co-founder of the Stimson Center, a nonprofit policy institute in Washington. (On Friday, the Pentagon grounded its nascent 51-plane fleet of F-35s after discovering a cracked engine blade in one jet.) The F-35 is “worth killing, particularly given its technical problems,” Blechman said. “Putting the F-35 into production years before the first flight test was acquisition malpractice,” Frank Kendall, the Pentagon’s acquisition undersecretary, said in February 2012. So, um, let’s do something about it, Frank.

I just hoped that Canada had a better political system in place.
Anyway, other reports say that Boeing is now active on Parliement Hill, peddling the Super Hornet, and the chief salesman is an ex-airboss... I forgot the details.

[frosti]

Anyway, other reports say that Boeing is now active on Parliement Hill, peddling the Super Hornet,

Gotta try to sell your junk somehow when no one else is buying it. Boeing seems to be getting cozy with the Communist Broadcasting Corp.

So, if every positive thing about the JSF from pilots involved is "LM propaganda" can anything negative be dismissed as "Boeing Propaganda" just as easily? It is absolutely amazing to me, that the slightest negative comment about the JSF spawns dozens of articles all over the world, and none of them in context, or balanced, and devoid of any positive light. I ridicule journalists who display their ignorance when they are pretending to be experts. It is clear that they aren't. It's all negative coverage when ofcourse the real world suggests that there is good and bad. Let us see them also say something about the good. Clear?

[Gravol]

That's too logical Frosti.

As you're aware, many people these days hate anything and everything conservative. If the government did not assist them personally with some sort of struggle or what have you, I guarantee said people will be tainted. The guys/gals who fly the jets alongside the guys/gals who make decisions (who eat drink and breathe this crap) have outlined the pros and cons. I've heard more pro-F35 chat from them.

Something also quite entertaining !!!! , those who express their open contempt for the media generally eat it all up when it favours their politically motivated / ideological agenda.

[Rockie]

The guys/gals who fly the jets alongside the guys/gals who make decisions (who eat drink and breathe this crap) have outlined the pros and cons. I've heard more pro-F35 chat from them.

The guys/gals in uniform rightfully aren't concerned with paying for their equipment, but somebody has to. That makes it very much Joe Schmedlap from Medicine Hat's concern whether he knows anything about it or not...because he's paying for it.

If we relied only on the governing party (whoever it may be) for information we will only get what they want us to hear. This party happens to be worse than any other that's come before it in that regard. So we rely on the media to tell us the rest of the story which is something called "free press". That's a fundamental, defining principle of democracy that uniformed people like frosti are supposed to be defending. The press are not experts and I haven't actually seen any reporter at the CBC or anywhere else pretend to be. They can only report what the real experts like the AG, PBO and non-manufacturer employed pilots are saying about what our government is hell bent on buying with our money.

There is a tendency among some to view anything negative about the F-35 as originating from an incompetent, biased, "communist" media when it clearly is not. Those same people view anything positive as absolute truth even if it comes from the company selling the airplane. Those people have nothing to teach others about "context" and "balance".

[2R]

It is impossible to have a meaningful discusion about an aircraft that is still to be evaluated.

It is a incredulous that so many politicians are willing to commit to a weapons system that is not Proven or half tested.

History is filled with examples of how wars are lost by politicians making stupid decisions.