|About||1 week ago|
Question. In your opinion, isn't it better to have military hardware that's good at doing what it's supposed to do, with minimal frills...
As a person who did in fact work on the HUD system, it was a cluster fuck of a program. I can’t speak on the 2nd gen systems, but the 1st
Than something that tries to do everything with the same piece of hardware?
gen systems were AR, not VR. The targeting, radar, and optical systems integration took a huge engineering effort and corners were cut.
The jet is still an embarrassment, it may be good later down the road but right now, it's an embarrassment.
I’m assuming in the newer generations they fixed the issues and “undocumented features” we had early in the program.
If it’s possible to do everything with the same piece of hardware, I’m all for it, as it cuts down on logistics, but it IS difficult to do.
That sound you hear is someone grinding an ax
Yeah, we don’t really get to mess with the helmets much, but the pilots never complain about these gen 3 ones, so I think they figure it out
While it is nice, I have a bais to the a10 has it has saved many a buddies life including mine
I love the A10, absolutely fantastic aircraft, purpose built and rugged as fuck, the F35 can’t replace it truly.
God bless the man who built it. Truly a magnificent terrorist killer.
Are you sure? Med group told me it was tinnitus
I never got to play with a finished installed system. But the initial development systems we sent to the field for testing always came back
The a10 is a guncraft though, the f35 isn't. So it's not really a replacement as an...alternative.
with lots of complaints and suggestions. The Automated Test Systems I got to use were very cool. Tested the targeting and tracking features
the AR overlay, and the camera feeds. By far the coolest thing I have ever worked on. Had to go through background checks for security
clearance. We had twice weekly audits of materials. Transfer of material was done via locked cases. Code names for everything. And so much
paperwork! The government loves its paperwork.
The technology packed into that plane is far from being an embarrassment. Its the schedule and bloated budget that is the embarrassment.
I'm curious how does the f35 hold up to the f22?
In a dogfight f22 wins without a doubt. F35 have newer tech and is very support based. I’ve read somewhere that the f35 can basically 1/2
Target enemy aircraft and relay information to the other fighters (like an f22). 2/2
That’s badass that you worked on such a piece of machinery. Do you go to college and if so what major? CS, CE, or EE?
Plus a lot of the tech developed for the f35 can be integrated into other platforms. Possably saving money down the road.
He used sputnik, a russian government propaganda news site for source(s)? Thats probably his issue.
Canada cancelled their plans to buy the F35 and are doing the F18 instead. Numerous reasons. Not just performance.
Former airforce fuel cell mech. Here. I like what you're doing, I had a similar argument with someone who had no knowledge about a/c. 1/3
Crew chiefs are enlisted, extremely unlikely he even has an associates degree (CCAF) unless he's E-6 or above.
And I told them that each MDS have specific roles they play and are defined by the letter and numbers of the A/C. he or she then sent 2/3
If you work around jets..... your fortunate friend
A gif saying "my lack of knowledge is disturbing". Anyway you're doing a great job. CC are the unsung heroes of the flight line.
The F35 is one bad ass plane that in many was is better than the F22. It's cost loads and took ages but it's bad ass 1/2
And then CNN, as well as a clearly biased random website. The guy is just a tool.
People also don't understand that stealth jets don't fly the same way in combat, max rate turns screw your stealth profile. 2/3
Pilots are trained to fly flat and not bank sharply. F35 will fire air to air while flying away from you so has no need to turn or bank! 3/3
Maaan just you wait. The airfield is FULL of acronyms.
From what I understand, the development has been spread to so many companies/states that almost every state a financial gain in it
So essentially, the F35 is more of a strategic tool
I tried my best to keep it non flightline personnel friendly
Studying to clep through that CCAF right now, lol
Well theres a wing-drop "problem" on every airliner with swept back wings. Setback of cruising in the transsonic range effectively
F35 has a better radar suite and the LO on an F35 is 10x better than on the F22, but the 22 outmatches the 35 in pure air superiority
You did a great job sir.
Try country’s, there’s parts on the 35 made all over the world
Article about the F-35's dogfighting: tl;dr it doesn't perform well because it's designed for beyond-visual-range engagement 1/2
Sure, but it’s capable of combat too due it it’s stealth nature and being undetectable by radar (crosssection of a bird) Fire missile boom.
OP knows more though, I just read articles for fun
Good luck and don't stop there! Backup plans are always a good idea. After 10 years I couldn't deal with the bullshit any more. That was 1/2
I was never aware our northern brothers planned to buy the 35 to replace their 18s
with 2 years left on the contract. Been out 3 years and have an undergrad and almost a Masters in comp sci. Wayyyy happier.
But with the states means they’ll never have enough congressmen willing to defund or cancel the project
Yeah, good point
Civilian life and military life both definitely have their pros and cons, but right now I think I’ll take military over civilian for 7 more
That’s a big factor in its longevity. Then tech development lag time to advances. Large chunks of interface can replaced with Bluetooth
I think you got trolled pretty hard man
I'm exhausted after wading through the acronyms. Thanks for the cat +1
Even anyone with a bit of common sense could deduce that this guy is full of shit, without knowing anything about the program itself.
Holy shit is there truth to that "losing half an inch on ejection" thing? That's insane
F22s only warning would be when their radar warning receiver went off. Then they'd get an AIM-120 AMRAAM up their tail pipe.
We can build trillion dollar war planes while Flint still doesnt have safe drinking water. LOL
Yeah, it’s like 16-25 Gs straight down on your spine.
It sounds like he knows more than you friend, wether you like it or not. Also, Rolls Royce engines are British.
I'd heard that the plane sinks heat into the fuel tank, so that if the fuel was too hot it caused issues. Solution was reflective paint.
Ten Manhattan Projects worth of money and the damn thing doesn't work. That's still accurate.
This guy doesnt really know what hes talking about. Jets are developmental arcs, early phantoms were equally disliked
I know Congress wants a jack-of-all-trades, but I like purpose-built planes. They're just so imaginative and can be devastatingly effective.
Aren't they the jets that the Aussie gov'ment played for from the Americans like 3 years ago.
My friend is an Ordy for an F35 squadron, and she says the plane is a pain in the ass. Mostly because it’s still under warranty.
My biggest problem with F-35 is the unit cost, Finland is replacing its F-18s in coming years and F-35 is one possibility and I'm 1/
Wondering how much would it cost to replace them with 35s. Otherwise I guess it's a good plane. 2/2
Go and read the US govs own annual report on the programme and you will see what the pentagon thinks of the plane. It isn't pretty!
Every single aircraft is a hot mess upon certification and introduction to the fleet.
To say that a crew chief "works" on an aircraft is such an overstatement.
I've seen these monsters do things in the sky that seemingly defy physics. Every aircraft is initially a headache and jets are WORK.
I have a bias towards the A10 because it's fucking badass
I'm sure that the F16 is better in a dogfight and the A10 is better at putting a hurting on armour and ground targets...
But neither is capable at the job of the other. That is the point of compromise. A plane that can perform multiple roles has a place.
I miss working on the jsf
The type of person who actually believes that Trump thought the plane was invisible.
Yo shit is shit compared to mine shitbag! - F15 Crew Cheif
Bless this thine holy brrrrt.
TIL you can lose height from ejecting from a seat.
Ill just go withbthe eurofighter
I know of it from the discussion on italian parliament. Basically USA is "forcing" every Nato ally to buy this crap.
And rt.com! That's Russia Today, another Russian government controlled news agency. He might be right but he lost all credibility.
But it still cost an absolute fuckton. Like "cure hunger world wide five times over"-fucktons.
One of the lucky ones, since that piece of shit is the king of friendly fire.
I've talked to a couple pilots of f22s and read what pilots have said about the 35. A dogfight shouldn't happen. If it does, sure, a
Pictures of pretty planes are what we get instead of health care.
It's still a dumb fucking idea to invest this much in a manned strike fighter platform at this stage, but meh, sunk costs.
Typhoon can turn faster. But from what I've read the typhoon would get shot down before they even saw a spec that could be a 22 or 35. That
I used to work around planes on the ground at Logan Airport, and my uvula swelled up every day. Am I fortunate?
Don’t get me wrong. You have a point, but that is the fault of the state and not the nation.
the ak47. works like a charm. in all conditions and so easy to use a kid can use it
Speaking of Russia, I wonder how it'll handle that totally not overhyped su-57! ... I guess we'll never know, because it GOT FUCKING CANNED.
You mean understatement? I just got off an 11 hour shift fixing shit asshole.
The cold war is over, when is the last time an American pilot got into a dog fight with another plane?
The ironic thing is that, if this guy were to look at the development (and ONLY the early development) of the F-16, he would hate IT too.
Yeah I stopped reading half way through, main thing I heard about this in the past, it was shit at dog fighting, no new info here
I don't wanna dig for sources because the debate is a dumpster fire, but I read mention the losing fight had the F-35s short-leashed.
Is how good their stealth and combat systems are. Whatever fighters people compare them to isn't even fair. There would not be a dogfight
Wouldn't stealth coating that peeled off with even a stiff breeze that needed to be repainted after every flight be fucking useless? It >
Yes, every other country is buying 35s because they are the “best” fighter they can buy since the 22 is only United States.
You realize it takes just a tiny bit of time to REPLACE AN ENTIRE CITY PLUMBING SYSTEM? I mean sure it's bad it's taken so long, but..
would peel off before it even reached its target, so whilst you can claim some incompetence (factual or otherwise), that's just too absurd.
Remember it takes like a year just to widen a city street an extra lane or two, that shit ain't easy yo.
What, did it really? Is it because the Indians backed out?
Also the plane money isn't being pissed away, it's giving jobs, advancing tech, and our knowledge of aviation.
Another thing about the F-35 to note is that its development is one of the most public in history AND it's going into production while being
Going off Wiki, but it says that's an interim solution of 18 used Australian (which are buying 35s) planes before a competition can be held.
They can definitely do both, they just don't care about Flint water enough.
A trillion dollars (and that's the LOW estimate) spread across ~80 years is still $12 billion per year. That's $5 million per plane per /1
Developed. So yeah every flaw is greatly magnified and most solutions are barely mentioned.
Officially, the reason is that the 10 they made are so incredibly awesome that they'll never need more. Yeah, they expect people to buy
that load of shit. It's the MiG 1.44 all over again. People talk shit about the F-35 while Russia keeps making these EPIC failures.
year. That is a shit-ton of money for something that's probably going to be made obsolete in the next few decades by drones that cost 2/
Thank you so much for this. The F-35 program has indeed had many problems, but pretending like they haven't been fixed is flat-out lying.
Also, I think the a 1/4 chance of having your necked snapped and a 100% chance of being injured is better than a 100% chance of being pate.
a million a pop. 3/3
I think a nice middleground would be a few multi-role machines instead of lots of dedicated machines or one overextended machine.
The 22 looks sexier too.
You got so amped up by a Twitter fight that you had to come recap it on a whole other site?
Get real. I've seen you guys "work." Call me when you can't figure it out and I'll come help ya =D
Is there any particular reason to think "the main problem is you cannot see it" repeated a million times DOESN'T mean he thinks it's invisib
The A-10 is such a specialized machine and they're running out of parts. Plus, its cannon was designed for armor, not close air support.
@OP original JSF requirement was 1 plane for all branches. 3 different production models only came as a budgetary measure.
Motivated Reasoning Is Why You Can't Win an Argument Using Facts
The result is these 3 models have shortcomings resulting from compromises made for the original 1-type requirement.
Specialist planes are definitely superior if you already have the upper hand or the initiative. I like flying tanks.
They dropped the T-14 Armata project too.
An F-35 can arrive on-site much faster than an A-10. Though for the same reason it presumably can't loiter as long.
The guy said the plane has to fly right up next to enemy to hit it .. was reading anything else idiot said necessary? LOL .. it's not WW1...
OP - “That’s a nice rant you got there. It’s be a shame if someone.... *BRRRRRRRTTT!*”
Manhattan was fairly cheap, overall, though. Or, at the very least, it used the 'leftover' resources after the rest of the war was paid for.
A-10 will always have my heart.
You must be from some shitty heavy base lol
Just out of interest, what if the opponent also had a stealth jet? Although I don't think anyone else has an actually working one yet...
And very high tech compared to a cannon, or bolt rifle
Oh internet - the pace where one smartass creates plenty more other smartasses. Please, never change.
Crew chiefs ftw!
I mean... we can do all that focusing on something actually useful like space travel and advancing medical equipment.
Yeah that would be interesting to see. The f35 is going to be sold to other nations though I believe
Dog fighting is like obsolete warfare isn't it?
It also can't take punishment like the A10 can.
The A10 isn't an aircraft, it's a cannon they mounted wings on. I love it!
Obviously a red herring to underestimate us and take eyes away from the secret ufo program.
I wasn't aware Flint was having water problems since 1992.
Yeah dogfight is obsolete, like chariot lol
I don't claim to be an expert, maybe it's not as important as it used to be. But it seems like it should be relevant for a trillion design
The easiest way to spot a retard on an aviation forum is if they say the F-35 has no redeeming features.
Im sure they said the same thing about the bow and arrow.
Can't turn, can't climb, can't run. Never heard more bad things about any other plane than the f35. Time with tell all.
Can I get a TL:DR on that?
An F22 can shoot down and F35 no problem. Your comparing a $340milion dedicated fighter to a 100mil support jet...
Maybe next time the inhabitants of Flint won't vote a city council that cuts corners, drains the treasury, and destroys the city's plumbing.
We sell F35s to other countries, that cost is offset significantly.
It's meant to fight BVR, if I recall that test forced it to 'knife-fight' which is counter intuitive to it's design.
Imagine if we just took %10 of that for future R&D, and the rest we put into education and social programs with long term benefits
Raw cost is some 100m per unit but if I recall the tag includes replacement parts for the initial life-cycle.
Vietnam War? Also, no dogfights occurred between Soviet and US. It would've went Nuclear pretty fast.
The trillion dollars thing pissed me off every time I see it. It’s a trillion because they are measuring it in an unprecedented manner 1/2
Then vote for politicians that fight for healthcare and programs like nasa. Honestly though, we do spent far far to much on military.
Unit cost has gone down significantly now that Marietta and Fort Worth have streamlined production. Its down to ~$90mil a plane.
They are assuming cuter inflation amounts and measuring the cost of the plane going forward doing that. If you used this measuring 2
The F22 has yet to receive the Aim120 upgrades right? Did they initiate it. I don't think they did. It's at a terrible disadvantage if so.
Vox has a video out there that spreads a lot of this too.
Most recent red flag appearance the F35 had a 20:1 kill ratio. That is impressive.
System and apply it to say the B-52, it also is a trillion dollar program. Normally you normalize the price to today’s dollar, which makes 3
But it does work, its completed dozens of combat missions. Maximum effectiveness, 0 failures on mission.
The hardware can make some difference while the training will dole out the greatest dividends. The jock mentality hates the support tag.
It something like 600-800 billion. Still a lot of money, but that’s the full up price for the entire program of 2k+ planes including 4
Also, Meteor hasn't been integrated to F35. It's at a disadvantage too. 2021 would reveal the full performance of these costly toys.
Putting CNN on the level of russian propaganda outlets is beyond laughable.
The 10 is nice but it's been about 3 decades past due(and as such running out of parts) It's greatest asset was loiter and hopefully that
Things like fuel, training, and other expendables and indirect costs not normally rolled into this type of cost analysis.
Something 1 of 3 ejections will cause a spinal fracture, which is hardly surprising. Don't even ask about the earlier models and arms.
They sent a .gif instead of facts and a rebuttal? That's a white flag if I ever saw'd one.
can carry into the 35. The benefit would be a quicker ToT while other hardware maintains longer loiter times like pred drones.
other problem is logistics. imagine if you have 3 cars that can share 90% of their parts. It would make life very easy for inventory.
You can't really cure world hunger though. Not all the countries will accept help, no matter how bad it gets.
It's not cured with food, it's cured with infrastructure and knowledge. And, yes, some like North Korea won't accept that, but most will.
Traffic-ocalypse in LA was supposed to last what? A month? They did it overnight because they paid for speed, rather than hourly.
The fuel temperature problem is (or was) a legitimate issue for the F-35. If the fuel gets too hot or is delivered too hot, the engine 1/2
shuts off during start ups. theaviationist.com/2014/12/10/luke-afb-fuel-trucks/ 2/2
There is no HUD on the F-35, it uses an HMD instead.
the fuck doez that mean? If it targets enemy, it does its job
You can't replace the brrrrt. You just....can't.
BUT DID YOU DIE?!
My dad is an inch shorter and has arthritis in his back 20 years after his ejection.
Well it's better that they get those worked out in testing than live exercise runs. And you know programing, early builds rarely go clean.
the problems would have never appeared with human beings in charge though
Yeah, us aussies are getting JSF. It’s going to be interesting from a comms perspective.
Also the "clearly biased" Medium article (which by the way is not a random site) was a copy of a publication released by POGO, an award- 1)
I was saying that calling it a direct replacement isn't 100% right, since the a10 is built around its cannon, while the f35 isn't.
Seems it wasn't even that, just bad habits from different planes and a spot of restrictive control software. Reminds me of Soviets hating-
The a10 is a dedicated ground attack plane, the f35 is a multirole strike fighter.
winning non-profit, non-partisan investigative journalism watchdog organisation. It's easy to discredit information you don't like. 2)
Public opinion held that rising US costs made them pressure us to buy in. It plagued our Harper gov't (known for its US fellatio) for 6y.
-Spitfires, of all things (well, hate's a strong word), because they got worn out planes that they didn't know how to use and maintain.
It was designed to be simple and cheap, but the m16 outpaces it in accuracy and practical RoF. Theres tradeoffs.
Also if you eject at the speed of sound it's 99% chance of death.
The A-10’s gun is fairly useless in modern symmetrical warfare. Mostly something to shoot people that can’t shoot back. 1/
In large scale war with a major power, the A-10 would be using mostly stand off ordnance like Mavericks. It would also be very limited 2/
Its still a turd when you look at what we already have, the only legitimacy for it was to finally give the marines something nice and new.
The Iraq invasion had several air to air engagements
You aren’t wrong haha. What a wonderful airframe.
Curing world hunger is as easy as snapping your fingers.
...in what it lets the pilot do or know about compared to the F-35. As far as performance is concerned, it’s objectively worse than the 3/
Does an aircraft need to be able to survive a missile strike if the SAMs can't even target it?
It's not just those two things either. Climate and allocation play a role too. And a culture change. Having the knowlegde is one thing, but
...JSF if you want to do stuff like go to war with China or Russia. It may cost less, but so do prop planes with HVAR slapped on. 4/4
actually using it throughout entire countries and over generations another.
200 billion is the UN estimation and, I assume, took all that into account. it's about ensuring they do their own farming.
How are you a crew chief on a plane without crew?
Lockheed Martin has a weird was of doing it, I’m assuming they want the A model, so they’ll be paying like $110mil ea because they’re 1/?
I thought the F-35A could carry 23k lbs of ord? Great mythbusting tho goin right into the F-35 folder.
That's why the article was overall inaccurate, the ROE for the test were simply odd and the plane was still coming from 'duckling' stage.
In the case of an ejection the top priority is to "Get the hell away from this pile of fire, fuel, metal, and ordinance ASAP!"
2/? just getting in now, while the US and Australia only have a $90mil price tag because we put money in it from the beginning. The other
The cannon was never really much of an anti-tank tool. Cold War era tank armor was already enough to make the cannon kind of useless... 1/
That'd be fine if criticism was limited to this one guy on Twitter, but the F35 has long been under the loop..
3/? countries got in on it like half way through and have a $100mil price tag, because they put money into dev, but for not as long, like
More like 85-89 now.
...for killing tanks. There’s a great AF issue coloring book that shows how the gun just wasn’t that useful on stuff as old as the... 2/
...T-62. It’s cool and all, but it’s much more useful for CAS than dedicates AT. You’ve got AGM-65s for tank busting. 3/3
4/5 the Netherlands, and finally there’s countries like Israel and Finland coming in now with $110mil price tag, but as time increases the
Using "that was true but they fixed it" repeatedly to shut this guy down verges on strawman whipping, because dev't hell was a real problem.
Long story short tho that was a control laws test. Specifically looking at pitch rate and various AOAs. They specifically concluded 1
That the control laws tampped down on the pitch rate to hard and subsequently lessened them up. No dogfight ever took place.
5/5 price will decrease because they’ll be at a higher level of production efficiency until they finally reach their full capacity.
But moooom, truth is booriiiing
The A-10’s armor is mostly only good for very light cannon fire and people pointing HMGs at the sky and crossing their fingers. 1/
The A10 is like the AK47 of fighter jets. It can take a beating and is still relevant after all these years.
Crew Chief or Future Exec at Lockheed Martin? Joke / Not a Joke
As far as missile protection goes, that comes down to plane design like, “how much of the plane can be missing for it to still function?” 2/
Please do explain how a drone is going to do all the same things and be cheaper....
It could be cured cheaper from a money standpoint... but ethics would have to take a hell of a hit :p
As some who works on F22s, I will say that some of the blunders listed above are legitimate, but we're handled badly, costing us more money>
Which the A-10 is definitely pretty good for, but then again, so is the F-15. We’ve all heard the one wing story. 3/3
I SAID DON'T AS- Oh. Well, I died, but it wasn't a fatal death. Horrible inconvenient, however.
Yeah, F-35 isn't the only plane being considered but my fear is that if it is chosen it'll be so expensive that there will be less planes
$400 per second for 80 years straight. Yeah that sounds “tame” to me.
Rolls produces the lift fan in the B. Pratt produces the actual engine.
Yeah, it's generally bad to put the whole farming population out of a job.
Being able to fly without hydraulics like the hog can would be a start.
yall wanted to buy superhornets but then realized oh shit they cost more than an F-35A.
Consider this, then: it sounds like you did a very good job helping to iron out those issues.
The F35 was supposed to replace the F16 here in the Netherlands. But since the program is such a clusterfuck, nobody wants it anymore.
A trillion dollars over 80 years breaks down to $400 per second. For 80 years. I’m not convinced that that’s reasonable.
Yeah, but it looks cool, though...
I get that we hate CNN but to put it on the level of rt is just insulting to journalism. It's like calling wrestlers "real fighters". No.
The F-35 ain't "a piece of shit" - it had many development problems, yet, but they are being worked on.
Oh please. The F35 is notorious for its long and grueling development which went billions over budget and was filled with design flaws.
The first of the new is never as good as the last of the old. But the F35 is becoming quite mature and it kicks ass hard.
I am proud to work in a factory that makes parts for these bad boys. ^_^
Even upon release they still have design flaws and are incredibly expensive to buy and operate. There's a reason countries are opting out.
It uses fuel to cool engine electric systems, which might be what you heard, but it solves that by running it back through a heat exchanger.
Though they've now mostly been ironed out. I will say the BOS system being needed should've been forseen, as the f22 had the same issue>
And the same solution. Also, the VR headset JHMCs system was wired and set up for the 22, but never implemented. And even though the>
F22 has the BOS bottles mounted behind the pilot's head and there is no way the pilot can see behind them, the aircraft is deemed safe.>
Parts of the F35 development were taken on by international partners, including the UK. The lift fan is definitely made by RR.
Also, the article refers to reversion of the LO due to high humidity, which is still a problem on the F22, but there has been new>
Compounds released to fix it. I'm honestly just surprised that there is no reference to the fact that the compounds in LO are extremely>
Cancerous, basically making stealth aircraft an eventual lung cancer sentence for all those that maintain the aircraft
Too soon, man.
Wasn't the maneuverability problems due to limitations put on the fly by wire system by the engineers? And fixed after feedback from pilots?
The real downfall of the 35 is it has no ability to do close air support, the main role of the a10 these days. And it's weapons system is>
Lmao, if LM want to pay me a Chiefs pay to fix this shit on a hourly 12 hour shift, then fuck yeah!
Pitiful compared to the a10's main gun
1982 for HM RN in that Argentinian Conflict - and the UK bought the F35 for our shiny new carriers.
Lockheed has never had a knack for nomenclature that didn't sound good and HUD always sounded good. It was likely used despite semantics
Nice! Thank you for sharing!
The 3rd Gen HMD is sick af.
Geez that was a freaking essay, and a dissertation.
The planes are really good, they scored crazy high at combat tests last year.
I've heard that not only terrorist are getting killed.
The jokes on you then since you’re still getting them.
Why not buy a JAS 39 Gripen instead. For the price of one of these you get 5 Gripens :)
The cost goes down the more countries that buy them and that was stated early on in the program.
With all due respect, I just don't care. If it functions the way it was meant to and the pilot comes home safely, that's good enough for me.
I mean yeah, that's just simple math. Not sure what greater point you're making?
It's funny how over the years imgur has transitioned from assaulting to defending the F-35.
I knew they didn't plan to make many more but i highly doubt they'd drop the entire project...
Another secret proponent of war thread?
This guy's probably still driving around in his house and buggy because cars are just so prone to failure and crashes
Here is how to kill anything in development, have radically changing goals and no dialog with the people actually making it
I'm not actually convinced that a trillion dollars would be enough. Plus, it's not like we have a trillion sitting around...
People do vote for that, sadly someone believed that land is more important than people
F35A costs (right now) about 20% more than an F18 Super Hornet. F35s have decimated such aircraft on exercise. It's worth the cash.
Not dropped just decreased the amount thediplomat.com/2018/08/russia-will-not-mass-produce-t-14-armata-main-battle-tank/
Super Hornet is actually one of the planets that is considered as a replacement. And I don't doubt that is worth the money, it's just 1/
We did, but we spent it on an overpriced plane.
Okay, you've convinced me that the F35 might not be a complete dumpster fire. And it does look pretty as hell. But it doesn't have a GAU-8..
That if we can buy only 20 of them or so is it really useful? 2/2
"Man, these things are getting expensive. Wish we had an actual economy to fund all this shit..."
Looks like propaganda with all these links to Sputnik news.
I like the way you think, comrade.
Fault of one guy, right?
well couldn't they use the LO from the F35 next time the F22s need to be repainted or since the F22 flies faster that paint wont work?
So clearly “the bad egg” is a dumbass. However, the F-35 has had a metric shit ton of problems. And is extremely over budget.
Funny, I don't know any "conservatives" that believe in long term plans, or education, or conservation
That was LA freeway needs. Millions needed that overnight accommodation, and paid for it.
so basically an expensive weapon of mass destruction that didn't work, the US should invade themselves for it, or let the Russians do it
Your Mom know you're on her phone this early?
I'm sure it's a good jet. I'm less sure it's worth the asking price for other countries.
The faster the plane can fly, and the more explosives it might be carrying, the faster you need to get away from it.
Yeah but where he got it right: Its small, shitty dwell time, small payload, absurdly expensive in unit and operation hour. inferior in MANY
I've never been a fan of planes (specs, etc. Not like a fear of flying or anything), but this was really interesting. Thank you @OP :)
ways to gen 5 fighters. Got its shit kicked in at red group to gen 5 fighters.
So you just gonna talk about classified shit on the open web or what?
Still better than the zero sauces OP provided.
Yea, basically all BVR. The last proper dogfight with modern jet fighters was when an Israeli F-15 scored a gun kill, it's hardly relevant.
Ok the explosion-powered pipe you are flying in is exploding. So we are shooting you out with a large explosion. Happy not exploding. Cheers
Isn’t Bono the biggest number two
I know the Israelis have flown these in combat and love them. And they are a practical people.
It's completely irrelevant. BVR engagements are the norm.
Isn't that right, Jesus?
It's 20+ years in and still doesn't work properly I thought ? Also, if it only costs a trillion I'll show my arse in a high street window.
May be Russian propaganda.
I don't think "cluster fuck" is classified.
According to? All info I can find is info that its still ongoing.
My country has to buy planes from other countries and the US wastes money on shit planes that can't fly if you want it to remain flyable..
Thats like when your ear gets sexually aroused right?
I wont lie, I quit reading half way through, but as a very experienced f-22 maintainer, I enjoyed your commentary on this.
Development was hell for most aircraft we now call great. I'm no fan of the F-35 but its development isn't much different from that of 1/?
The F-16 for example, which is widely regarded as one of the best of its generation. Same goes for the F-4 Phantom which has a 2/?
NO WAY! A product in development has bugs? Unheard of. wp crew chief.
Straight up legendary status. Point is none of the greats got there without significant hickups, the F-35 is no different in that regard 3/3
As an ace combat fan what I know is F35 designed to kill way before the target even know it. In a modern warfare dogfight is ... discouraged
To be fair, at the F35 cost per unit, anything that didn't shit gold bars and suck you off was gonna be a little dissapointing
It’s actually (Hazues) and I don’t know you
But he’s alive. I think I’d gladly take those to still be alive.
I'm not an expert, but I would think you could cut a lot of stuff out if you didn't have to worry about those squishy organic parts
*countries (sorry, couldn't resist)
Sure, but hell is still hell hence valid criticisms. With such precedent (just read on F16 devt; ty) how were F35 cost increases a surprise?
Can't wait to see one at the Avalon International air show but full disclosure i love A 10s and The Blackbird but we won't see planes like'm
The Rolls Royce Merlin Engine.. I've seen/heard one (on a P-51). An absolutely incredible bit of design and engineering..
The intended way to play it is 35s, 22s, and B2s go in first and clear any AA fire in the area, leaving other planes free to do their thing.
As someone who planned to go into the air-force and has friends there. They love the F35 atm. They just wish some of the bug could be fixed.
The RT article links directly to the Official Air Force website with a detailed press release that contradicts OP though...
Everyone does but it's two different aircraft produced for two different purposes. The A10 is worthless without air superiority and we
If I understood correctly the operating costs of F35 are way more than any other plane that is considered here in Finland.
Aren't guaranteed that in the future so we need to prepare something that can operate in that environment.
So it is not just the initial cost of the plane itself that has to be taken into account.
It's pronounced "hay-sus" and I don't know you
To be honest, I'm doubting much of what you say. You offered no sources or any proof for any of your claims and several are just wrong. 1/
I like the part where he tries to name drop trump like he came up with the project...
2/ For example, you say there's no need to paint the trucks for fuel yet the official Air Force site has a press release from the base in
3/ question literally saying the F35 has a fuel temperature threshold that mandated their refuelers to be repainted for this purpose.
To be fair how long ago was it that Russian jets were flying "accidentally" too close to our coast to test our response times.
That’s really not how SEAD works. Sure, we can wreck the ADN of a 3rd world country, but not of a fellow major nation. 1/
A trillion dollars IS ridiculous even for 80 years of upkeep. Which btw these planes will be obsolete by 2030 but you'll still have to pay.
You'll probably get 35's due to your butthead neighbor is my guess
4/ I'm not a pilot, but the Twitter guy cited sources, reports and interviews with pilots. You just went "nah, wrong, just trust me".
The entire A-10 fleet had an expected life span of 2 weeks against the Soviets decades ago. 2/2
I think you two should have a beer together.
The ejection seat thing is true. Was av-8 ordnance and Duty officer one day when pilot had to eject. He was already short he complained 1/2
That because of his cartilage compression he now had to weigh in an inch under what he used to.
Flint also was a case of willful neglect. Oh they knew not putting filters in the system was bad. The state wanted to cut corners
Probably depended when he flew. From what I understand the initial 35's were flying garbage at first. But most jets start off with issues
Am calling B.S. on 99% of this
Yo, are you a fellow Rockwell Collins brethren from Portland?
That trillion dollars sure would look good in the public school system. Even over 80 years.
AFAIK this comes from back in the day where ejector seats were just a pile of explosives going off under your arse, today ->
Dream on, Russia couldn't even properly invade Georgia. Without nukes Russia would get smoked
they are rocket powered, so the instantaneous force is a lot less but the force is sustained for longer. 0-0 seats changed a lot.
You sure it's over?
Do I hear sizzling of burning flesh? Cuz you roasted that fucker
This will get lost, im.sure but here goes. I am an AFE technician (I pack the pilots ejections parachute among other things) and 1/?
Had a chance to ask a pilot why the f-35 lost in those dog fights. Back in 2015, they weren't ready to test the g-limits of the aircraft 2/?
So it was on a "waiver" which limited the pilots to only pull 3g's maximum where the f-16 was obviously not limited. There WERE however 3/?
He's not wrong. That's why Canada didn't want them. They're useless. Cheaper to abandon the billions we invested instead of buying any.
For something in this program area, you're not really supposed to talk about it at all, or mention you worked on it.
Significant issues with their OBOGS (on board oxygen generation system) that caused a few pilots to become hypoxic but nothing permanent 4/?
That I recall hearing about. When we teach ejection and survival classes yearly, we also refresh their memory about their "green ring" 5/?
Which activates their emergency pressurized oxygen that is attached to their seat (for this very reason) or if they eject over 15kft 6/?
The pilots I've spoken with says it's absolutely amazing. The equipment they use is as well. I've been lucky enough to see firsthand 7/?
The f-35 will never be able to replace the bae-10 but it is a badads bird. If you have any questions feel free to ask! 8/8
Lets remember that the navy decided the best eay to launch aircraft was literally a big slingshot. So it makes sense.
Yeah. The ejection seat has to launch you at 550mph+ out of the seat to clear the tail. Compressed disks. Life >height.
it is true that if you want economical air-to-air superiority plane for your country´s defensive purposes, f35 is not the optimal choice.
A10 still cooler tho
the F35 definitely has a major disadvantage in dog fights. russias latest fighters can out perform it. the F35 however is designed to
Yup it was a big deal and then tanked for political reasons and because our military acquisitions program is a joke.
nail any enemy aircraft before they get within their radar's range. they'd be shot down before they even knew an F35 was 300 miles out
Let it be known, that is all ejection seats and not just the F-35.
Offense - you need to grow the fuck up. No one wants this jet. Our own military literally turned it down. We have to sell it to Israel.
the new swedish gripen or the new eurofighter typhoon would be better candidates for that, i think.
The F22 project, which after 20 years of development never even entered full scale production and cost the same amount, got rolled into it.
No, its pretty much standard procedure.
Absolutely, he still complains that Martin Baker robbed him of a good deal of peace and quiet.
Well that landing might have been a little loud...
That isn't projected cost. Since the 90s this project combined with the F-22, its previous version, have literally cost hundreds of billion
You both sound really fun at parties.
F-35 solo killed a squadron of F-16's before they knew it was there in mock dog fight. They didn't even know they were being jammed.
Yes but your other planes don't have stealth coatings or even remotely have the E-WAR capabilities.
have half the E-WAR** my apologies
i build this thing....
Funny cause if you send a F18 vs a F35 the 35 will win every time
Any idea what kind of AR? Like projection based or OLED screens?
Very nice breakdown, Chief! Kudos! But you lose five points because you didn't post a potato at the end.
Maybe the Russians should start paying attention to their economy instead of talking shit. No money, no new toys.
Also the F35 was grounded for most of its time in Australia... If the fuel in the aircraft gets too hot, aircraft can't fly.
pretty damn obsolete. the F35's can acquire aerial targets from a much farther distance than the competition, while still being hidden
That is true but they don’t do much good if you can’t afford to keep the planes flying in significant numbers.
Turn that frown upside down. The F35 is currently the single most capable strike fighter currently in existence.
It's almost like fighters are usually revolutionary in some capacity and come with growing pains.
Basically, the previous gov't bought in without holding a contest for alternative options, which the new gov't has pledged to hold in future
That is completely contrary to pilto reports which say it's a dream to fly.
815 million people live with chronic nourishment. How much do you think it would cost to fix that?
As much as people like to think they can, drones will never replace the human warfighter in the sky or the ground.
No. The F35 will enable the military to better engage in a conventional airspaces. Something the A10 will never be able to do.
Eurofighter will cost more over it's life time and be less capable.
the F35 can pick up targets up to 300KM away, which is a little bit more range than the 50KM of russia's Su35
Remember that the F35 is a strike fighter while the F22 is air superiority
A weapon kills whatever it's pointed at. Blame the people doing the pointing.
The US spends 4-5% of it's GDP on education and 3% on defense.
The F15 was introduced in the 80 and is expected to see like till the 2040s. The F35 will be around after the 30s
No fighter in the US arsenal uses anything more special than JP8 bud not even the 35
Eurofighter maybe but I think gripen is too small for US purposes. Not enough range.
Or the new Su-35
Wow your math is off.
Isreal is using the piss out of it.
Lol, Russia killed the PAKFA
I need to be alone with this picture.... For reasons.
That's funny, because it's being rolled out to numerous countries and more countries are looking to buy it. Even German generals want it.
I won’t comment on the specs or abilities of the F35, but it absolutely has been a cost overrun nightmare. Originally the variants were 1/?
American doctorine from what I understand is to out in the Russians and use loads of missiles.
going to have 70% similarity so as to make the whole thing cheaper, but in the end it ended up with only 25%, so it’s expensive AF. 2/?
Canada didn't want the F35 because it is single engine and Canada is huge.
So with that planned 70% similarity we expected to get each plane for $50 million. Once all the retinkering happened, cost per plane 3/?
I thought the OBOGS issue was on the F22. Also, 3g limit is criminal for a dog fight.
So much to read that I don’t understand. Is the plane shit or legit? I’ll go by the most one word responses.
He's not wrong for most of it.
All early problems of the plane. It outperforms in all areas it was designed for now.
Trump is the scape goat for all things bad
doubled to $100+ million. Part of the problem is the way we allowed Lockheed to make early versions then retool rather than just give us 4/?
a finished product. So we allowed them to continually make promises on saving cost then break them and eat that cost ourselves. 5/?
It works fine now. It costs less than a eurofightr. And that's 29 years of development not deployment.
Keep watching Russia today
In the end, the F35 may be a superior plane, but we wasted billions on its development. We need to hold contractors more accountable. (Fin)
Unfortunately the A10 is useless in a conventional air space. Also modern tank armor is no longer susceptible to Canon fire from planes.
LOL. Source please....
Bc the 35 is a metric ton of shit
Most R&D projects are over budget. What's your point?
He doesn't know. He is just talking out of his ass.
Lololol it has cool capabilities but can’t kill the hoards with 4 missiles
Because they tried to make one plane to do all, which has been known for decades to be impossible.
How can a plane use absolutely 0 fuel?
The Air Force has actually tried to get rid of the A-10 twice. Once in the late ‘80’s. They were giving them to the Army when they (1)
(2) realized how effective they were in desert storm. They again tried to get rid of them recently, but didn’t due to a huge outcry from
The F-35 has failed if it enters into a dogfight, its purpose is to win before that happens. which it has proven in simulations.
From the sound of it, it's just a matter of the regular jet fuel needing to new a little bit cooler when pumped in the plane, and a paint -/
(3) active duty and retired military personnel that had seen the A-10 in action. I’ll take one A-10 over 10 F-35’s any day.
Job on the trucks solved that problem. No fancy trucks or anything, just a coat of paint.
They also catch the planes with a big slingshot and a hook.
It's a trade off, the old saying is "A jack of all trades is a master of none". 1/2
That's why Europeans have developed the Rafale, Eurofighter and Grippen fighters. Less revolutionary, but they get the job done.
A specifically designed piece of kit will ALWAYS beat a multi-role pushed into a job, but again it's not bad. It can still work anyhow. 2/2
This is what I'm curious, it seems given our current needs an updated A-10 is a better investment, a backup plan is never bad either. 1/
So can it fly at night yet?
but when it's a 1 trillion over 80 years program, trying to be a "one fits all" solution, that will be outdated in 10 or so - is this smart?
The problem with the F35 is it was being designed as they built it which led to a complete cluster fuck of a plane in the beginning.
There are not that many supersonic ejections documented. One happened a few years back, one survived, one died. Dude got fucked up.
It's a not a large explosion. It's just a very focused one.
I surely hope that our air force dosen't get these for replacement. It's literary over priced piece of shit.
So much info, and yet I give so little fucks..
The F-35 is the new model F-111. Designed to be everything, tons of issues, will likely end up in one specific role it performs well in.
Well, they didn’t install that rocket chair for nothing.
What about non-disclosure agreements?
Forgive me for changing the topic a little, but is it true that an A-10 can take a suface to air missile and still fly home? I watched a-
Sure, this guy is shitposting. Still, I kinda feel both dev-cost and purchase might have been invested better. Like, medicin or education.
Truth. I flew the E170 when it was first introduced. We called it the 180 because of frequent gate returns. Long ago though. Wonderful now.
dpcumentory about someone getting hit with a clear hole in one of the wings near the main body but still landed it safely.
But it's a fucking trillion dollars! I really don't care if it's great or not, defense companies are bending us over.
Some version had projectors at the top of the inside of the helmet, which projected to the inner visor (outer being sun shades)
I wonder how much we need these incredibly expensive war planes or if we need an incredibly expensive war more just to justify them.
theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/the-tragedy-of-the-american-military/383516/ - expensive af to fly
Well done, thanks for trying to keep the interwebs honest.
Mass production plans were cancelled, PAK FA project hasnt been cancelled as of yet as far as I can see.
Can either if you provide sources? I see part of them in the screencaps but none here mate. You claim to be a chief, but everyone can.
Sure, they fixed it over more than a decade of work. The enormous cost overruns that led to are the real concern.
The A-10s should be refit and kept in service. It is a good, reliable aircraft and a lot of people in the airforce feel they aren't done.
One is an free press news outlet with it's own opinions another is literally a Russian sponsored propaganda outlet. How shallow are you?
Generally end a certain time after your work is done. Which may be the case here
I hate that kind of logic by Mr Egg there. Thing in development has some early stage bugs so obviously that means its broken forever.
Yeah, and we really need that here with all those invasions going on!
That’s usually how it works with first gen stuff. Hopefully 2nd gen went better.
Pet peeve here: it's a "hangar," not a "hanger."
The whole "can't beat an F-16 in a dogfight" myth is from when they were testing software. The F-35's was too nerfed, they fixed by relaxing
It's a shit plane. Look up the BFV similar development problems. Multiple chiefs giving multiple directions during a long dev period
the software flight control restrictions on the recommendations of the test pilots. That's why they fucking test things, so they know what
needs to be adjusted. And the "TRILLION DOLLARS" this clown throws around is for the total cost to fly and maintain all of the F-35s for
Not true. The F35 is a boondoggle that made a lot of people billionaires. That was true purpose
the entire lifetime of the fleet.
Do you have any comments on whether the cost is higher per plane due to development than using older equipment? From effectiveness?
I see two people grinding an axe. One provided multiple sources, and the other said “nuh uh.”
I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm saying that OP is plain wrong in saying there's no need to repaint the trucks. Twitter guy made a 1/
Follow the money
The A-10 is old and getting expensive to maintain. And would be swept from the sky by any modern air defense system. A smoking hole won't
save anyone's life.
2/ mistake by saying it's the fuel that's heat sensitive when it's actually the plane with low tolerance for hot fuel, but OP is still wrong
Very true. So you'd agree that OP is wrong in saying that there's not been a need for heat-resistant paint on the fuel trucks?
On the losing to an F-16 in a dog fight, that's because the fight was in visual range, where the F16 excels, the F35 excels in killing 1/2
Before you can see it detect it. Hence the whole stealth aspect. 2/2
That's why pilots get 2 ejections and then loose their wings. 3rd ejection could cause a severed spinal cord due to compression.
Dogfight comments are curious since an Ace pilot is no longer a thing. Firefights begin and end with planes miles apart in most instances.
No they're both propaganda machines of a couple of world superpowers. Though I understand your warped perception having grown up around one.
It appears he's a crew chief; his source is time on the airframe. I've spent 12yrs crewing jets, his rebuttals are pretty accurate.
Well technically the seat is what gets you clear of the aircraft and you're strapped to it. But ya.
As op stated, most of what he talked about were old issues already fixed or that never were issues. In 2014 they already had short term fix
No current aircraft can and it was laughable when they tried to retire it, only to back pedal like ya we still need this old yet badass mofo
Well I'm a classified general navy seal commando with tier 3 x-fighting inserts and I graduated top of my class in ranger school.
that saying continues with "but oftentimes better than a master of one."
The F35 is a case study in shitty project management, but this guy is like Trump. Twisting facts, exaggerating problems and flat out lies.
I really wanted to read all of that. I really did.
What if I told you, 90% or more of homes in Flint has had safe drinking water for over a year? Google it.
How much is a pilot's life worth? F18s are the old generation and won't stand up to Russian new gen either.
They don't have the same response time nor target acquisition ability of a standard manned aircraft.
If you hadn't noticed, the cold war is back again.
According to Wiki from 91-03 some decent air to air went down. To include the first F16 air to air kill (MiG-25).
Y´all just wanna buy some BF 109s ? I mean, they´re not fast or stealthy but they work
It also has horrible range. A great rugged gun, but it has its shortcomings too.
part of the issue is software, we can get the software for the f18 variants, they flat out refused to share the f35 software
Flint also has local and state officials that created that problem. There is a reason why we have different levels of govt.
Huh it’s almost like the government way over pays for things
That is the true mission of the aircraft.
@op Look up operation Red Flag 2017 in September, it went 17 to 1 against legacy fighters.
What about Fox news? The lies and propaganda they weave makes Sputnik and RT look like angels. Not a fan boy of any of them btw.
New army pistols cost $2,500 each......
They won’t save lives if you can’t keep them flying in sufficient numbers. Imo other fighters offer better overall capabilities for same €.
If you ever get bored, find a copy of "The Pentagon Wars" in your local library to get an idea of what goes on with weapons procurement
. . . Which is what SHOULD have been done with the F-35. When something becomes too expensive you SHOULD can it!
The book, not the movie with Cary Elwes, you can just find the movie on YouTube right now for free, funny but leaves out most important bits
And every time they guy had a point he couldn't refute he just skipped it "not my area but he's probably full of shit" they both seem biased
This post was obviously written by an F35 plane.
Woohoo! Lift Fan! I’m not allowed in that area of the plant but I see the JSF boxes with them in it all over the place
Id consider sputnik and rt worse, but yeah they dont try to hide their bias much.
You must not have read the post. That's the budget from 1990 til 2070. It says so... in the post. It's not like we ever HAD a trillion.
No good reason to replace the A-10
The development of the f-22 10yrs earlier cost about 38 billion. Less than 1/25th of the cost of the f-35. Justify that.
When have they ever had to fight symmetrical enemies since Korea?
Remember kids: health care and schools are just too expensive.
The development of the f22 10yrs earlier cost about 38 billion. 1/25th of the cost of the f35. Justify that. Defense cos are raping us.
The same thing is the case with most missile defense systems. The number of tests (and the cost) as they go from inception to production..
That sounds like it holds true for all vehicles powered by chemical fuels
its not supposed to be a fighter. dog fights are going to be a thing of the past. the point now is to kill from beyond the horizon
Can't fund it, can't run it
Did he get the watch?
Is it really a "heat resistant paint", or just a different color paint? You can achieve lower temps by just switching colors.
Cnn is pretty awful as it goes, but not close to propaganda machine
Problem is this is the internet, where no one has accountability, and everyone can tell all the lies they want
Work in aerospace can confirm the F-35 is a piece of shit. One thing I agreed with trump was when he said he’d kill this program. But I 1)
F-14s to F-18s. They never fkn shut up about Tomcats. Never. Still wont.
Don’t think he’s done anything about it yet. Too much lobbying from the aerospace industry especially Boeing. Boeing is a laughingstock 2)
Right now. Losing business to airbus, can’t make planes on time. Incompetent engineers. Need those fat government checks to stay alive.
I work on ejection seats. no matter what aircraft your in they could kill you, because of the force required to get you away from the craft
Yes, you are he ejected at like 5,500 psi a sec. this info is unclassified
"MikeRoach3" is entirely correct here
I think instead of buying 100 F-16s, 20-40 F-35 should do it so in long run its going to be almost equal I guess in long run
Yup, the massive acceleration of the rocket-powered ejection seats compresses the spine. Better than the '60s when it was literally 1/2
So thurough, you must really care 4 that plane. I'm ok with US focusing on being superior in military equipment.. But it's 2 damn expensive!
the ejection seat ting cracks me up. like would you rather die? would you rather take a chance at death and suffer injury or just die? wtf
Weird that a plane which is scheduled for ongoing development through 2070 would have issues fixed over a few years. Who knew?
Still cheaper than F-22 though
A 105mm artillery powder charge. Those were just about guaranteed to break your back and you'd never fly again.
first generation is ALWAYS a cluster fuck. thats why they have multiple generations, so they can find and fix fuckups
In the F-35's case, fuel is used as a coolant for a number of systems, which get hotter than in other aircraft, between being designed to (1
have as small a heat signature as possible (poor cooling) and have as high a performance as possible (lots of heat generated). If the fuel (
is too hot going into the plane, it's an ineffective coolant. Many aircraft use fuel as coolant, but they're less sensitive and generate (3
Arent we all on here?
Just watch our boots problems and lack of rucksack
less heat for the fuel to manage. It's like using a Honda Civic's radiator to cool a Ferrari. Just not suited to the performance level. 4/4
Where did I "put it on the same level"?
Russia just spend probably under 5 M to ruin US and they made more destruction and chaos than any of one of those plane ever gonna do
I remember when the F-16 was put into service, experienced F-4 II pilots beat the crap out of it in ACM... because they had experience.
well, it is not 'strictly' speaking a 'Merican' plane as it gets development funding from 8 other nations.
I am not much a fan of the F35, but Bad Egg is just plainly lying and making stuff up occasionally. I dont see much purpose for the F35.
You want air superiority? You get a F22 or Eurofighter. You want an attack plane, you get an A10, missile/bomb strikes, get a drone
you want to get air superiority over a 3rd world country? F16, 18, Griphen, harrier or any french plane can do that easily.
Simply too expensive for no mission profile for it as are not way overkill.
I stayed in a house on Pax River Naval Air Station, approx 200 m from F35Bs doing SVOTL, then flying around, etc. ABSOLUTELY AMAZING!
Though it usually doesn't take a trillion dollars to get to 2nd gen.
Upvote for mentioning specs. Go spec flight!
I want my $3076.92 back.
A huge part of why the LO on the 35 works better is its imbedded into the skin as well as painted over, so they’d have to completely 1/2
Not necessarily because of the mass of the helmet specific to F35. (he said fixed in gen 2 though)
The school system is something that touches literally every family every day. It should be much much higher.
2/2 reskin the 22 for its LO to be as effective, but using the 35 LO paint would still improve it, though.
Putin and Donald seem to have more and more in common all the time
There was never a "dogfight" with an F-16. It was used as a rabbit to help dial in the F-35's SAS limits, which were deemed too restrictive.
I’m at work right now but I’ll post proof when I get off.
Thanks for the info, I could see that being done though in a later on F22 upgrade
It can operate missing either an engine, half the tail section, or half of one whole wing, no if it can work missing all that together idk.
Yeah, my unit has been doing night flights all week.
The govt gave the money to the DOD, not the red cross, the military chose to spend those $ on 5th gen warplanes, and they've fixed the issue
It doesn’t have the 30mm GAU8, but it’s 25mm, so bigger than the 16s 20mm.
Its payload is larger than every fighter in the USAF arsenal expect the 15E Strike Eagle.
The plane doesn’t, the lift fan does
I build these, you sir, are amazing
Didnt take a trillion dollars, did you even read the post you shitposter, the trillion dollars is all planned spending from 1992 to 2070
Yup. Stupid "it only does everything"-wonderjet dreams result in design compromises across the board. Jack of all trades, master of none.
The eurofighter is fucking garbage, what do you expect when 200 militaries all have to be appeased
He only sourced one of his claims, and the source doesnt even back up his statement
The dollar in the 90s had twice the buy power it does today, the budget of the f35 is 1 trillion over 80 years adjected ror projected
Ejection seats instantaneous g force has gone up as time has gone on, you need to clear the tail faster when your plane is moving faster
This really explains the frequent reluctance of fighter pilots to eject
You lost me at, "The STOVL engine in the F35 uses absolutely 0 fuel." Did you mean 0 additional fuel?
The cost until 2070 1.45 trillion dollars, you pedantic shitposter. You get the point about the massive amount of spending being funneled
The article says the paint has "solar polyurethane enamel that reflects the heat of the sun's rays", so it's definitely special paint.
I count four on one side and zero on the other.
OP said that these issues existed previously, during development, but have been resolved now with new iterations of the plane. 1/2
I ejected from a fighter aircraft...no adverse effects whatsoever as long as your butt and back are in correct posture.
Planes don’t just magically work the first time they put it together, there are probably stories of F-16 failures in development as well 2/2
wait... wait wait wait.... you lose half an inch everytime you eject? half an inch of what?
We are still using B52s because we never build enough new bombers to replace them. The cost of planes are includes R&D which is wrong.
To get rid of world hunger? A one time expense? I'll look that up. The world should be able to make that happen in a few decades tbh.
rt.com and sputnik news are russian propaganda. Consider those claims unfounded if that is the only source.
Thanks man, I apreciate it. It's hard enough to believe people already these days, y'know?
Sorry, I believe the official reports more than some rando tech
the plane is still a piece of shit.
Tough to "cure world hunger five times over" when the starving places are ruled by despotic warlords...
It also takes time for the pilots to master the new planes. The F-16 pilots already had been practicing with those for years.
I did not know that about aircraft. Very neat, very elegant solution
F35 ~ $32k / flight hour. A10 ~ $11.5k / flight hour. Predator Drone ~ $1.5k / flight hour.
I understood that US military uses metric system due to STANAG but you are using US Ton(nes)?
There's always going to be a lag time between the operator and the drone
Early LO planes (F-117) had goo that filled gaps in access doors that needed to be opened every flight. Very labor intensive.
I really want to know what operating previous planes, 1000 units, 80 years cost like F-15.
cheers on you for correcting a vast array of issues, but I'm worried how you constantly admit you don't know about the other parts
It has close in maneuvering somewhere between F-18 and F-16, slightly less instantaneous than F-16 but better nose positioning when slow.
HMD is a kind of HUD, so it's still valid.
And yet still a waste of tax dollars.
Yes, context, nuance, social aptitude and not purposely having the conversational awareness of a 4th grader on Call of Duty.
I have a LOT of problems with the F35. Not only is it stupid expensive, but they're trying to replace 2 planes that don't need replaced. (1)
The problem is, unlike the normal method, F-35 went into production in the middle of development. 1/2
So all those 'finished' units had to go back and be fixed up. Repeatedly. 2/2
The guy kind of lost me when he decided to explain which planes they are as cartoon characters.
That's the same shit generals were saying before Vietnam. So they took the guns off and relied only on missiles. Didn't go so well.
Many of those customers are cancelling their orders.
The A10 is a damned near perfect weapon platform and doesn't need replaced. We've lost like 3 of them and they can be upgraded easily. (2)
F16s do need upgraded, but they are more than capable of just getting upgraded without needing fully replaced. There is no reason to (3)
So, instead of 2 planes that do their separate jobs well, we'll have 1 plane that sucks at both jobs. Great plan.
Spend all this money on the development of a new platform when you can just upgrade the old one. (4/4)
That matters a lot less when you don't have a human pilot to worry about and your vehicle costs so little to replace.
Yup. And since they want to scrap the A-10s *fast*, they'll have to develop *another* new plane to do that job…
I fix the plane, not fly it, so I don’t know much about flying it, but what I do know is if s pilot over Gs my plane he owes me a keg
Height, so a 6’1” pilot ejects 2 times he’s now 6’ even.
I guess it could be phrased that way, but there’s not fuel connection to the STOVL lift fan, it uses no fuel, just mechanical energy 1/2
See, that dev./prod. overlap is the biggest problem. All the 'finished' jets have to go back for multiple refits, adding to the cost. 1/2
2/2 from the main engine.
But the contractor needs a new stock dividend… 2/2
So basically, Drones are the future because the future is drones. Some nice circular logic.
Not to mention, distinct aircraft can gain a sort of notoriety. Willing to bet that the sound of an A-10 alone can send the enemy running.
Yep, NDA is expired. And its not like I’m sharing any technical specs.
It has a purpose… to make money for defense contractors.
Need to rewatch this abridged series, way better than the anime
Even after almost 45 years, she's still one of the most beautiful things I've ever seen
That is not true.... Most NATO countries are ordering more F35s.
There are plenty, but let's pretend there aren't. So your saying we should wait for our equipment to be obsolete before starting a 10-15
2/2 year Dev cycle so we have no CAS on call during that time frame?
No, I’m telling you from experience that the A-10 is my best friend in the air when me and my Soldiers are on the ground. AC-130 works too
Everyone has bias toward their plane, but saying that we should never upgrade it is just retarded.
When did the original guy publish? Maybe he's saying gen 1 is shit and OP is like on gen 3 going no it works fine. Both seem biased as fuck.
Avionics and computers are heavy, require cooling and power generation. If you wanted something even with the power of a modern HEDT 1
It’s not a bias. I’m telling you that the convenience is far superior. Unless you’ve done targeting, collateral damage estimates, or are 1/2
That cost is over the lifecycle, which is around ~80 years. Which comes to about 50$ a person total. And that doesn't include the fact that
2/2 JTAC or FAC-A, it would be hard for you to understand specifically why it’s more convenient.
It would weigh well over 500lbs in an military aircraft. Then factor in the increased cooling & power gen requirements and your looking at 2
2/2 the US sells them to other country's for $100milion plus a pop....
Nothing to do with communism u fucking redneck
And added 750lbs. Then factor robust BLOS high bandwidth com gear that's gonna be 1000lbs added or more. Ok now you want this to still pull1
It's not like you really need armor when you already control the white house.
+9G -3G to reinforce an airframe with all that new weight 250+ lbs. All in all way more than a pilot, cockpit, and ejection seat.
Shh that doesn't tow the story line they're spinning. That means it's not true.
Was he saying HIS knowledge or YOUR knowledge though?
Now arsenal drones that don't maneuver much and have top speeds of M.89 that support a manned vehicle those are going to be a thing.
Jesus tap dancing christ! I would have thought that some kind of spinal support would have been invented by now to prevent that from
happening... we should just start shooting the pilots out of the bottom
They might as well be. They're basically saying "yeah, we'll use the 10 we made, but we're not going to make the other 490." They spent 10
billion dollars to make 10 fucking planes. For comparison, we have 200 F-22 Raptors and 300 F-35 Lightning IIs.
OK, awesome! That's what I was thinking you meant. Fuel is still required, but it's fuel that is already being used for another purpose.
That doesn't change anything about the refuel trucks having to be specially repainted to keep the fuel cooler just for this plane though.
^Completely pedantic, but when arguing with crazy people on the internet, I'm always looking for the one dumb thing they'll latch onto :p
An F-35 A cost $89 million, F-18 super is about $90, Eurofighter is $120, Rafale is $110. Not to mention the F-35 CPFH is around 26k atm.
Only 20% more than an F-16 and still falling very sharply in cost.
Everything to do with protecting ourselves from it, Ivan.
Your forget that that trillion is in then year inflation dollars. Then year being 2070
If that's what you took from what I said, that's well into "your problem" territory.
This is where this guesstimate falls apart as a lot of assumptions were made to get to that inflation %. So far inflation has been below it.
Sorry, didn’t mean to come off as a dick. Never said we don’t need an upgrade. Just citing that I believe the A10 is adequate for us —
And it’s fine to supplement that with the F35. But originally, the plan was to get rid of the A10, and that was dumb IMO
You’re definitely right. Sorry I may have made it sound simpler than I intended. There’s a whole slew of reasons the 35 outclasses several
Then let me ask you how much is the F-16 full program cost? The F-15? F-18? simply put probably similar but nobody knows. So we have 1
Other airframes these days, especially in this world with this set of powers. That said, the A-10 still has A place,
even if that place isn’t quite what many think it is.
Nothing to compare against. All we got is a OMG shock value head line of muh gud 1 TRILLION DOLLARS!!!
Um not even a year ago. An F-18 Super Hornet shot down a fighter bomber with a Aim-120
Those carriers are fucking beautiful tbh
That's not how history went. It's a common misconception. The navy and air force saw atrocious loss rates with the F-4 in the middle of the1
War. The USAF decided to put guns on their AC. USN decided that teaching their pilots Missile employment and tactics was best thus TOPGUN.
Lo and behold by the end of the war the USN had a drastically better kill ratio than their gun armed air force counterparts.
You want to JAM, SIGNT, OCA, SEAD all at the same time? That's an F-35s role. To knock down the door of any threat hard enough it never gets
Didn't de Dutch get punked out of having the VTOL version?
All the OBOGS for the F-18, F-22, F-35, F-5 are made by the same company and it's a clusterfuck or was at least.
That might be because his the first to ever be developed in the digital age. Just study earlier programs. they were much worse.
That's a trillion dollars for R&D, testing, procurement, fuel, spares, maintenance, training, deployments, munitions for 70 years
Across 2500 airframes. Even then this estimate is in then year 2060 dollars with some guesstimated inflation rate. US econ as been well 1
Well below this estimated inflation rate. Now it also should he mentioned we stand to gain a profit of about a Trillion on the foreign 1
Market selling and maintaing the F-35 in the same timeframe.
Your right it did, so why did this cost 25 times more?
Gotta remember that special paint has no use outside of extremely hot places like 115F 80% humidity. So 90% of F-35s will never see a
Special fuel truck and neither will 90% of the maintainers.
Lost 3? They were the most shot down allied aircraft of the gulf war. And they were on the "Frontline" all of 5 days.
The F-35 cost 89 million a new build F-16 is 100+ million, F-15 100+, F-18 super is 90+ so how's it to expensive?
Upgrading the existing fleet and sticking with it until 6th gen comes along will cost us about 4 trillion. 4X as much as the F-35 cost.
True but doesn't really change the point. OP is bashing the guy for suggesting there's special measures that needed to be taken for the 1/
2/ fuel because the F35 has a lower tolerance to heated fuel when that is absolutely 100% wrong. OP is just wrong here and seems biased.
Well, that's a lot more weight than I expected. Good to know
OP is a maintainer and probably never saw it. That or it was actually fixed. Most issues fixed on the F-35 never get news coverage.
Sorry, but not having seen yourself it is no excuse for militant ignorance. I'm not going to trust a random person online saying "this is 1/
2/ all fixed now, ignore these government reports and interviews with pilots, just believe me because I say so". Yeah, absolutely not.
I however do have good reason to believe at least everything else as I also know a maintainer who has told me the same things. Now to you 1
I'm a second hand source with "he said" blabla info corroborating a dubious statement. But to me my friends a trusted source and this crew 2
Chief just backs up what I've already been told.
Your gas is cool but a truck on the ground gets hot. Since the F35 uses its fuel as a heat sink, hot fuel means it can’t cool its systems.
He’s wrong on a lot but the fuel trucks on the ground were a legitimate problem(haven’t heard that it’s been fixed) and the aircraft 1/2
Sorry, it was, "I find your lack of knowledge disturbing".
Radar computers were crashing forcing a hard restart while in air (leaving you situationally blind) (this has been fixed though). Sauce: 2/3
Sorry, we lost 4 to AA Missiles, I just looked it up. Every other one returned to base even though they were torn to hell from AA fire.(1)
It flew 8100 sorties. 4 downed and a couple that were written off due to landing issues is insanely low for a ground attack plane (2)
Because we have a pair of platforms that don't need replaced, just upgraded.
Got a source on that one?
What I really want on these programs is independent companies to come in and basically price check what everything should cost because (1)
Everyone who is giving these numbers has an agenda, top brass want to have new fancy planes, companies want to squeeze out as much money (2)
As they can, and there's no one who just wants accurate numbers and is capable of giving them. (3)
Well giving accurate numbers is a matter of law for these companies. That and the way the program cost is calculated is usually mandated by1
Congress or SecDef staff. Now having a standard by which we measure to cost of a program would be nice.
Wait what? theres 2,522,880,000 seconds in 80 years, and 1 trillion dollas puts it at 40 cents a second, not 400$?
Are they working to update the 22 with the same information capabilities as the 35
The F-35 IS an overpriced piece of shit though. It's supposed to be a cheap replacement and it's done the exact opposite of that.
Absolutely - should have been Nuc powered but, yes, I’m proud of our carriers. About Time We Had CV Capability Again.
This is technically true, as it’s all inside the helmet. Early in the program (2003ish) there was a backup HUD incase the helmet had issues.
If we feed the enemy, they can fight back harder.
I don’t know if they kept this feature as I left in 2004. One feature I thought was very cool (at the time) was the live feed from cameras
thats would allow the pilot to “see through” the plane. Where he would look, they system would fill in what was there. So if you looked
I remember looking inside the new F-16 cockpit. My Dad would point to a “box” and say $32K this one $64K. Planes are like cars, preference.
behind you, you didn’t see the seat/cockpit, you saw what was behind the plane. As they were actively cutting down the exterior sensors
while i was still there, I’m sure this feature was paired down or just cut completely.
While I didn’t work for Rockwell, I did work with them on occasion. I was at a company called Maxtek (joint venture between Tektronix and
Maxim). We were responsible for a large portion of the HUD/HMD electronics. Some design, but mostly the manufacturing and test.
I CANT HEAR YOU! Mawp! Okay, say again?
Pft. You're a special kind of stupid.
Im sorry what? How would the 35 enable that? The A-10 isnt a fighter. The F-15, F-16, F-18, and F-22 take care of air superiority.
The F-35 does multiple roles semi passable. It has no purpose other then the stovl model for the marines.
The AF have two of the best fighters ever built in the F15 and 22. And a hell of a dogfighter in the 16.
Top Gun 2 is not using F35s because they suck. They're sticking with F18s
The navy has been trying to go to one airframe for years now to cut costs on repair and training, hence all the F18 models.
The F18’s do their job amazingly well also, purpose built airframes will always trounce jack of all trade planes.
The F35 is a waste of money and time when the age of manned fighters is at its close. The future is combat drones, not a half baked JSF.
The F35 gives 0 new benefit to the air power of the US military.
Not a problem. I don't see it as one. The Falcon does have better thrust to weight and turn rate. But!!! The F35 carries more A-A.
Isn't the euro also a multi role?
No. No. No. It does both jobs well enough. The Warthog and Falcon are two of the best at their jobs.
Not a dogfight. DOGFIGHTING is not over the horizon. Hell, the ancient ass F14 can do that. Trust me though. Upgrade the suite on the...
Falcon, and it would not be so disadvantaged.
Because there are these things called anti air missiles and ZSUs that can destroy an A10. The F35 is LO which makes it harder to kill.
Right cause the stealth coating and profile of the plane have nothing to do with it either
Added my own credentials in an edit, if that makes me more believable.
Gen 3 is actually really good. There were some serious issues with gen 1 and some less serious ones on gen 2. But the gen 3 is a world beate
What abridged series is this?
Bullshit. when you consider the actual GAU and roundcount. Plus the f-35 doesnt even have the software to fire it yet. And dwelltime ???
not to mention for the cost i could put up 5 a-10s...or 5 f16s...or 18 tucanos...
Drones are cheaper to make and can be mounted with missiles. And they're expendable. doesnt cost billions because of one getting shot 1/2
down, and being small they can be transported easily. Not to mention theres no person in them
Cheaper with the same capabilities as a fighter jet? No way in hell. Avionics and coding are the biggest divers in cost and testing of a 1
New plane. To make it autonomous like this and have all the sensors of a fighter would literally double the electronics and power budget 2
Code would be at least quadrupled. How would that be cheaper?
A drone with the same capabilities if anythi g would be size neutral or bigger due to increased weight of the extra avionics, power systems1
Cooling. Then you need to beef up the frame to accommodate all of that as well.
Well we all know companies can fuzz costs to buyers when they want to. But you provide a good point. A standard to check cost would be good.
This is exactly what i worked on. It was a dual projection system onto an inner visor. The outer visor being the sunshade.
One projector was RGB and another was Grayscale. The grayscale updated much faster than the RGB. If i remember correctly, that was used
for targeting systems, with some RGB over the top.
The NDA was only for 10 years after leaving. And I’m not giving technical specs. You can find pretty detailed info online about the system.
I worked on early development systems. They are not what is currently used in any plane. They were proving grounds for features and fit.
I will say that nearly all of the civilian projects I worked on went much smoother. But they also weren’t nearly as technically difficult.
So it’s 50% survival rate now. Not 1% lol
Bear with me here, is the lift fan aboard the plane? What powers the lift fan?
This is code for "I don't know what I am talking about."
Well I guess more than one has happened. But most likely the pilot was never recovered (Vietnam)
Not of they're armed with any sort of MPADS. Then it's "oh, a slow jet let's kill it."
Wasnt it consistently losing in testing against the f16?
The actual engine itself, there’s a crank shaft that runs down the middle of the engine and extends to the lift fan
You do know that the military does destroy enemy weapons that could pose a threat to their aircraft before sending them in, right?
Not only that, the A-10 is famously durable. To the point that one once flew back to base while missing an engine and most of a wing.
Hell, the cockpit is protected by a titanium tub that could even withstand glancing blows from weapons that were meant to kill tanks.
SAMs are easy to find and destroy. Shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles are not and they are a huge threat to low flying aircraft.
Even if it only cripples the aircraft it now needs to head back to base with an escort.
That's true. But it's not exactly something that the F-35 can get around if it's going to be used for ground support to replace the A-10.
Yeah, it's too sensitive and expensive. What the US needs is a modern and faster A-10 with a smaller gun and even higher take off weight.
While I do agree on a newer A-10, I don't think getting rid of its main cannon would work. The bird was designed around that gun.
You couldn't at least drop me a tldr?
Okay. They did the same thing with the Raptor. Even the Air Force knows that the Eagle can outfly it. IF it can find it.
And what powers - fuels, if you will - the engine?
Never heard of it losing to a F16. Did read recently a 35 fought 3 16's so bad it was like sending a caveman against an Abrams
Why am i getting downvoted, I double checked the math, it’s right
Nephew drives the 15-E at SJ
Nine other countries have to fight and defend.
That’s where I work, small world.
The F-35 uses electrohydrostatic actuators, not hydraulics. So… yes it can.
In other words, the actuators use electricity rather than relying on delicate hydraulic lines.
If, the Falcon had the ability to see it. More what I meant. Stealth only lasts a while.
The entire point of the F-35 was to be a cheaper plane than a 22 and have more capes. And it’s not that
but they did invade properly, then they pulled out, the message was delivered.
Nine other countries are buying and using
It is hard on humans. Additions were made as a horn to wake up pilot after violent movement’s to ground proximity.
To the uninformed
Trump had them lower the price
You would surprised where they keep sometimes
The price was (and is) always going to go down since LockMart is going from low rate initial production to full rate production. The US 1/2
2/2 military and other buyers will continue to negotiate of course, but this isn't anything special or unexpected.
2)The pressure helped a deal on LRIP 10 in February 2017, with unit costs reduced by about 7.5 percent when compared to 9th batch of jets.
1) F-35 costs came under fire from Trump, who publicly lambasted the program and positioned Boeing’s Super Hornet as an alternative.
That's basically what you said "the lag time won't be an issue because they'll be using drones too" that's circular logic.
Doesn't matter if he's already in position and locked. F-35 will still have the greatest advantage
...No, that's not what I said. I said that lag time wouldn't matter because the cost of replacing a drone is much lower. It matters less 1/
if your opponent takes down one of your drones through superior reflexes if your fifty other drones shoot him down in exchange. And even 2/
then, a pilot's reflexes are offset by the limited G-forces his squishy meat body can be safely exposed to. 3/3
Yeah. I know, I used to pack the kits/chutes. :)
Yeah, it was an issue with the 35 as well, I THINK. It's been a while. And yeah, thays why the report omits it, to make 35 look bad
I thought I was gunna start a whole thing. I’m just gunna go cut myself now instead
Just know ALL new planes gave issues
By the time you have drone capability you're talking about, they won't be 4-5 mil a pop anymore. So instead of 50 vs 1, it'd be closer to 1/
4-6 to 1. And given the f-22's current capabilities, it'll still win that fight. The f35 is only going to get better as time goes on. 2/2
Maybe next time you'll remember that it was the state-appointed manager, not the city council, that made that decision.
State EMs only happens when a city runs in the red, MI has a whole set of procedures before that happens, nah man that's the councils fault.
The council picked to make the switch of sources to bring budget back in line, they failed to schedule the change over and used the Flint r.
as a 'stop gap' until completion of the new water line even when Detroit offered to continue providing past original cutover date.
That's what I said, yes. Theoretically, the Eurofighter is. Practically, it isn't really.