Recent Topics
Looking for Fram Ultra XG30 and XG5 cut open
by rubberchicken. 12/12/18 10:27 PM
92 f150 332 code
by ram_man. 12/12/18 10:05 PM
Mixing brands of brake fluid / gear lube
by SureshR. 12/12/18 09:26 PM
45,000 miles in the Caprice.
by ls1mike. 12/12/18 09:21 PM
Quality oils?
by Horsehaulin. 12/12/18 09:16 PM
Exhaust fumes in cabin
by Skater4life27. 12/12/18 08:40 PM
Squeaky sunroof
by dishdude. 12/12/18 08:09 PM
Liqui Moly Top Tec 1800
by Chuckh. 12/12/18 07:56 PM
2006 Pathfinder Transmission Shudder
by Bluestream. 12/12/18 07:10 PM
Maybe E-10 is better? - PentaStar (Flex Fuel)
by StevieC. 12/12/18 06:52 PM
Shipping cost
by Fitter30. 12/12/18 06:45 PM
Purolator P1 14476 CUT OPEN
by 53' Stude. 12/12/18 06:00 PM
Which car to buy?
by jrcowboys. 12/12/18 04:55 PM
New Tire Cracking
by robd. 12/12/18 04:43 PM
SAR B6P - Thoughts?
by 28oz. 12/12/18 03:59 PM
Time to sell the 1-ton Dually
by 02SE. 12/12/18 03:55 PM
Shell Rotella Grease
by WMW0505. 12/12/18 02:27 PM
Need to add attic ladder in stairwell
by Klutch9. 12/12/18 12:51 PM
Newest Members
Horsehaulin, JLew, bmrk1100, Rrrracer, jefe_de_estado
66664 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
31 registered members (clinebarger, csandste, Bullwinkle007, carlprop, 3 invisible), 1,042 guests, and 38 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics295,007
Posts4,925,873
Members66,664
Most Online2,553
Oct 27th, 2018
Donate to BITOG
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 5 1 2 5
F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail #4436285
06/19/17 08:37 PM
06/19/17 08:37 PM
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,466
New Jersey
Rock_Hudstone Offline OP
Rock_Hudstone  Offline OP
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,466
New Jersey
You've heard of too big to fail banks, well now we have too big to fail fighter jets.

A $100 Billion down the tubes so far and according to the article it could probably be shot down by a well flown Mig 21.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...l#ixzz4k9rxdIyC

Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Rock_Hudstone] #4436293
06/19/17 08:44 PM
06/19/17 08:44 PM
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,097
Michigan
A_Harman Offline
A_Harman  Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,097
Michigan
Yeah, all those high-tech weapons that America makes are junk.
Just ask Emperor Hirohito, Josef Stalin, Manuel Noriega, Muammar Qaddafi, and Saddam Hussein.

Last edited by A_Harman; 06/19/17 08:46 PM.

1985 Z51 Corvette track car
2002 Camaro Z28 LS1/6-speed
2001 Dodge Ram 2500 diesel
1972 GMC 1500 shortbed project truck
Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Rock_Hudstone] #4436315
06/19/17 09:13 PM
06/19/17 09:13 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 42,295
New Jersey
JHZR2 Offline
JHZR2  Offline
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 42,295
New Jersey
This is a topic that can very easily go political or cause a lot of fighting. So be careful what is said here, or it will be closed and possibly worse.

I don't know enough about fighter jets to be an expert, but it seems that this was an experiment in acquisition reform and a host of other things that has gone haywire. I don't doubt the study that says it would have been cheaper for each service to design a plane (engineering always has a set of trades to be made, but engineers don't often make these decisions, uninformed lawyers do). Id suspect that if the government had not been lambasted as lazy and overpaid, and been able to maintain a technical competency, along with lead system engineering and integration for as long as possible, the outcome may have been somewhat cheaper... But it doesn't change the laws of physics creating tradespaces for various trades to be made, which align to each service...

Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Rock_Hudstone] #4436327
06/19/17 09:23 PM
06/19/17 09:23 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,417
PA
d00df00d Online content
d00df00d  Online Content
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 11,417
PA
As soon as I read the phrase "expert reveals," I knew Pierre Sprey would be in there. Really entertaining guy, but his qualifications are hideously overstated. Guy knows a thing or two about 3rd and 4th gen fighters, but when he comments about 5th-gen stuff, he's like a muscle car guy trying to talk about Formula 1.

Speaking of which, check out the last line of the article. Professor of Finance? Not exactly the kind of person whose opinion on cutting-edge defense projects I'm most interested to hear. The F-22 photo near the beginning isn't inspiring, either.

Unsurprisingly, the article is made almost entirely of true-but-misleading tidbits. Like, yes, if you use low-frequency radar, you can find it. But you'll also be finding every bird and large insect in the airspace, as well as clouds and rain. Do you want to be the guy who has to figure out which of those thousands of tiny blips is the F-35? I don't. Yeah, you can use low frequency radar, thermal imaging, and laser range finders to shoot down a first-generation subsonic stealth aircraft with no real defenses when its crew gets lazy with mission planning and gives clear signals about where and when it's going to be flying. Which, one might add, is the only time a stealth aircraft has ever been shot down. Good luck translating that into a useful strategy on a modern battlefield against a plane that's 30 years newer, can handle itself against a missile, and isn't necessarily exactly where and when you think it should be.

And yeah, if you bring an F-35 within visual range of a solid 4.5-gen fighter and THEN begin the engagement, the F-35's going to have a hard time. Again, do you want to be the guy searching the airspace for a plane you have to visually acquire to engage, but that has the sensors and missiles to be able to track you and shoot you long before then? I don't.

On a modern battlefield with modern radars and missiles, a 4th gen plane won't just have a hard time operating; it'll be swatted from the sky before it knows what hit it. In that context, low observability isn't some whiz-bang add-on; it's the bare minimum a plane needs just to survive. Likewise, speed and maneuverability don't mean jack if you're spotted and shot down from over the horizon.

Here's some real info from people who actually know what they're talking about: F-35 test pilots. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTgDTC8_PM0

Gonna leave it there for now. Yes, the project is years behind schedule and hideously overbudget. By all means let's have a tough conversation about whether it's worth all this money to stay on the bleeding edge of military technology. But this article, like most F-35 criticism (especially where Pierre Sprey is involved), is way off the mark.


2008 BMW M3
Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Rock_Hudstone] #4436345
06/19/17 10:17 PM
06/19/17 10:17 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 6,600
Huntington Beach, CA
tenderloin Offline
tenderloin  Offline
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 6,600
Huntington Beach, CA
That article is using some not only outdated but wrong information. The F16 designer has a hard on for the F35 and his views are worthless. The previous comments about VS the F16 are also outdated/wrong. Also many Euros want home grown fighter planes even though parts of the F35 are made in Europe. The demo today showed only the beginning of what the plane will do (7G limit now, 9G soon) Go online. Recent dog fights F35 defeated the F16 and F18..having matched the F15C two years ago. Plane has had trouble and is more expensive than expected, but from recent accounts it will turn out a winner BTW the photo in the article is F22 Raptor...
F35 Paris Airshow 2017 F35 was loaded with missles
Red Flag results

Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: tenderloin] #4436346
06/19/17 10:19 PM
06/19/17 10:19 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 6,600
Huntington Beach, CA
tenderloin Offline
tenderloin  Offline
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 6,600
Huntington Beach, CA

Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Rock_Hudstone] #4436351
06/19/17 10:27 PM
06/19/17 10:27 PM
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 3,514
Alberta, Canada
Smokescreen Offline
Smokescreen  Offline
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 3,514
Alberta, Canada
Put the F35 against a SU35S...it will fail.


13 Civic Si 2.4L- 69Kkms(43Kmi)-PP,Wix
05 LeSabre 3.8L-210Kkms(134Kmi)-PP,Wix
03 Sierra 2500 6.0L-204Kkms(127Kmi)-PP,Wix

All with mpg > EPA
Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Rock_Hudstone] #4436369
06/19/17 11:04 PM
06/19/17 11:04 PM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,453
Gulf Coast, MS
3800Series Offline
3800Series  Offline
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,453
Gulf Coast, MS
F35 is not a fighter jet tho. It's primarily a support air craft. What it offers is a very good radar, advanced radar jamming abilities and many other features.

It can be used offensively but that was never it's intent. It could be better but it's not intended for air superiority. It's features compliments other air craft like the F22 and to a lesser degree f16.

It's able to communicate with other air craft and it's radar jamming abilities also cover other jets with it and it can send radar feed live to other jets.

It's is not and was never intended to be a dog fighter. It simply complements the F22 and makes it far more effective offensively and defensively then without it.

Not all jets are fighter jets.

Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: 3800Series] #4436386
06/20/17 12:32 AM
06/20/17 12:32 AM
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,756
Massachusetts
turtlevette Offline
turtlevette  Offline
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,756
Massachusetts
There's only so much ordinance a single small jet can carry. The goal is to kill and we can't forget that. I'd rather have 10 cheap simple jets than one super tech one.


USA-1
Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Rock_Hudstone] #4436390
06/20/17 12:50 AM
06/20/17 12:50 AM
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,485
S California
OneEyeJack Offline
OneEyeJack  Offline
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 7,485
S California
Follow the history of the F-20, a great, cheap to buy, cheap to maintain weapon system that is quick to service and turn around and really good at below Mach 1 maneuvering but capable of Mach 2 speed and also super cruising. But....the US Air Force brass likes big, complicated and expensive jets and the F-20 was none of that. This Northrop line of planes that includes the T-38, the F-5 in all variants and the F-20 made up one heck of a product line. The T-38 was the best trainer the Air Force every deployed but for combat the other Northrop variants never made it pass the special interests in the Pentagon. The F-5/F20's were used as adversaries in ACM training and made live miserable for advanced students. Right now the Marines are buying every old F-5 they can find and that's quite an endorsement for such an old design that's still relevant today. It's small, maneuverable,not stealthy but very hard to see and has an up time and safety record never even approached by any other jet in any air force in the world.

Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Smokescreen] #4436415
06/20/17 03:05 AM
06/20/17 03:05 AM
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,101
North Carolina
rooflessVW Offline
rooflessVW  Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,101
North Carolina
Originally Posted By: Smokescreen
Put the F35 against a SU35S...it will fail.

Doubtful. The F35 could put a missile in the Su-35 before its pilot knew there was a threat. No "dogfight" necessary.

And the PAK FA... A plane Russia can only afford to build 12 of. 5th gen, huh?


"Zed's dead baby, Zed's dead."
Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Rock_Hudstone] #4436418
06/20/17 03:40 AM
06/20/17 03:40 AM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 806
Romania
Andy636 Offline
Andy636  Offline
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 806
Romania
Not that any of this has any importance in a SHTF conflict among superpowers since there are enough nukes in the world to turn everything to fine dust several times over...

Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Rock_Hudstone] #4436469
06/20/17 06:11 AM
06/20/17 06:11 AM
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 21,108
Upstate NY
Donald Offline
Donald  Offline
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 21,108
Upstate NY
My stepson is a weather guy in the USAF. His view is the plane is jack of all trades, master of none.

With drones doing a lot of our dirty work its not clear to me if it's needed.


2015 Subaru Forester 2.5 engine/CVT
2015 Ford F250 w/Powerstroke
2016 Subaru Crosstrek CVT (wife's)
Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Rock_Hudstone] #4436480
06/20/17 06:23 AM
06/20/17 06:23 AM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 18,283
Elizabethtown, Pa
Al Offline
Al  Offline
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 18,283
Elizabethtown, Pa
The age of macho dog fighting has come and gone and so has stealth. Skies can be cleared with conventional jets or ground to air. Enemy targets can be taken out with Cruise missles. No one in their right mind (except the U.S. Military brass) would procure a 100 million plane when for the same price you could send 100 cruise missles with zero risk to a pilot that you have poured in tons of money to train.

But rest assured the dysfunctional system is alive and well...we can print as much money as we need.

Last edited by Al; 06/20/17 06:26 AM.

Re: F-35 Fighter Too Big To Fail [Re: Donald] #4436481
06/20/17 06:24 AM
06/20/17 06:24 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 41,535
'Stralia
Shannow Online content
Shannow  Online Content
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 41,535
'Stralia
Originally Posted By: Donald
My stepson is a weather guy in the USAF. His view is the plane is jack of all trades, master of none.


Quite some years ago, I had a heap of beers with a US Marine technician who worked on the Harriers...that was his opinion...get it to do something well, not everything poorly.

Thinking about it, my daughter is 14, and it was well before she was even conceived.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 5

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™