The F-35 is an aircraft that communicates with it's host via satellite from anywhere in the world. The engine and other critical components notify it's masters of any real or potential maintenance issues. The USAF maintainers say that the F-35 is the "whinny airplane". It complains about everything, and believe me when it does, the USAF crews have to drop everything and fix it even if it is a fly in the engine intake. This airplane is just being introduced into squadron service and there is a "de-bugging" process that will go on for sometime. The USAF doesn't want to lose one of these planes, so they are treating them with kid gloves.However, it's not like these are the only planes in USAF service, they have plenty of others, so a temporary grounding to resolve maintenance issues is no big deal.
Stealth does not make the plane invisible but much harder to detect. The slower speed is probably to reduce the propablity of Infra Red detection. The higher the speed the hotter the plane and the engines gets the easier it is to detect with IR. If I'm not mistaken the Russians are betting on IR to detect stealth planes.
Stealth is not the F-35's best bet, it's the battlefield awareness. This is a force multplier.
The only thing that concerns me is that except for some F-16's they are putting all their eggs in one basket. The older technology has proven itself time and again in many dogfights and fighter-bomber-runs and nobody can beat it. I worked as a Electronics-Engineer for > 15 years most of it with military electronics and an intimately familiar with the Kiss principle: to a degree mind you: "keep it simple stupid". That is not to say to not make use of technology but as the complexity increases the amount of unknowns that can be covered by testing becomes questionable. Of course the leak for a virgin product is to be expected.
Doesn't the US Navy already put all their eggs in one basket with the F/A-18? It seems to work for them.
I'm quite confident in the capabilities of the F-35. The F-22 also had a lot of critique until it showed its capabilities against other planes.
Remember the F-35 is not completed. Anything this complex with stealth and all the electronics systems will take time to debug. When done I'm sure it's performance will be superior to that of the SU35, although likely more costly
Also remember this is not the USA's best multirole fighter that honor goes to the F-22 Raptor the best fighter yet to be developed to date.
In the case of the F 22 it's the best fighter on paper to date, but the most difficult to field and difficult to maintain par the F 35. As for the F 35 even members of product allocation have admitted the idea of Concurrency is a disaster. There huge mistakes made allocating this airplane. Now it shows.
This contributes to the possibility that this airplane will be the last air to air airplane that is manned to be purchased by the U.S. Airforce alone.
These problems are very late in the development cycle, this should've been fixed in the test phase and the test phase should have been concluded prior to production, not at the same time.
Here are key problems of concurrency:
- Instead of a small group of prototypes being fixed and applied to a few models for a fraction of the cost. We are non stop retrofitting and design changing a larger group of production planes all the time.
- We have now multiple groups off the production line at different stages of redesign that is ballooning cost out of control.
- This idea is not a common design or production practice, and is proving to be incredibly inefficient.
As for the Su 35BM. Aerodynamically it is better, carriers more weapons, cheaper , faster, better acceleration. Also China's copied J 31 has one huge advantage in itself': No fat stubby fuselage with short stubby wings, why does the F 35 have this? Marines wanted a lift fan... Now all three models are fat, and aerodynamically shaped like a brick. Also with only one engine, it's difficult to use thrust vectoring in a twin engine plane for VTOL purposes, also more dangerous.
China didn't just copy the airframe, they fixed some it's major issues. Although the software is undoubtedly far far behind F 35 standards, being that the F 35 isn't even functioning correctly it begs the question if that even matters.
Here are some key issues to consider with this Lockheed Martin Advertising success story:
The plane cannot loiter, unlike the A 10 which it is supposed to replace. A 10's often use all 1,100 rounds of ammo on CAS missions, the F 35 moves faster at low altitudes and only carries 180 rounds. The F 35's stealthy skin is many times more vulnerable to AAA fire. F 35 carries much less ordnance than the A 10.
How can this airplane provide close effective ground support in the future? And where will that support for Ground Forces come from.
Also in the air to air sense, the all seeing cameras which seems tacked on as a fix for the lack of rear visibility along with the half a million dollar helmet system, is either lagging behind real time with rapid head movements of the pilot, or low quality textures in the images, much less than what a pilot can spot with the naked eye at great distances. Such as incoming enemy aircraft.
Also once again, that giant lift fan is the reason the F 35's rearward visibility got cut. Once again looking at the Chinese Plane, the biggest difference is that that problem is Fixed on their design. Camera failure on an F 35, would mean no rearward visibility, coupled with bad acceleration performance and awful turning from those short stubby wings means a Super Flanker can feast all day for free.
This plane is doing what the pentagon has tried to do twice, make a wonder plane for all three services , the first time, spurred by the Navy, made the F 4 phantom, and that plane was very successful, and even compared to the F 35, at least it has plenty of power and a great angle of climb.
The second attempt at a wonder plane was the F 111, and as cost ballooned up only the Air Force and select allied countries bought that. Spurred by the Airforce.
This time, the Marines spurred development and got the jump with Congress first in the 90's. Lockheed already working on a design to replace the Harrier, and doing feasibility studies in the 80's was already years ahead of the competition. Congress drafted for a competition, and a pitiful completion was held against Boeing. After that sideshow was over the obvious choice was Lockheed, and Lockheed Knew this from the start being they had a 10 year lead.
Lockheed also makes generous sums to Congressional campaign funding, you don't even need to look at the Congressmen and Women who they've funded by name, look at any state with a Lockheed plant, and you will most likely have their money for that's states current sitting in office Representative or Senator.
Back to airplane. There are three factors that you don't take into account with this program, one it's been in testing and not functioning as advertised for over 10 years.
But here is a ugly truth about the competition:
Lastly, new radar techniques and technologies to aid in testing are being placed on the market and on the field each day. A new form of hunter killer in terms of detection equipment parred with operational adversary fighters capable of well out performing the F 35 may make the airplane irrelevant.
- Competing countries arms industries have completed multiple competing designs and airframes compared to just two on part of the U.S. in that same amount of time.
- These designs are emerging with more and more sophisticated software and capabilities as time goes on it.
- Many are FUNCTIONING products ready to fly and fight NOW. As opposed to being stuck in endless testing.
- Some are already for sale to many of our adversaries.
Being as the F 35 can't loiter, can't run, and can't fight outside of lobbing a small payload of long range missiles. That would spell disaster for this aircraft in any toe to toe engagement.
Also as for stealth... Once a stealth fighter fires it's payload it often comprises it's position. So it the F 35 Fires it's weapons it can be fired at, then it goes from a stealth aircraft to a really bad performing aircraft.
Then the scales if the enemy survives seem alot more even. Considering the F 35 is facing a conventional air threat, not a stealth or air threat backed by ground support radar.
Plane works perfectly in Lockheed Martin advertising videos.
But seems like a Turkey Everywhere else.
Every plane had it's development problems and cost overruns. The F-16 designers struggled with canopy, engine and cockpit issues and was in service before it was completely tested. To date, there are 138 versions of the F-16, as well as 15 block changes, with each block a decisive improvement in capability.
The F-35's development isn't much different with the F-16 one. The only difference is that the problems with the F-16 are history.
Every post WWII US fighter plane was technologically superior to its adversaries and proved its capabilities in combat. Korea, Vietnam, Gulf Wars and Israeli-Arab wars. The US made planes proved to be vastly superior and the F-35 will be no exception.
Until this airplane proves it's promised capabilities I remain unconvinced. The investment to return ratio is totally askew.
The other aircraft you listed were remedied and designed without this disaster that is concurrency.
Concurrency is a BIG problem.
Concurrency and that darn lift fan are killing this program, the plane is built around technical issues, not designed to go on without them.
Also WE DON"T KNOW, what direction our adversaries may take, competing airframes are making leaps and bounds to match pace with U.S. Air Dominance.
Let's not forget, Rome's legions didn't hold off the barbarians forever, especially when they came riding in with thousands of horses and bows.
We don't know if breakthroughs in detection and ranging systems may lift the vale so to speak on the F 35.
Also the comparison between the F 16 and F 35 is moot. The F 16 can do things the expensive F 35 cant's. It can climb, it can turn, it can accelerate, and it can carry more ammo, not only shoot first, but have ammo left to shoot again. Let's not even mention the A 10's capabilities. I see that airframe being better replaced by unmanned drones than the F 35.
It can also loiter. Yes, shoot first in a BVR engagement then win the day.
In Vietnam the USAF said missiles will be the trump card to win all future air battles... And took away all the guns...
Then what happened?
In any air to air scenario where the F 35 fires all it's missiles, and the surviving enemy aircraft not destroyed in the first salvo close in the F 35 maybe a 21st century version of the F 105.
Can't turn like a Sukhoi or J 31, can't climb like a Sukhoi or J 31, can't carry as much ammo as a Super Flanker or Even PAK FA. BVR is great but a stealth Coated B 52 programed to fire AMRAAM's could do the same job.
The plane just doesn't have the real hard tangible attributes something with this much money thrown behind it should. It just doesn't.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.