Posted on 07/03/2013 2:05:52 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
The Pentagon's pursuit of the Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth fighter jet has been a heartbreaking one. If you're a tax payer, the program's estimated $1 trillion price tag probably breaks your heart a little bit. If you're an aviation enthusiast, the constant whittling away of the do-it-all aircraft's features, which in many cases actually amounts to adding weight and taking away maneuverability, must hurt a little bit, too.
If you're just an everyday American, though, you should be downright shattered that after a decade and a fortune spent, the F-35 will actually be more vulnerable than the aircraft it's replacing. At this point, the Pentagon is literally rewriting its rulebook so that the dumbed-down super jet will pass muster.
The Defense Department's annual weapons testing report reveals that the military actually adjusted the performance specifications for the consistently-underperforming line of F-35 fighter jets. In other words, they couldn't get the jets to do what they were supposed to do, so they just changed what they were supposed to do.
(Excerpt) Read more at motherboard.vice.com ...
We need old fashioned fighter fly-offs with these proto's done in the black and keep all the Milacrats out of it and K-Street Vultures too.
Exactly. Thanks for reading "between the lines"...
"Let real fighter pilots fly the protos and see what the hell they can do, all these flight test programs are so anal so risk adverse it is enough to make your head explode..."
The risk aversion originates from dead test pilots and crews.
But I see your point.
“It took 27 months to go from a paper napkin to an operation craft called the SR-71.”
Kelly Johnson was still alive and in charge then!!!!
We all went through this kind of BS with the F-111, didn’t we?
Over weight, underpowered, and too slow.
LOL, I’d forgotten that! That air intake looked like somebody installed it backwards.
>>F-35 doesn’t have canards.<<
I beg to differ. The project itself has become a canard. It cannot and will never deliver.
Informed and educated position or conjecture and opinion?
Just curious...
>>We all went through this kind of BS with the F-111, didn’t we?
Over weight, underpowered, and too slow.<<
My ex-wife was an F-111?
>>Informed and educated position or conjecture and opinion?<<
Yes.
It's also a poor fit for education.
But until the marriage with the Rolls Royce Merlin, the Mustang was so so at altitude.
Then why is carbon what's left over when I have a camp-fire?
At Lockheed Martin, we’re at our best when we bring talented people with diverse capabilities and experiences together to take on our customers’ toughest challenges. Embracing diversity sparks creativity, generates new ideas, and raises smart, insightful questions. That’s when innovation really takes flight.”
Marillyn Hewson, Chief Executive Officer and President
As long as we're putting it bluntly, it is also one butt-ugly airplane. Just sayin.
Well then, expand the informed and educated position and help dispel the conjecture and opinion. There are always 2 sides to a coin and the F35 is no exception to that rule.
Beware, some of the articles are extremely technical and geeky in nature.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-35.htm
http://whythef35.blogspot.com/
http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-f-35-and-infamous-sustained-g-spec.html
http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-f-35-and-infamous-sustained-g-spec.html
http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-f-35-and-infamous-sustained-g-spec_26.html
http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-f-35-and-infamous-sustained-g-spec.html
http://whythef35.blogspot.com/2012/11/usaf-pilots-and-maintainers-give-f-35.html
In addition, the USAF has moved up its expected IOC by one year. I don’t think they’d be doing that if the aircraft was such a “brick”.
That plane was designed and built by a generation of engineers who had already brought two dozen new fighter aircraft designs into service within the span of a single decade. We don't have that kind of talent today.
Oh,
Wishing you and yours a Happy 4th of July.
FRegards,
SZ
Nice photo sir! Looks like they may have that problem with high G turns solved!
I respectfully disagree. Over its 31 year operational career with the US Air Force, the F-111 in most configurations proved to be a very good strike aircraft. It received a bad reputation due to the association with the TFX program. The aircraft was not a failure in its ultimate role with the Air Force, rather the bureacrats failed to see that you can’t put a square peg in a round hole. In the end it was a good Air Force platform...not a sufficient platform for the Navy. The difference with the F-35 is that nobody in the military is demanding an end to the multi-service aircraft concept this time. The military needs to buck up and tell Congress this dog don’t hunt...just like the Navy did with the F-111B. Don’t make the common mistake that the F-111 was a bad airframe for the ultimate role it ended up serving...and once they ironed out the early production/design issues.
I was a student at the Air War College when one of McNamara's Whiz Kids was the speaker. I challenged him on his assertion that the FB-111 would adequately replace the B-52. He couldn't really respond because he knew I was right.
Don't we ever learn? Why do we have to repeat the same mistakes every generation?
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.