Please ping me to aviation and aerospace articles. Thank you.
If you want added to or removed from this ping list, please contact EveningStar or Paleo Conservative.
Contrast with the F22, which performs way over spec. And which Obama killed.
>>More evidence that the F-35 will not be able to do the job it was promised to do.<<
A camel=A mouse built to government specifications.
The F-35 was a great idea. Then the bureaucrats got ahold of it.
The F-16 and F-18 will probably continue to be the best MRFs well into the century.
And since the F22 was scrapped (I’ll never know why), the F-15 once again rules the skies.
Old airframes but designed back when we could actually ACCOMPLISH things.
Famous quotes...
Affirmative Action Aircraft, What a concept .
The F-35 requirements have been rewritten many, many time prior to this. Range, weight, performance, price, schedule, electronics, STOVL capability, carrier adaptability, helmets, on and on.
The only target that does not change is it's ability to enrich LockMart and deplete the Treasury with unerring, unmatched, accuracy.
Kelly Johnson and Ben Rich are turning over in their graves.
‘One-Size-Fits-All’ is a very poor policy for weapons development.
No problem. Just put in a better engine.
not nearly as stealthy as F22
The F-35 is like the F-111, where bureaucrats decreed that “one size fits all, and jack of all trades”. It doesn’t do any one thing real well. Add to that the decision to make it a single engine aircraft, rather than twin engine, simply to save money, results in less than optimum performance and survivability.
Please ping me to aviation and aerospace articles. Thank you.
If you want added to or removed from this ping list, please contact EveningStar or Paleo Conservative.
We all went through this kind of BS with the F-111, didn’t we?
Over weight, underpowered, and too slow.
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.
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?
>>>>The US’s Stealth Fighter (F-35) Is Too Heavy and Slow<<<<
It is not surprising considering a fact that JSF was based on a Russian platform (Yak-141) rejected by Soviet Navy for exactly same reason in late 1980s. LM has bought this technology from bankrupt Russian company in earlier 1990s.
“F-35’s air-to-air ability limited”
http://elpdefensenews.blogspot.de/2013/06/f-35s-air-to-air-ability-limited.html
I.E. the proposed Delta Wing Variant for the Israeli's of the F-16.
Think about it.
* Upgrade with the F-119 engine with Supercruise Capability.
* Thrust Vectoring if you want it, possibily.
* Add a robust landing gear like the Swede's and the Ruskie's used to, perhaps the F-18 or A-10 gear for unimproved fields and or maybe even off the carrier deck.
* Speaking of which add a folding wing Option, Carrier Style fold up, not back.
A penny for your thoughts, Fighter Jock and Arm-Chair Aero-Enganeer Freepers....
Since the beginning of the two programs, it has been very clear to ALL aviation professionals that the F-22 was the better and more versatile a/c.