F-35 Program - General Discussion
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
Boagrius
Well-Known Member
Just stumbled across this little gem and found it pretty neat. F35 does a touch and go landing, then with a brief visit to low afterburner demonstrates some pretty impressive agility and acceleration:
https://youtu.be/Tc3L8jOo-w0?t=1m4s
Enjoy!
https://youtu.be/Tc3L8jOo-w0?t=1m4s
Enjoy!
Got my self banned from nationalinterest.org lol. 
Apparently pointing out bad math is a sin... or might have been my minor comment made in relation to the 'genius' journo...
Why Donald Trump was Right That the F-35's Costs are "Out of Control" | The National Interest Blog
My comment
Apparently pointing out bad math is a sin... or might have been my minor comment made in relation to the 'genius' journo...
Why Donald Trump was Right That the F-35's Costs are "Out of Control" | The National Interest Blog
My comment
Oh well
cdxbow
Well-Known Member
Surprised you got banned for that, in some forums the first line might be considered inflammatory, but the comments section of NI is pretty lax usually, especially with the truth. I got banned from Brietbart news, largely for pointing out obvious lies. Not sure why the F35 program continues to attract the amount of criticism it does and with such fervour.Got my self banned from nationalinterest.org lol.
Apparently pointing out bad math is a sin... or might have been my minor comment made in relation to the 'genius' journo...
Why Donald Trump was Right That the F-35's Costs are "Out of Control" | The National Interest Blog
My comment
Oh well
Boagrius
Well-Known Member
Same thing happened to me when I had the audacity to point out that the F35 uses an exhaust nozzle derived from the LOAN program and is not, in fact, devoid of sig management features in the IR spectrum (contrary to a claim by Dave Majumdar).Got my self banned from nationalinterest.org lol.
Apparently pointing out bad math is a sin... or might have been my minor comment made in relation to the 'genius' journo...
Why Donald Trump was Right That the F-35's Costs are "Out of Control" | The National Interest Blog
My comment
Oh well
Copped the same fate when I corrected Tyler Rogoway on Foxtrot Alpha for claiming that the A10 had a DIRCM system while the F35 lacked one.
Never ruin a good story with the facts eh?
EDIT: Personal favorite though is when Kurt Plummer rocks up to one of said fora (usually under a different moniker) and attempts to impress the pants off the masses by verbally vomiting as much technical jargon onto the page as possible. Rarely coherent let alone relevant but entertaining all the same.
MARKMILES77
Active Member
Could just be a bargaining tactic with LM?BLOOMBERG POLITICS
DEC 23/2016
President-elect Donald Trump upended years of Pentagon procurement planning with a tweet on Thursday, announcing he had asked Boeing Co. to price an upgrade of its F-18 Super Hornet jet that could replace Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35, the most expensive U.S. weapon system ever.
“Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!” Trump said Thursday in a post on Twitter.
Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump
Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
9:26 AM - 23 Dec 2016
8,416 8,416 Retweets 30,880 30,880 likes
Lockheed’s $379 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is intended to be the mainstay fighter of the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps, replacing several older planes including Boeing’s F-18. Development of the F-35 is more than a decade in the works, and Lockheed is planning to build more than 2,400 of the aircraft for the U.S. and allied air forces, a project that will create tens of thousands of jobs at factories across the country and overseas.
The exact impact of Trump’s tweet wasn’t immediately clear. The Pentagon has scaled back purchases of the F-18, which lacks stealth and other high-tech capabilities of the F-35, and would require extensive design changes to be comparable to the newer plane.
Lockheed shares fell 2 percent after Trump’s tweet in after hours trading, while Boeing rose 0.5 percent.
arrow canada
New Member
Maybe, but that only works if you are willing to walk away. Like it or not, this program has been a financial mess. The F35 was oringally pushed as a simpler cheaper alternative to the F22 that would perform multiple roles, much like the F16 and F18 to the F15. But, while it is cheaper it isn't cheap enough, the technology proved to be not simple, and antiquated military regulations required excessive development. Because of the slow development, and the specialized nature of the design which integrates targeting pods and similar, by the time the plane is developed it is already becoming obsolete in some aspects, so constantly being revised before it's even complete, like chasing your tail. Time is money, and the development of this aircraft lacked the urgency to make it economical. With hindsite it is very clear that a better approach would have been to update existing jets without LO and run with a few more F22 (sufficient to look after the handful of squadrons of stealth aircraft the Russians and Chinese are able to develop and afford, and take out anti aircraft ground weapons that cruise missiles can't deal with). Former Naval Commander Chris Harmer discussed it recently.
I don't know what happens now, Trump has no vested political interest in the plane, he can walk away from it just like Carter walked away from B1 (a plane that should never have been revived). I expect Lockheed will come up with a simpler path forward, maybe one final large block for each variant (perhaps scrapping the naval variant as Navy seems to prefer Superhornet anyway, it's telling how few F35s they have ordered), instead of multiple ones that require ongoing development, but it wouldn't shock me at all if this all falls apart like the F22 program did. Nothing is ever too big to fail, sunk costs are sunk, the buggy software code mess could be walked away from, but some of the technology developed would then end up in something more cost effective; eventually.
Last edited:
Air Force Brat
Member
To quote Lord Vader, "I find your lack of faith, Disturbing!",
from Jimmy Carter's last fan on the planet, posting from an underground bunker, its clear you also share Mr. Carter's "keen intellect"??
Mr. Trump obviously lacks an appreciation for the amazing capabilities the F-35 brings to the battlefield, and I would remind that he is the "president elect". While he owns a large "transportation aircraft",,, he is lacking in any real apparent knowledge of military aircraft??
Hopefully someone with a real understanding will be able to bring him into the "present day", and give him a primer on air-combat in 2016 and into the future. Your post seems to "parrot" the many naysayers of this very fine airplane, who believe that it makes them look "knowledgeable" to criticize the F-35, whether on performance or cost?
The F-35 is an extremely effective and cost effective aircraft as we survey the extremely dangerous "counter air" environment everyone is currently operating in. Those F-22s that have been deployed to the Middle East have proven invaluable in providing support and protection, situational awareness to our 4th gen platforms that are currently operating in that very hostile "anti air" environment.
To "assume" that any 4th gen aircraft would be the solution, or even a viable option is indeed small minded, and at worst, completely ignorant. Hopefully someone will bring the President Elect into the real world, and quickly. While I have no problem with him "calling out" both Boeing and Lockheed, his suggestion that any version or proposal of a future F-18 as a viable alternative to the F-35 is simply "pitiful".
arrow canada
New Member
Small minded, ignorant, pitiful. Etc., you know, shooting the messenger because you don't like the message doesn't make an argument. I think the F35 is tremendously capable as well, although it still has various bugs, but the real question is why does the US need to spend so much on so many tremendously capable aircraft that are much more expensive to operate? The F35 was supposed to be cheaper to operate than the 4th g, but disappointingly it will be more costly due to the stealth coatings, which then eats into what the forces have the money to do. I think it's very clear the Navy don't want it (Naval doctrine is jam not hide, carrier environment isn't suited to delicate stealth coatings) and the C variant is dead (I expect this is what Trumps Super Hornet talk is about). Unless Lockheed can simplify this project quickly the A and the B will be dead as well, and the US won't collapse because of it. Like China and Russia, Trump realizes it makes more sense to have a mix of affordable to operate aircraft and a few cutting edge ones, the Pentagon used to understand that, and I think the tide is turning back to that. We will see what happens though, it's fun to watch. My prediction is Trump kills C, orders Superhornets for the Navy (who will focus on longer range / less stealthy, F/A-XX), and a simplified final but large batch of A and Bs is ordered. It wouldn't shock me if the program dies though, it's all on Lockheed now.
Last edited:
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
What I marvel at is this "cutting edge aircraft" is from 1996 and yet 20years on it is still not in operational service.
The F 35 program is a massively mismanaged industrial adventure not a functional military capability. By comparison the F15 began development in 1965 and entered service in 1976 at a time when our society lacked the computing power we have today. Moore's law at its best. The F35 was obsolete before at ever got airborne.
I sit here with my iPhone in my hand holding more computational power than could have ever been conceived when I bought my first computer, aCommodore Vic 20.
The way forward is likely as arrowcanada stated. SH for the US Navy and a reduced buy of the other two variants. :rel
The F 35 program is a massively mismanaged industrial adventure not a functional military capability. By comparison the F15 began development in 1965 and entered service in 1976 at a time when our society lacked the computing power we have today. Moore's law at its best. The F35 was obsolete before at ever got airborne.
I sit here with my iPhone in my hand holding more computational power than could have ever been conceived when I bought my first computer, aCommodore Vic 20.
The way forward is likely as arrowcanada stated. SH for the US Navy and a reduced buy of the other two variants. :rel
what absolute nonsense
for crying out loud there are over 100 in active service and they are FOC - ie they are war ready assets
I am going to cut and paste what I have said on a private forum to other hand wringers who have come up with the same mythical nonsense
"and for the 15th time in the last half a dozen years - the cost varies with the customer delivery cycle
RAAF JSF costs have never been above $86m - despite regular trips to the Senate by the hand wringers who want us to fight future wars in 4th gen assets and think that by digitising the cockpits that we can end up with JSF capabilities
the JSF has similar design elements to the F22 - core electronics and warfighting systems are embedded within the structure
good luck trying to retro fit arrays and EODAS into a SHornet or F-16/F-15
you don't need to be an engineer to know that retrofitting some systems is a certification headache - and you trade off range and performance (and loadout) when you do
People who want the warfighters to go and fight a future sensored up battlespace in a 4th gen asset albeit modified really have no idea what they are talking about
the sensor and battlespace pictures available on JSF to 4th gen is equiv to comparing a beaufighter to an F-15 I (israeli F-15)"
I find it interesting that every wailing anti-jsf politician I know has pulled their heads in very quickly when they received the classified briefs
anyone who thinks that a SHornet retrofitted is the way forward needs to sign up to their respective airforce and volunteer to be a target.
the future combat operating picture capabilities alone are better than a lot of dedicated AEW assets in some airforces
Last edited:
John Newman
The Bunker Group
From what I have read and understand the answer is no, not when funds have already been allocated, see below:
Can Donald Trump cancel the F-35 program? | Ottawa Citizen
Anyway, regardless of all the posturing and politicking by Trump, I still can't imagine that the F-35 program would get the chop.
Seriously, what is the alternative??
well, the problem is that the spey brigade proffer the argument that future combat is about light knife fighters, high mach speed, "turning on a dime" etc....(and to save weight, ditch the radar and go GCI - you beauty, lets bring back a 21st century version of the Tigershark - NOT) To reiterate ad nauseum the common combat picture and common operating picture mantra - whoever sees first gets to dictate the fight from that point on. geebuz wept, the JSF doesn't even need to be in the weapons range engagement box to see the enemy before (and if) they see her - and she can handoff weapons to other assets. If its Link 22 and Link 16 then that includes skimmers and Abrams fitted with same. the combat box acreage has exponentially increased by considerable margin. No amount of marketing blurb from Boeing is going to see a Growler or Shornet have that capability - less yes, equal? Not in a blue moon
they have NO comprehension about situational awareness improvements, situational appreciation advances, how everyone in all 4 main service arms are now highly interconnected, and I loathe to use the term in case some muppet misinterprets it - but network centric warfare at the co-operative level is literally mind boggling.
I've worked in the C4ISR space developing awareness and feeding extra information into the combat and operational picture - where we were 8 years ago, or even 3 years ago is nothing like what we have now
good luck with that dogfighter when he can't see even when he knows that the other side is in the engagement box - let alone in the sensor box, good luck with a dogfighter that has stress frame alerts going off at 7G when the missile can do 30G+
good luck with the fighter when JSF and everyone else on Link 22 and Link 16 can be informed of where and when to shoot and nobody knows where they are, but they get the TADL info to release
seriously, I just despair at some of the continued idiotic comments about JSF coming from some areas - they demonstrate no appreciation of how C4 and C5ISR at the comms level has changed the way that we will fight
even if by some magic of engineering and supported by a temporal rift in the fabric of space we could double the range of the Growler, pack more smart weapons into it, get rid of the spare bum in the rear and replace it with BAE's smart logic (bearing in mind everything I have said prev about "integrated into the frame" technology - then it would still have no chance against JSF
good luck with the gator fleet as well - all of sudden, the ability for the americans to double their "carrier" based STOL fighter footprint just disappears. Good luck selling that swill to the USMC - because they will be putting up a robust fight if anyone now tries to take them away.
The lack of knowledge presented as fact just does my head in with these arguments.
Last edited:
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Couldn't agree more.
I think it's time for some to "take a Bex and have a good lie down" as my old Gran used to say!!
Welcome to the forum. When posting here one should observe the rules. This is a professionally run forum with defence professionals active on it.
All I see here are some spurious claims made without any reputable verifiable sources. Being a Mod I am aware newbies cannot post links however that does not preclude you from posting the url or the reference and letting the rest of us cut and paste them. It is a requirement to cite sources.
Why do we insist on reputable verifiable sources? In the case of the F35: because a lot of the so called "information" peddled by those opposed to the F35 is nothing but misinformation and lies that have no reality in this reality - yes I know define reality. The people who make these claims, such as Air Power Australia and their ilk, know absolutely nothing about the aircraft, are not part of the program, or do not have access to the necessary data to make a valued assessment upon its capabilities. Also Wikipedia is not a valid and reputable source.
No need to get snarky especially as this is only your second post. I would strongly suggest that you refrain from this.
"Show me the money" to quote a Tom Cruise film character. The F35C has it over the SH in range and weapons carriage ability without even going into its sensor, data fusion and dissemination abilities. Trump is an aberration in a political sense and before you get started politics on here is against the rules. To quote Col Klink "ist verboten".
Read back through the F35 threads and have a look at what has been said. There is a wealth of data here. Whilst we do welcome robust debate we tire of continually having the repeated regurgitation of the tripe and sewerage thrown up by the anti F35 brigade that consists of memes etc., and unsubstantiated claims, since disproven, that have been circulating around in social media, main stream media and occasionally in the odd Senate hearings to be thrown out.
Since when? :smash
Trump would really be upsetting a lot of people by threatening to curtail the Program. There's a reason LM shared significant pieces of the pie domestically and abroad. Vested interest all over the place, most importantly in Congress.
https://www.f35.com/about/economic-impact
https://www.f35.com/about/economic-impact
the JSF is not at risk - Trump is about colour and movement. He'll be fighting republicans in congress
There are 10 republican representatives in Georgia, 25 in texas, everyone is well aware how congress switches on when their districts are in the scope for the QDR's etc...
MARKMILES77
Active Member
Interesting to note that Trump's tweet happened AFTER he was given a briefing by Lt General Bogdan (JSF Program Office Director) on the F 35.
This comment was made by Bogdan to reporters on 21 Dec with regards to the F 35 Program and it's future:
Take a punt and self fund a program to significantly upgrade the Super Hornet? Perhaps all of the proposed Super Super Hornet upgrades.
This comment was made by Bogdan to reporters on 21 Dec with regards to the F 35 Program and it's future:
What would you do if you were on the Board of Directors at Boeing?
Take a punt and self fund a program to significantly upgrade the Super Hornet? Perhaps all of the proposed Super Super Hornet upgrades.