F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter
- Thread starter SABRE
- Start date
- Status
Hey, Red Baron, care to share with us why you feel the F35 is a lemon? What proof do you have that is totally incapable of doing what its supposed to do.
Agreed, I await with baited breath the usual arguments one puts forward in such arguments, which I expect comes down to a "this v that" comparison of the platforms individually.
In the latest Warships IFR, it is claimed that the F35B can outrange the Tornado, Typhoon and the earlier F-18C/D and actually carries a similar payload with a similar range to an F-18E/F, could someone verify this because AFAIK this is untrue but I would LOVE to be corrected.
Note: Apologies for the newbie-style question, just want clarification on accurate figures, don't want a X v Y discussion. The only reason I ask is because it was apparently an 'F35 "expert"' who claimed this so I thought I'd consult you guys here.
That's good news indeed, I wonder how AW will spin it to a negative?
I've just got banned from AW for posting this reply to one of their spun articles
http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.a...79a7Post:82a6ec7c-f4fe-4aa5-8d5a-fb275108bae8
"After prolonged lobbying and badgering, Oslo secured a firm U.S. commitment to have Kongsberg's Joint Strike Missile (JSM) integrated early on the F-35."
you mean that norway gov approved budget and paid the money to have the missile integration proceed as planned for block 4, don't you?
in my opinion AW have painted themselves into a corner on the f-35 and it looks like nothing is changing to change the reputation they have earned
I've just got banned from AW for posting this reply to one of their spun articles
http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.a...79a7Post:82a6ec7c-f4fe-4aa5-8d5a-fb275108bae8
"After prolonged lobbying and badgering, Oslo secured a firm U.S. commitment to have Kongsberg's Joint Strike Missile (JSM) integrated early on the F-35."
you mean that norway gov approved budget and paid the money to have the missile integration proceed as planned for block 4, don't you?
in my opinion AW have painted themselves into a corner on the f-35 and it looks like nothing is changing to change the reputation they have earned
According to Wiki, SH has a 390nmi combat radius vs a F-35B's which is approximately 450nmi.
the road runner
Active Member
Not another ill informed Fan boy.You guys don't quit do you?
Maybe you should read this whole Thread and then make an INFORMED decision,instead of being ill informed ,and commenting on nothing you know about.
You know more about the JSF than the US Air force,US navy,USMC,UK,Italy,Netherlands,Australia,Canada,Denmark,Norway,Turkey,Israel,
Singapore and Japan?
Please enlighten us with your wisdom
t68
Well-Known Member
That’s good news, I take it they are ordering the A model. Have they shown any interest in the B to go with 22DDH as her dimensions are on par with Cavour (550) and ten metres shorter than an America class?
Is it a camel or a lemon? Are lemon's incapable of what they are supposed to do? What about camels? They are found to be very useful by many, so I wonder if these are apt descriptions?
What is it about the F-35 that makes it incapable of performing it's role as a strike fighter aircraft?
Why would you want to be in an upgraded existing design, rather than a clean sheet new fighter designed from scratch?
This is the point of a discussion forum. Share your opinion by all means, but discuss rather than conduct drive-by postings or you will not be welcome here.
Last edited:
So long as you are flying for the oposing force I am perfectly happy for you to be flying a Super Flanker while the guys providing me with top cover are stapped in F-35s. Why because in the real world it means I have a better chance of living.
He could've called it an apendix, you know, it's there but we just don't know what the hell it's good for. That's what I would have said anyway.
He could've called it an apendix, you know, it's there but we just don't know what the hell it's good for. That's what I would have said anyway.
We know exactly what it's good for. It's intended role. It's working it's way through it's development and having to overcome challenges true enough, but even the US IOT&E community have identfied no fundamental flaws in this aircraft. Only the armchair critics have. Not the people bringing this capability into existence and not the people who have to decide if this capability can do what it's supposed to do...
Many areas remain to be brought up to spec no doubt about it, as one might reasonably expect for an aircraft that has 3 years of planned development still to be undertaken, but it's funny that only the JSF is singled out for nor delivering a "go to war capability" today when it was never intended to. Is that reasonable when other aircraft and projects aren't held to the same standard?
What sort of "go to war" capability does the SU-35 provide today? The answer is NONE and that's because it too is still in development and no blame to it (from me at least).
Yet it gets a free ride from those who will only ever come as close as a roped off area allows them to be to any of these aircraft, but nonetheless confidently tell all and sundry which aircraft is capable and which is a lemon, camel, apendix (sic) or whatever and the F-35 doesn't.
Hardly a reasonable and objective position...
Von Richtofen
Banned Member
I don't need to read nothin.I stand by wat i said about the jsf. how maneuvarable is it compared to even a legacy Mig 29? Can u really define is as a super maneuvarable aircraft? It was ostensibly meant to replace or complement the f22;but can u really see it doin that? It can barely defend itself and costs an arm and a kidney! It is to put it mildly a piece of shit and a political machine. Like i said,i'd rather be in a super flanker.
I don't need to touch a SU-35 to know wat it is capable of. the same way u don't need to drive a Lamborghini to know wat it can do. And u seem to be takin dis all too personally. Wat are u? in charge of theJSF development?:ar15
Nope. In the real world u have a quicker chance of dying extremely fast.
Last edited by a moderator:
"I don't need to read nothin"
"I stand by wat i said"
Mate apart from the fact that you can't spell, and you abbreviate words like your texting, goes to show the maturity you have with your obvious many years in this world.
Your pathetic attempt to compare the JSF's maneuverability to a MIG29 shows your complete lack of understanding, even at a basic level, of what this is about, because you have based your opinion on fanboi dreamtime
Thanks for your short and pathetic stay here, I am highly confident you will not be with us for long, or you could show the smallest piece of maturity and go away and find a nice little fanboi forum that you can rant and rave on as much as you like, if you do im sure it will make you feel more intelligent when you play with people of your level, there are millions of them out there !
You haven't got the faintest idea of what either aircraft is capable of. Both of them are still in development for a start and second of all, unless you are operating them, you are kidding yourself when you pronounce definitely what they can and can't do.
Your Lamborghini analogy is also nonsense. You can imagine what they can do, but unless you're driving them, you still don't KNOW what it can do. You can read the publicly released specs and attempt to comprehend it, but you don't truly.
However as warfare is in no way similar to driving a sports car, why you would think it is, is beyond comprehension.
I'm taking it personally? You're the one using the insulting language against something you'll never get to use yourself and one which even your Country is not ever likely to see. Except in-bound perhaps in some future scenario, in which case you most certianly will NOT want to be in an SU-35...
Von Richtofen
Banned Member
Mate,u sound drunk. Hope u haven't been hitting the beer too hard. And u can't spell too good either mate.:ar15
Nope. In the real world u have a quicker chance of dying extremely fast.
Ouch what a comeback, you sure got me beat with that one. I am curious though, when was the last time US designed combat aircraft we resoundingly defeated in air to air combat? I could be wrong but I am fairly sure the date would have been 1943 or possibly 44. This includes many occassions where they were out numbered and even facing newer opposing types.
For one thing it is a 9G capable aircraft, so the MiG-29 is not "more" maneuverable than the F-35A.
For another, a fighter aircraft armed with AMRAAM and Sidewinder air to air missiles is FAR more than "barely able to defend itself" as all the Yugoslavian and Iraqi MiG-29 pilots who have been splashed by AMRAAM and Sidewinder in REAL air combat between VERY competent and reasonably competent air forces, can attest...
Any aircraft that is capable of turning at 9G is "super-maneuverable" however given you seem to think we are in 1916 judging by your handle and your apparent understanding of what matters in air combat ie: "super-maneuverability" it will undoubtedly be a waste of time pointing out to you that historically the most successful fighter aircraft are those that facilitate the opportunity for a pilot to engage his enemy first.
Once that was done by physically hauling your aircraft around to get into a firing position and the aircraft that could do that quickest or could fire first without having to maneuvre invariably won the engagement.
However technology in the form of sensors, helmet mounted cueing systems and high off-boresite launch capable weapons have been invented and these primarily have resulted in the situation that physical agility is not the be-all of air combat that it once was.
If I can look at you and engage you with a weapon without having to turn at all, what difference does our relative agility make?
Here is a real world demonstration of what I'm talking about. This is what the AIM-9x Sidewinder Block I could do in 2000, 12 years ago when launched from an F/A-18C Hornet, a contemporary of your MIG-29.
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g4_jzqBJnA&feature=youtube_gdata_player"]AIM-9x SIDEWINDER Trial - YouTube[/nomedia]
Your "Super Flanker" doesn't have to be more manueverable than me to win in combat. It has to be more more maneuverable than my missile if I get the first shot away, otherwise you and your Super Flanker will die and everything that is built into the F-35 is designed for exactly that reason.
Low observability, high off-boresite weapons, 360 degree sensor and auto-tracking capability means any agility advantage you possess is irrelevant because your agility and performance doesn't mean squat if you can't evade my missiles.
Fighting an LO aircraft is akin to putting you in a ground environment and asking to you to fight a well trained, well equipped sniper, when he is set up in a hide, ready to take his shot whenever he desires and you are blindfolded, deaf and dumb and have no reliable way to determine if there even is a sniper present, let alone a reliable way to target and engage said sniper before he can reliably engage you.
In short you don't realistically stand a chance. It's for that reason that the makers of Mig-29 and Super Flankers are trying desperately hard to build their own low-observable fighters.
Au contraire, it appears you are the one making it personal. Moreover, I find it interesting how you somehow find someone taking part in the F35 project as someone who needs to feel naturally defensive on what the platform can do and also - interestingly - that you appear to think yourself better informed than someone you infer to being a part of the project, very droll.
Also, not to be a snob or anything, but I wish you would at least pick up on your spelling ability as 1) it's not very nice to read and 2) it's a direct violation of the forum rules, the latter part of number 18 (and your attitude also makes you very close to toppling into number 3 too in my opinion)
http://defencetalk.com/forums/rules.php
It always amuses me how some people are determined to show how they know everything and the people in 'the know' are somehow mentally incapable of even understanding basic principles
then go on to - usually- say how gimmicky 5th gen aircraft are, while being determined to ignore the development of the PAK FA and J-20.This one goes out to everyone, does anyone happen to have a link to the most recently revised delivery sheduled for the F-35? The only example I can find dates to 2007 and I assume since then the situation has changed somewhat.
EDIT: Also, does someone have any information in regards to what weapons will be cleared for use on the F35 on each progressive block update?
Last edited:
Definately has changed a lot since then !! Although I have not seen him on for a bit, Spudman WP is all over this stuff, particulary the block upgrades for weapons and software, Im sure he will update you when he comes by
Spud, you there ?
- Status