Skip to comments.
Future fighter (F-35 Update)
Flight International ^
| 27 June 3006
| Graham Warwick
Posted on 06/26/2006 1:17:58 PM PDT by Yo-Yo
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
The Monty Python aircraft program: "I'm not dead yet."
1
posted on
06/26/2006 1:18:01 PM PDT
by
Yo-Yo
To: Yo-Yo
I'm kinda partial to Pratt & Whitney's F135 engine.
Success with that engine (and many others P&W makes, both commercial and military) is what helps me pay the bills!
2
posted on
06/26/2006 1:21:24 PM PDT
by
CT-Freeper
(Said the perpetually dejected Mets fan.)
To: Yo-Yo
As long as the planes can hunt down and blow up terrorists or any enemy of the United States of America, I am all for it!
3
posted on
06/26/2006 1:24:56 PM PDT
by
MAD-AS-HELL
(Put a mirror to the face of the republican party and all you'll see is a Donkey.)
To: Yo-Yo
This and other changes to increase fuel capacity and reduce drag pushed the F-35Cs radius of action close to 1,300km (700nm) 100nm more than the requirement, he says. That's a pretty huge difference.
4
posted on
06/26/2006 1:26:58 PM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: CT-Freeper; patton; sionnsar
Odd that he uses "40 lb" (ANSI units) when talking about structural weight, but "35 kg" (metric weights) when discussing equipment changes.
If that terminology carries into the design, methinks that's a formula for another NASA-type Mars-landing calculation disaster.
5
posted on
06/26/2006 1:33:18 PM PDT
by
Robert A Cook PE
(I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
To: lepton
6
posted on
06/26/2006 1:33:25 PM PDT
by
bkepley
To: bkepley
heh. Yeah, abbreviations should be unique.
7
posted on
06/26/2006 1:34:35 PM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: bkepley
hahaha i read that as "nanometers" too. i was like "damn accurate measurements!"
8
posted on
06/26/2006 1:37:36 PM PDT
by
Zeppelin
(You've been Zarqed !)
To: Zeppelin
hopefully nm is referring to nautical miles. A range of 700 nanaometers probably won't very useful.
To: Robert A. Cook, PE
The maximum airspeed indicator is labelled in units of parsecs per picosecond.
10
posted on
06/26/2006 1:45:53 PM PDT
by
orionblamblam
(I'm interested in science and preventing its corruption, so here I am.)
To: driftdiver
11
posted on
06/26/2006 1:46:24 PM PDT
by
jrp
To: Yo-Yo
The biggest issue is clearing the helmet for ejection at 600kt while staying within the neck-load limits of the smallest pilots, he says, adding: We are developing this for the broadest pilot population ever. My read is that it is costing a lot more to design a politically correct, inclusive a/c for female pilots.
To: Robert A. Cook, PE
y'know, I believe that you are correct. When I was a young lad in Engineering school, the professors would regularly grouse about how much ANSI costs the US yearly.
I think that they were right, too.
13
posted on
06/26/2006 1:49:15 PM PDT
by
patton
(...in spit of it all...)
To: driftdiver
A range of 700 nanaometers probably won't very useful.Unless they're using fiber optics for the controls.
14
posted on
06/26/2006 1:49:28 PM PDT
by
SlowBoat407
(What is our exit strategy in the war on poverty?)
To: driftdiver
hopefully nm is referring to nautical miles. A range of 700 nanaometers probably won't very useful. But think of all the fuel it would save!
To: Yo-Yo
Anyone tell me the major differences between this and the F22?
To: bkepley; lepton
100 nanometers? Don't laugh. F-22 distsnces are measured in Picometers.
17
posted on
06/26/2006 1:57:14 PM PDT
by
Lazamataz
(Proudly Posting Without Reading the Article Since 1999 !!!)
To: bkepley
"100 nanometers?"
I think it's actually 100 nautical miles. You were close though. You were only off by a factor of 1,852,000,000,000.
18
posted on
06/26/2006 2:00:06 PM PDT
by
Moral Hazard
(If Democrats win any more moral victories in November they'll gain moral control of Congress.)
To: Eagles Talon IV
F-22: Twin engine Air Dominance Fighter.
F-35: Single engine strike fighter.
The F-22 is to replace the F-15 in the Air Superiority role, while the F-35 is to replace the F-16, A-6, and AV-8B in the multirole strike figher role.
19
posted on
06/26/2006 2:01:07 PM PDT
by
Yo-Yo
(USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
To: Aeronaut
20
posted on
06/26/2006 2:01:47 PM PDT
by
Yo-Yo
(USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson