the other mike
Diamond Member
What we need is flexible towers.We are all fucked if we rely on obsolete ships in the modern world
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What we need is flexible towers.We are all fucked if we rely on obsolete ships in the modern world
Nah more Mohammad cartoons would do just fineWhat we need is flexible towers.We are all fucked if we rely on obsolete ships in the modern world
View attachment 413452
We will know the answer under 59 minutes after the USA launches an attack with a carrier. That said the USA will never use an obsolete weapons system in such an attack so the carrier is uselessAnd just 1 DF-21 is all it takes.
Unless it is carrying a nuclear warhead, one DF-21 would be little bother to a supercarrier.
And if all 10 things went right to get it to the carrier. Let one thing go wrong and it goes terminal. The chances of it working is not even worth calculating.
Doesnt change the facts........think about that
The operative word here is, "Outgoing". Think about that for just a bit.
Doesnt change the facts........think about that
The operative word here is, "Outgoing". Think about that for just a bit.
The engines on A-model F-35s, which take off and land conventionally, have been running “hot,” or close to the limits of their design, and that heat has caused premature cracks, or delamination, of turbine blade coatings. That’s forced the engines to be removed or repaired earlier than anticipated, aggravating an already backlogged depot system. The cracks in the coating are not a flight safety issue, but they do reduce an engine’s useful life, said a defense official. Air Force cuts back exhibition flights on new F-35 engine woes | The Edge Markets
Yeah that's it,car can't fly much because we'll burn too many engines we don't have a fix for. .How long would your skewing last in real war before they couldn't fly .......stupid analogyThe engines on A-model F-35s, which take off and land conventionally, have been running “hot,” or close to the limits of their design, and that heat has caused premature cracks, or delamination, of turbine blade coatings. That’s forced the engines to be removed or repaired earlier than anticipated, aggravating an already backlogged depot system. The cracks in the coating are not a flight safety issue, but they do reduce an engine’s useful life, said a defense official. Air Force cuts back exhibition flights on new F-35 engine woes | The Edge Markets
I'm an old motorhead. When I built a bread and butter engine, I expected it to run forever. But I didn't ask so much of it. It didn't have it to give anyway. The basic parts were not being overly taxed.
But when I built a performance engine, I didn't expect it to last very long. In fact, on one of my quarter mile builds, I would have to have to identical engines due to engine failure. No engine was run on two consecutive days on my Modified Production builds.
The F-35 engine is like one of my performance engine builds. You are trying to get 5lbs of shit out of a 2lb bag and it's doing it. The bird isn't that fast due to to the airframe drag. But one thing it does is gets up to it's top speed extremely fast. By the same token, it slows down faster than anything else for the same reasons. But as the article says, it meets the combat service requirements even with that "Problem". If called on, it does the job and gets home safely. The same won't be said about the other guy.
I expect things like this as all performance engines will have the same problems. Yes, even the F-15 with the -220 engines and the F-22 with the F-119 engines. You seem to leave out the problems that the Russian have with the engines on their SU-35 where they have a low sortie rate. The F-35A has over a 70% sortie rate which is one of the best in the world for Fighter type Aircraft. Yes, it will have less than 30% sortie problems for various reasons but it's still better than anything anyone else has.
Fighters break. Get over it.
Yeah that's it,car can't fly much because we'll burn too many engines we don't have a fix for. .How long would your skewing last in real war before they couldn't fly .......stupid analogyThe engines on A-model F-35s, which take off and land conventionally, have been running “hot,” or close to the limits of their design, and that heat has caused premature cracks, or delamination, of turbine blade coatings. That’s forced the engines to be removed or repaired earlier than anticipated, aggravating an already backlogged depot system. The cracks in the coating are not a flight safety issue, but they do reduce an engine’s useful life, said a defense official. Air Force cuts back exhibition flights on new F-35 engine woes | The Edge Markets
I'm an old motorhead. When I built a bread and butter engine, I expected it to run forever. But I didn't ask so much of it. It didn't have it to give anyway. The basic parts were not being overly taxed.
But when I built a performance engine, I didn't expect it to last very long. In fact, on one of my quarter mile builds, I would have to have to identical engines due to engine failure. No engine was run on two consecutive days on my Modified Production builds.
The F-35 engine is like one of my performance engine builds. You are trying to get 5lbs of shit out of a 2lb bag and it's doing it. The bird isn't that fast due to to the airframe drag. But one thing it does is gets up to it's top speed extremely fast. By the same token, it slows down faster than anything else for the same reasons. But as the article says, it meets the combat service requirements even with that "Problem". If called on, it does the job and gets home safely. The same won't be said about the other guy.
I expect things like this as all performance engines will have the same problems. Yes, even the F-15 with the -220 engines and the F-22 with the F-119 engines. You seem to leave out the problems that the Russian have with the engines on their SU-35 where they have a low sortie rate. The F-35A has over a 70% sortie rate which is one of the best in the world for Fighter type Aircraft. Yes, it will have less than 30% sortie problems for various reasons but it's still better than anything anyone else has.
Fighters break. Get over it.
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter may be the Air Force’s “quarterback in the sky,” but it’s also expensive to operate and, to date, still riddled with issues. Now, the Air Force is kicking off a month-long assessment of the branch’s tactical aviation requirements with the intention of potentially fielding an all-new fighter that boasts some of the capabilities found in the F-35 and F-22, but with a significantly smaller price tag.
The Air Force wants a new fighter to fill in for the F-35 - Sandboxx
And there you have it. Its a specialty plane like an AWACS that shoots but doesnt want to let anything get to close, and a fancy drone controller. and we probably alrdy have too many of em
super lame duck
it costs a billion, maintainance costs another billion an hour, it requires a month of maintainance works after an hour of flight..
in a week of war allF-35 will stay on ground
super lame duck
it costs a billion, maintainance costs another billion an hour, it requires a month of maintainance works after an hour of flight..
in a week of war allF-35 will stay on ground