F35 - superfighter or lame duck?

[Daryl Hunt]

The F-35 cannot out perform the F-16


Leaked F-35 Report Confirms Serious Air Combat Deficiencies


--------------------------------------------

Upgrade, flight control and computer software problems ; as well as unreliable components.

Pentagon: Here are all the problems with the F-35 - Business Insider



--------------------------------------------------------------------


My bet is, and will always be........ on the F/A-18

Long live the F/A-18 Super Hornet.


Shadow 355

Just how many times are you going to use the same outdated report. I do notice that the date of the report versus the date of the actual test is different. The real flight was in 2014, not 2015. I notice that it condemns all F-35s instead of just the AF-2 Test Bird that was actually used in the test.

Once again, the report is defrocked. Come up with something new like the bad the seat ejectors being faulty. I imagine that it's being addressed right now. If you wait another year to start harping on it then you will too late. So get on the stick.

As for the F-18C/D those are the models that are to be replaced by the F-35C. Just like you take the AF-1/2 and use them for all F-35s, you are using the F-18C/D for all F-18s. Newsflash, Cupcake: The life of a Carrier Born Fighter is the roughest life a fighter can do and their life expectancy is lower. The C/Ds need replacement. It's a good time for the USN to pick up a bunch of F-35Cs to augment their EF-18G and F-19E/Fs. The USN is going Gah Gah over the F-35Cs they already have and so is the RN. You leave out all this and still harp on a test from over a year ago on a Test Bird.

Canada can't afford many of the F-35s so you use your own countries lack of funds to bad mouth the Lightning II. The US can't afford NOT to have them and neither can Britain. These two do the majority of the heavy lifting for NATO and Asia.

Every day, you tripe doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

 

[shadow355]

The F-35 cannot out perform the F-16


Leaked F-35 Report Confirms Serious Air Combat Deficiencies


--------------------------------------------

Upgrade, flight control and computer software problems ; as well as unreliable components.

Pentagon: Here are all the problems with the F-35 - Business Insider



--------------------------------------------------------------------


My bet is, and will always be........ on the F/A-18

Long live the F/A-18 Super Hornet.


Shadow 355

Just how many times are you going to use the same outdated report. I do notice that the date of the report versus the date of the actual test is different. The real flight was in 2014, not 2015. I notice that it condemns all F-35s instead of just the AF-2 Test Bird that was actually used in the test.

Once again, the report is defrocked. Come up with something new like the bad the seat ejectors being faulty. I imagine that it's being addressed right now. If you wait another year to start harping on it then you will too late. So get on the stick.

As for the F-18C/D those are the models that are to be replaced by the F-35C. Just like you take the AF-1/2 and use them for all F-35s, you are using the F-18C/D for all F-18s. Newsflash, Cupcake: The life of a Carrier Born Fighter is the roughest life a fighter can do and their life expectancy is lower. The C/Ds need replacement. It's a good time for the USN to pick up a bunch of F-35Cs to augment their EF-18G and F-19E/Fs. The USN is going Gah Gah over the F-35Cs they already have and so is the RN. You leave out all this and still harp on a test from over a year ago on a Test Bird.

Canada can't afford many of the F-35s so you use your own countries lack of funds to bad mouth the Lightning II. The US can't afford NOT to have them and neither can Britain. These two do the majority of the heavy lifting for NATO and Asia.

Every day, you tripe doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Ok. I realize you are trying to insinuate an argument. But one rebuttal.

The F-35 is inferior. That is the fact, point blank. The F-35 was manufactured when it did not need to be, because we have the F-22.

The F/A-18 was manufactured, then the whole manufacturing process went backwards with the F-35. The F-35 was put on the assembly line, when it was not needed as I see it. The F-35 was a cash cow for Government Contractors. The F-35 was nothing but guaranteed income, money in the bank, a steady investment - and Congress, as well as the Military failed to see that. The GAO report, which I reviewed...not read thoroughly - speaks loudly.

The F-35 was an item for the Military; which Government Contractors could make money on. Sooooooo, the F-22 and the F-35 "Will age" about the same time - so both will need replacing...at about the same time. Expensive. UNLESS a better fighter is designed and built to sell to the US Taxpayers, saying that it will be much better than the F-35 that was just sold to them.

The A-10 is an outstanding, and very basic ground attack aircraft. Superbly well at assisting troops with Tactical Air support, or busting enemy vehicles and armor. the A-10 does not need to be some super aircraft capable of performing mythical feats. It needs to come into the battle space, assist allied and coalition forces - perform its mission, and then exit the "A.O" ( Area of Operations ). The A-10 "Warthog" has proven itself time, after time, after time - and has made it "Home" limping from bullet holes, when other aircraft would have crashed. The A-10 has saved countless pilots. It does not have to be scrapped, Congress should fund the money to keep the assembly line open and running for the A-10. The F-35 was also designed to perform the air to ground mission --->BUT what can the F-35 carry...and how much ; compared to the A-10. What about maneuverability = which aircraft maneuvers ( can dance the dance ) better at 2500 feet AGL ( Above Ground Level ). Again-----> my bet is on the A-10 for ground attack and support. The design for the A-10 is old, but it is still a very capable and versatile aircraft, proven to be able to perform its mission for decades to come.

It is not hard to figure out that the F/A-18 ( especially the C&D models), as well as the F-22......Rules the sky.

The A-10 is, and will always be------> King of ground support.



Shadow 355

 

[shadow355]

It is a very serious problem........

They got what they should've expected.

Lockheed seen a cash cow is what they seen. Money-Money-Money, and that is all it is about !

They seen dollar signs, and their eyes lit up. Lockheed simply seen........Government Dollars.


Shadow 355

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The F-35 cannot out perform the F-16


Leaked F-35 Report Confirms Serious Air Combat Deficiencies


--------------------------------------------

Upgrade, flight control and computer software problems ; as well as unreliable components.

Pentagon: Here are all the problems with the F-35 - Business Insider



--------------------------------------------------------------------


My bet is, and will always be........ on the F/A-18

Long live the F/A-18 Super Hornet.


Shadow 355

Just how many times are you going to use the same outdated report. I do notice that the date of the report versus the date of the actual test is different. The real flight was in 2014, not 2015. I notice that it condemns all F-35s instead of just the AF-2 Test Bird that was actually used in the test.

Once again, the report is defrocked. Come up with something new like the bad the seat ejectors being faulty. I imagine that it's being addressed right now. If you wait another year to start harping on it then you will too late. So get on the stick.

As for the F-18C/D those are the models that are to be replaced by the F-35C. Just like you take the AF-1/2 and use them for all F-35s, you are using the F-18C/D for all F-18s. Newsflash, Cupcake: The life of a Carrier Born Fighter is the roughest life a fighter can do and their life expectancy is lower. The C/Ds need replacement. It's a good time for the USN to pick up a bunch of F-35Cs to augment their EF-18G and F-19E/Fs. The USN is going Gah Gah over the F-35Cs they already have and so is the RN. You leave out all this and still harp on a test from over a year ago on a Test Bird.

Canada can't afford many of the F-35s so you use your own countries lack of funds to bad mouth the Lightning II. The US can't afford NOT to have them and neither can Britain. These two do the majority of the heavy lifting for NATO and Asia.

Every day, you tripe doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Ok. I realize you are trying to insinuate an argument. But one rebuttal.

The F-35 is inferior. That is the fact, point blank. The F-35 was manufactured when it did not need to be, because we have the F-22.

The F/A-18 was manufactured, then the whole manufacturing process went backwards with the F-35. The F-35 was put on the assembly line, when it was not needed as I see it. The F-35 was a cash cow for Government Contractors. The F-35 was nothing but guaranteed income, money in the bank, a steady investment - and Congress, as well as the Military failed to see that. The GAO report, which I reviewed...not read thoroughly - speaks loudly.

The F-35 was an item for the Military; which Government Contractors could make money on. Sooooooo, the F-22 and the F-35 "Will age" about the same time - so both will need replacing...at about the same time. Expensive. UNLESS a better fighter is designed and built to sell to the US Taxpayers, saying that it will be much better than the F-35 that was just sold to them.

The A-10 is an outstanding, and very basic ground attack aircraft. Superbly well at assisting troops with Tactical Air support, or busting enemy vehicles and armor. the A-10 does not need to be some super aircraft capable of performing mythical feats. It needs to come into the battle space, assist allied and coalition forces - perform its mission, and then exit the "A.O" ( Area of Operations ). The A-10 "Warthog" has proven itself time, after time, after time - and has made it "Home" limping from bullet holes, when other aircraft would have crashed. The A-10 has saved countless pilots. It does not have to be scrapped, Congress should fund the money to keep the assembly line open and running for the A-10. The F-35 was also designed to perform the air to ground mission --->BUT what can the F-35 carry...and how much ; compared to the A-10. What about maneuverability = which aircraft maneuvers ( can dance the dance ) better at 2500 feet AGL ( Above Ground Level ). Again-----> my bet is on the A-10 for ground attack and support. The design for the A-10 is old, but it is still a very capable and versatile aircraft, proven to be able to perform its mission for decades to come.

It is not hard to figure out that the F/A-18 ( especially the C&D models), as well as the F-22......Rules the sky.

The A-10 is, and will always be------> King of ground support.



Shadow 355

Life expectancy of an A-10 in todays battlefield is measured in seconds. Life expectancy of a F-18C/D is also measured in hours since there is a lot more distance involved. But the results are the same. Unless they both have something else ripping air superiority first.

The problem with the F-22 is range. It's worthless to the USN. We can't be pulling tankers off of the Nuclear Bombers to support a large contingent of F-22s. The Navy has to use what they brought with them. As wonderful as the EF-18G is, it still requires fighters out ahead of it to survive. When those fighters are lost, the EF-18G has a huge Shoot Me sign on it. Hence the need for the F-35C.

In the AF, the A-10 is dead in the first seconds it enters a contested area. If the big radar sites don't get it, the shoulder fired grunt manpads will.

These aren't just Aircraft losses, they have pilots in them. You seem to forget that.

Now, about the F-22. It's benefited greatly from the F-35 program. Those costs aren't figured on the cost of the F-22 but against the cost of the F-35. Let's just say that we actually start building more F-22s. They might get the cost down to 150mil each instead of 250mil each if enough are built. Meanwhile, the F-35A model for the AF will end up costing between 80 to 85 mil each when it goes into full production. That is less than the most modern fighter from Europe that has long reach. IN fact, the F-15 has ballooned to over 115Mil each and it flies with a huge shoot me sign on it.

Bean counting, the F-35 becomes quite a deal in comparison. And that has been the biggest gripe about it. When it is in production by the thousands, the cost drops dramatically.

The ONLY reason the A-10 is used for CAS is that the Army misuses their own CAS. The Apache is used for everything But CAS. The Marines don't have a dedicated CAS fixed wing aircraft. They use their AH-1W/Z for that. In fact, the ground controls the Marine CAS like it should. The F-18s are used to backup the Cobras. While the army uses their AHs like roving cowboys, the Marines use theirs to get the job done. It doesn't matter how good your AHs are if your ground troops are being chewed up on the ground because they don't have adequate CAS. The A-10 has never been the answer. The answer is for the Army to change it's doctrine.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It is a very serious problem........

They got what they should've expected.

Lockheed seen a cash cow is what they seen. Money-Money-Money, and that is all it is about !

They seen dollar signs, and their eyes lit up. Lockheed simply seen........Government Dollars.


Shadow 355

Ever hear a term , "Free Trade". Or how about "Capitalism". The only reason for any of this is that you want to save the A-10. Newsflash, cupcake, the A-10 wouldn't last 10 minutes over syria with the introduction of the S-300 and the Russian provided Manpads. The Army has green flag. Earlier this year, only two F-35A models were used in Green Flag. They not only took out the ground targets but lived. Last years Green Flag, the F-16/A-10 combo had a high attrition rate. You drop down below 10K feet and all the rules change. The average Grunt can take your bird out if he's equipped properly. Not every grunt will have those fancy Manpads but each unit will have at least one. Making the A-10 and the F-16 have to stay at 20k feet for it's attack. The A-10 really sucks at 20K feet for an attack because it lacks the really good stuff to target that far away. The F-16 fares a bit better but still not accurate enough.

There would be to many blue on green attacks. And the A-10 already has the highest rate of Blue on Green fatalities of all. If you don't believe this, just ask a Limey after an A-10 makes a single pass while firing that gun. The A-10 won't be aware of it's mistake until AFTER the first run.

You can't save a 40 year old Aircraft. It's gone as soon as something comes along to replace it. Again, I think the Army needs to do a rethink on the utilization of the AH-64. It can do CAS without getting itself in trouble since it can see the enemy but the enemy can't see it. One of the reasons that the Army is pressing so hard to keep the A-10 is that they don't wish to look like complete idiots with the AH doctrine. Too late, they are already looking like idiots.

 

[I amso IR]

So, today in the news we have seen a need for the F35 lurking about behind the scene. A Russian built MIG 29 cornered eight Turkish F 16's in Turkish airspace, locked his radar and missles on at least one of the F16's for four and one half minutes. Had the F 35 been available it could have sent the MIG 29 down or at least chased him away from the eight F 16's. I mean with eight to one odds, he had them cornered. So maybe the F 35 is a good idea as we can then help our allies out when they have allowed themselves to be boxed in by overwhelming force. Had an F 35 eliminated the threat, a pathway to the battle would be opened and eight more 16's from Turkey could join the fight and hopefully gain a victory. Our allies deserve the F35 taking their backs. Aside from the Turkish element and my obvious sarcasm, there is a need for the aircraft and from this humiliating fiasco we see what it is. Kudos to the Ivan pilot.

 

[HenryBHough]

Were we to assume the F35 is all the things all the people who had their paws on it want it to be it remains that it will be totally useless so long as we have only weak-kneed apologists running the military.

Or is there something built into the F35 to overcome that? Y'know, so it can actually be used for something other than job creation.

 

[I amso IR]

Were we to assume the F35 is all the things all the people who had their paws on it want it to be it remains that it will be totally useless so long as we have only weak-kneed apologists running the military.

Or is there something built into the F35 to overcome that? Y'know, so it can actually be used for something other than job creation.

IamsoIR replies; HBH I understand exactly what you say. I would wish/hope that the F 35 would at least perform well in that role of taking heat away from other aircraft as is it is designed to do. I simply found the original article from which I gleaned my information useful in presenting one of the roles the F 35 is to be used. I admit showing a given amount of disrespect towards the 8 pilots of the F16's as well as taking a veiled jab at the leadership which prevented those Turkish pilots from taking the 29 out. Implicit in my comments is that we spend the money we do on defense and then fail to act when we need to. And Ivan is aware of that lack of will also or they would never have lit up the aircraft while inside Turkish airspace. I agree with you in many respects I believe. But I feel there is a place for an aircraft which can assist in maintaining air superiority while being distant from the actual engagement. Once proven and operational, will we have the strength to use it, that is the question of the century. If this past encounter is any indicator of that resolve, then the F35 will be a total waste of our money. Again, 8 to1 and "we" are the odd man out. Perhaps the 16's we not armed, that would not surprise me. I know from personal experience the US will put it's forces in harms way, unarmed. An M1 or M14 and no ammunition nor bayonet. Good talking to you.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

So, today in the news we have seen a need for the F35 lurking about behind the scene. A Russian built MIG 29 cornered eight Turkish F 16's in Turkish airspace, locked his radar and missles on at least one of the F16's for four and one half minutes. Had the F 35 been available it could have sent the MIG 29 down or at least chased him away from the eight F 16's. I mean with eight to one odds, he had them cornered. So maybe the F 35 is a good idea as we can then help our allies out when they have allowed themselves to be boxed in by overwhelming force. Had an F 35 eliminated the threat, a pathway to the battle would be opened and eight more 16's from Turkey could join the fight and hopefully gain a victory. Our allies deserve the F35 taking their backs. Aside from the Turkish element and my obvious sarcasm, there is a need for the aircraft and from this humiliating fiasco we see what it is. Kudos to the Ivan pilot.

Those F-16s weren't helpless. They could have played the game. But the area is so hot right now, only the stupid russkies will play those games. The Turks are flying older less capable F-16s while the Russian was flying a Mig-29M which is one of the newest versions. Try that against a Saudi or a US F-16 and get a big surprise.

 

[I amso IR]

So, today in the news we have seen a need for the F35 lurking about behind the scene. A Russian built MIG 29 cornered eight Turkish F 16's in Turkish airspace, locked his radar and missles on at least one of the F16's for four and one half minutes. Had the F 35 been available it could have sent the MIG 29 down or at least chased him away from the eight F 16's. I mean with eight to one odds, he had them cornered. So maybe the F 35 is a good idea as we can then help our allies out when they have allowed themselves to be boxed in by overwhelming force. Had an F 35 eliminated the threat, a pathway to the battle would be opened and eight more 16's from Turkey could join the fight and hopefully gain a victory. Our allies deserve the F35 taking their backs. Aside from the Turkish element and my obvious sarcasm, there is a need for the aircraft and from this humiliating fiasco we see what it is. Kudos to the Ivan pilot.

Those F-16s weren't helpless. They could have played the game. But the area is so hot right now, only the stupid russkies will play those games. The Turks are flying older less capable F-16s while the Russian was flying a Mig-29M which is one of the newest versions. Try that against a Saudi or a US F-16 and get a big surprise.

Hello Daryl. Please see my reply to HBH above. Just pointing out one use for the F35, nothing more. The "russkies" play that game because they can and know it. And frankly, those 16's could be from the bone yard in Arizona, no "stupid russkie" is going to accept those odds if he knows those dogs will fight and bite. Good hearing from you.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

So, today in the news we have seen a need for the F35 lurking about behind the scene. A Russian built MIG 29 cornered eight Turkish F 16's in Turkish airspace, locked his radar and missles on at least one of the F16's for four and one half minutes. Had the F 35 been available it could have sent the MIG 29 down or at least chased him away from the eight F 16's. I mean with eight to one odds, he had them cornered. So maybe the F 35 is a good idea as we can then help our allies out when they have allowed themselves to be boxed in by overwhelming force. Had an F 35 eliminated the threat, a pathway to the battle would be opened and eight more 16's from Turkey could join the fight and hopefully gain a victory. Our allies deserve the F35 taking their backs. Aside from the Turkish element and my obvious sarcasm, there is a need for the aircraft and from this humiliating fiasco we see what it is. Kudos to the Ivan pilot.

Those F-16s weren't helpless. They could have played the game. But the area is so hot right now, only the stupid russkies will play those games. The Turks are flying older less capable F-16s while the Russian was flying a Mig-29M which is one of the newest versions. Try that against a Saudi or a US F-16 and get a big surprise.

Hello Daryl. Please see my reply to HBH above. Just pointing out one use for the F35, nothing more. The "russkies" play that game because they can and know it. And frankly, those 16's could be from the bone yard in Arizona, no "stupid russkie" is going to accept those odds if he knows those dogs will fight and bite. Good hearing from you.

We need to have bright leaders who can actually lead at all levels. The F-35, by itself (like all other hardware) is only as good as the leaders. I lost friends because of the LBJ/Westmorland Doctrine. Nixon and Abrams changed that. But it took 4 years of near suicide for Military Pilots before that would happen.Our Pilots and Ground Crews are the best trained in the World.

Most have no idea how the Sequester has hurt out Military. If they don't come up with an agreement for military spending and do pass the rest of the budget, the Sequester comes into play. One of the reasons that the A-10 and many of the F-15s are on the chopping block is that there isn't enough funding to do the training along with the lack of spare parts to keep us the #1 AF and Navy in the world. Now, add to the fact that those birds on the chopping block are at least 30 to 40 years old. Life of a Fighter and an Attack Bird is much harder than a Cargo, Tanker of Bomber bird. And when you add in Carrier duty, these birds are rode hard and put away wet.

Hangar Queens are definately taboo but every branch has them.

 

[Manonthestreet]

World’s Most Expensive Jet Somehow Gets Worse World’s Most Expensive Jet Somehow Gets Worse
Damaging, because the military and F-35-maker Lockheed Martin have increasingly sold the F-35 as a sort of “flying computer” whose software can outthink enemy pilots even when the enemy’s own planes fly faster, maneuver better and carry more weaponry than the F-35 does.

The stealth fighter’s software is its last possible claim to being a first-class warplane. If the F-35’s code doesn’t work, then neither does the F-35. Saddled with thousands of dysfunctional F-35s, the Pentagon could lose command of the air.
That would be 0 combat rdy.......

 

[Manonthestreet]

The U.S. May Build 500 Jets Before Finding Out If the F-35 Works The U.S. May Build 500 Jets Before Finding Out If the F-35 Works Talk about Russian Roulette

 

[Daryl Hunt]

World’s Most Expensive Jet Somehow Gets Worse World’s Most Expensive Jet Somehow Gets Worse
Damaging, because the military and F-35-maker Lockheed Martin have increasingly sold the F-35 as a sort of “flying computer” whose software can outthink enemy pilots even when the enemy’s own planes fly faster, maneuver better and carry more weaponry than the F-35 does.

The stealth fighter’s software is its last possible claim to being a first-class warplane. If the F-35’s code doesn’t work, then neither does the F-35. Saddled with thousands of dysfunctional F-35s, the Pentagon could lose command of the air.
That would be 0 combat rdy.......

Macnamar crammed the F-111 down DODs throats. They made a fighter that couldn't fight and was too large for a carrier. If found a home due to coding and went on to be a bangup Bomber, Electronic Warfare and Wild Weasel.

To date, the F-35 fires it's gun (A version) and fires the Aim-9X along with the Amraams. IT's already hard to see due to it's stealth qualities including spoofing, hiding, laying silent and shooting targets on both the air and the ground undetected. The A model already can accurately drop small diameter GBUs. Now, exactly what are you seeing that the rest of us aren't? Be specific and use current information instead information more than 3 years old.

 

[Manonthestreet]

No it was worth something because it could carry huge payload fast......F-35 can't do anything ........

 

[Manonthestreet]

To date only thing f35 can do is fail and fall further and further behind schedule

 

[Daryl Hunt]

No it was worth something because it could carry huge payload fast......F-35 can't do anything ........

I am so glad you are back. We are getting a kick out of the F-35 kicking your ass.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Lllmmaaaoooo. Only in lib world does fail = success

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Lllmmaaaoooo. Only in lib world does fail = success

Another lie on your part. I am not a Liberal. I am an old Lincoln/Teddy/Eisenhower Republican. From a time when the GOP WAS a Grand Ol Party before you criminals hijacked it.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Pentagon?s big budget F-35 fighter ?can?t turn, can?t climb, can?t run? | The Great Debate

Pentagon’s big budget F-35 fighter ‘can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run’

Is there a serious problem, or just the press hunting for a story?

The Military has to have new shiny things believe me I know. They should stick with a proven platforms. No pilot I know wants to get rid of the the A-10 and the ground pounders definitely don't want it replaced.