The F-35 thread

I would really like to know how the EA-18G Growlers were used in that exercise?
 
Dave123 said:
A view from the other side.

[video=youtube_share;ScM_rN9a-js]https://youtu.be/ScM_rN9a-js[/video]
Click to expand...

Interesting that the Russian analyst also thinks that super maneuverability has little application outside looking cool at an air show.
 
I didn't get that from the video. He says (of the T-50) certain stunts like " somersault at one spot ... makes an unforgettable impression on viewers, especially on viewers of school age. But in air combat, it's still debateable how much applicability they have."

And then adds immediately afterwards: "Again, whoever sees first - wins".

Right.

Hence software-defined fighter with BVR 360-degree theatre sight. F-35.

Especially good are his comments about engines. And here nothing comes close to F-35. He hopes Russia will have a suitable engine for T-50 in 3 years. But also admits that it's hope against hope as these projects can take ten years.

Lastly, perhaps the most awesome thing about the whole F-35 project is the sheer numbers. As in WW2, in the end sheer industrial might (depth and scale) wins the war.
 
Last edited:
Arthur said:
I
Hence software-defined fighter with BVR 360-degree theatre sight.
Click to expand...

Any aircraft can become a "software-defined fighter with BVR 360-degree" through upgrades as proven the E-2C Hawkeye missile test. A "software-defined fighter with BVR 360-degree" in a compromised air frame can not become a good air frame as proven by the F111 design debacle.

My point is still the US military might have gotten better aircraft If they fielded 3 air frames with similar software instead of one air frame trying to do everything.
 
Blu82 said:
My point is still the US military might have gotten better aircraft If they fielded 3 air frames with similar software instead of one air frame trying to do everything.
Click to expand...

You know that you've more or less described the F35 program? The A,B and C are similar but not identical.
 
Dave123 said:
You know that you've more or less described the F35 program? The A,B and C are similar but not identical.
Click to expand...

The biggest difference you have is the different wing on the F-35C required for carrier landing.
 
Blu82 said:
The biggest difference you have is the different wing on the F-35C required for carrier landing.
Click to expand...

The wing span between the A and B is about the only dimension that's the same.

Length, height, tail span, weight are all different.

IMG_5318.GIF
 
FoXtroT said:
Forgetting about that big fan and rotating engine nozzle in the B?
Click to expand...

The big fan replace a fuel tank in the other models but the basic air frame stays. We therefor end up with two aircraft with an air frame that is designed to take a giant lift fan behind the pilot that they don't use.
 
One would think that because its so much lighter, the A would beat the C in range, but then again the Cs has bigger wings for more fuel. What's would have been the negatives of giving the A a bigger wing?
 
Blu82 said:
The big fan replace a fuel tank in the other models but the basic air frame stays. We therefor end up with two aircraft with an air frame that is designed to take a giant lift fan behind the pilot that they don't use.
Click to expand...

That's not correct, not your fault you've probably been reading an anti page again ;)

Only 29% commonality.

IMG_5319.jpg
 
That shows me it is the same air frame with around 70% shared between the aircraft with the F-35C wing being the biggest difference.
 
Blu82 said:
That shows me it is the same air frame with around 70% shared between the aircraft with the F-35C wing being the biggest difference.
Click to expand...

You were talking about the fan on the B, check the purple of the diagram (the B is the one labelled STOVL), it's pretty much a different airframe surrounding the fan area.
 
This is an interview worth watching. CSAF General Goldfein explains why "platform v platform" comparisons aren't really applicable anymore. It's network v network. Given at a CSIS briefing after latest Red Flag, on 23 Feb 2017.

It's "family of systems" where the F-35 is a champion quarterback with unmatched sensors and theatre awareness.

"It's the network. And if you don't think about how the F-35 controls, dominates and uses the network, you're not having a 21st Century discussion about the family of systems that we bring to the fight."

On mobile so apols for mobile link.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xJd0wXu_2hg
 
Last edited:
Good find.

Arthur's vid on desktop.

[video=youtube_share;xJd0wXu_2hg]https://youtu.be/xJd0wXu_2hg[/video]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X