U.S. grounds entire F-35 fleet pending engine inspections

Once the F-35 is up and running to spec. After the F-35 has fired it payload of missiles there will be no enemy plane to fire back at it. When is the last time an enemy plane has fires back at an any US plane early Vietnam?


When has the United States military faced a first rate trained air force using comparable aircraft since Vietnam?

Even the the NVA Air Force was pushing it. I don't think it wise to put all your eggs in the basket of BVR shoot 1st win 100% always now and forever.

New 4th Generation++ are showing low end front signatures, giving the AMRAAM in certain circumstances a 20% miss envelop. If you have a brand new pilot in year 2020 trained to just hit the fire button from BVR range, what happens when that Sukhoi inverts and that AMRAAM does what we all project it will never do... Miss at least one 2 out 10 times. Also that Flanker can carry more comparable missiles such as the R 77, F 35 has very small payload. And relying on the F 22... A plane out of production now and very fragile despite it's advanced technology is difficult at best. I don't see an F 22 being able to do turnaround combat sorties in any serious conflict for long, the down time will eventually result in F 35's going alone (even if they are completely combat ready ) or with traditional older fighters.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-f-35s-air-to-air-capability-controversy-05089/

Then the upgraded Flanker is within a distance where the "stealth like" attributes of the F 35 are now lost. Sure, a cut rate Air Force with export Flankers with no technical knowledge of long range evasive actions, long range ESM support for friendly aircraft or how to tune long range low frequency radar into a method when combined to help diminish this plane's abilities can be challenged, sure. But one that capitalizes on these methods, well.

(Par one incident in Yugoslavia with older technology on both sides but that has only happened once).

As for the F 16, when it is out of ordnance it is still very maneuverable.

Lessons should teach us. Weapon systems fail, planes get jumped, sometimes the dot on the horizon finds a way to being a blur in front of your canopy.

I just would feel uneasy ever treating this aircraft as any serious agile WVR fighter worth putting our son's and daughter's in.

As for political interference as a problem I feel yes and no... Yes on terms of the Pentagon throwing "One More" design requirement into the program making it more complex and jacking up the cost. And the USMC's instance on that ridiculous VTOL capability that with the Harrier it has never used ONCE as intended via operating from "Lillypads" in any U.S. combat operation. Making it a poorly performing aircraft which could have been accomplished via traditional carrier aircraft in hindsight. But by every single means at that proper Government oversight on cost expenditures as well as where our tax money is going should be handled with extreme care. Dedicated, on sight and offsite long term officials should manage the record books on were that funding is going and Lockheed Martin should be held totally responsible both financially and officially for any unnecessary overruns.

Also may I remind my fellow tax payers, we are developing this aircraft for our allies too, even the one's who are considering pulling out on solely U.S. tax dollars. That's right, regardless if the world buys it or not we pay.

I also don't see how applying new stealth coating mixtures in the future will keep pace with possible future breakthroughs in detection in the long term. Who knows who will win that race. Aircraft designer or Radar Designer?

I watch the developments of foreign aircraft with great interest out of a growing concern that this airframe may one day face an opposition that is not as "sub par" as we all gloat they will be. Nor that we will find ourselves "generations ahead" in a period of financial turmoil here in the U.S.

Both out of concern of this program maybe one day being a total flop and U.S. lives in danger, but also compromising our national security abroad. That is where my concern lies.

But Lockheed, By all means, massive advertising budget aside and borderline intimidation to some past test pilots aside, Indulge me .


As for Mr. VDKMS. Thank you for your counter points. I enjoy our debates on various topics and feel it healthy to share respectful and thoughtful dialogue here along with others.
 
Su-30MK-BVR-2.jpg


Visual aide to reinforce my last post.

( I maxed out the characters in my last post)

Sorry Mr. Redleg! :-?
 
comparing the radar coverage between F 35 ans Su 35:

656165_235.jpg



F 35 is equipped to APG-81 and Su 35 radar is Irbis-E. these two radars have the same ability but because of F 35 RCS, it has upper hand. On the other hand Su 35 is equipped to an auxiliary L band radar which is especially designed to help it to discover stealth targets. Also radars and sensors of F 35 can find targets in 120°angle but for Su 35 this angle is 240° .

656166_400.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think Americans believe that the quality of weapons are directly related to the money they spend for their projects. If you spend more money you make a better weapon. Some times it is true and their weapons are supreme but it is not a rule.
The problem of the US is that they have the strongest and most advanced army so if they want to be the top for ever they should do more risk and spend much more money than others.
 
Last edited:
F-22

No fighter will stand up to the F-22. No dogfights will occur with this plane. This is the US Air forces top plane that will out perform the F-35 and every other plane out there for that matter. So all the eggs are not in 1 basket they already have a plane that is superior.
These Radar plots are somewhat relative, they show antennae coverage. But what about accuracy, Doppler shift, clutter processing, electronic counter measures, etc. The fact that this Su-35 uses 2 radars for more coverage could prove helpful if it's signal processing is equal, which I remain a bit skeptical about. This is where a lot of the money for the electronics goes.
 
Last edited:
I got a feeling this could go on and on. The article basically points out that the weak link is the heat producing single jet engine of the F-35 which I understand precautions have been taken to try and mask this heat profile. I have seen Russian vs. US electronics systems and I just have trouble believing they have the capabilities claimed but I could be wrong concerning these aircraft? In the electronics arena the US is generally years ahead.
 
I got a feeling this could go on and on. The article basically points out that the weak link is the heat producing single jet engine of the F-35 which I understand precautions have been taken to try and mask this heat profile. I have seen Russian vs. US electronics systems and I just have trouble believing they have the capabilities claimed but I could be wrong concerning these aircraft? In the electronics arena the US is generally years ahead.


How you use even dated equipment can pose a serious disruption to existing doctrine.

Also the F 35 does what other airplanes currently have not tried. With it's horrible visibility trying to create a false picture in front of the pilot's eyes with an elaborate and problematic system of cameras. Random system failures with poor camera quality, lost imagery, and "lagging" in the image currently faced could end up with a dead pilot if he is straining to see where the enemy has gone, or where ground fire is coming from.

In traditional aircraft all that pilot would have to do it turn his head.
 
How you use even dated equipment can pose a serious disruption to existing doctrine.

Also the F 35 does what other airplanes currently have not tried. With it's horrible visibility trying to create a false picture in front of the pilot's eyes with an elaborate and problematic system of cameras. Random system failures with poor camera quality, lost imagery, and "lagging" in the image currently faced could end up with a dead pilot if he is straining to see where the enemy has gone, or where ground fire is coming from.

In traditional aircraft all that pilot would have to do it turn his head.

Does sound a bit futuristic doesn't it.
 
Whats X-Wing

We know what the X Wing can do I just don't think we have the technological innovation to do it yet Kid.

Never heard of that one, X-Wing that is? Since I'm in my 50's I'll take being a kid as a compliment. Wisdom vs. Energy-Strength the inevitable tradeoff.
 
Never heard of that one, X-Wing that is? Since I'm in my 50's I'll take being a kid as a compliment. Wisdom vs. Energy-Strength the inevitable tradeoff.


Lol it was an Original Star Wars reference, even the kid part. But I will compliment you all the same for the thoughtful debate and valid points. :wink:
 
follow-up

Lol it was an Original Star Wars reference, even the kid part. But I will compliment you all the same for the thoughtful debate and valid points. :wink:

Thank you. These things are getting so high tech it's had to keep track of it all. In the end only time will tell if this F-35 is the do all they hope for and if opponents fighters can match or take it out.
 
Back
Top