F35 critique
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako
-
CosmoBuszard
- Rank 0
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:54 pm
-
SuperchargedRS
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1485
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:30 am
- Location: the stars playground
Re: F35 critique
What about thrust vectoring? Im not sure if the F-35 has it that same way the Raptor has is where it can cut a corner, but would think it retained some of that ability from it's big brother
As for the not knowing friend from enemy until you get a visual, what about that Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System (EO DAS) system?
As for the not knowing friend from enemy until you get a visual, what about that Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System (EO DAS) system?
Re: F35 critique
I am stunned that an expert actually agrees with my wild ass guess about the F-35.
Although i do not believe they are spending all of the money on that ONE particular design.The money is being funneled into a secret weapons program codenamed "Hookers and Coke"
I wonder what his views on the Leonardo Da Vinci Codex are ?
Although i do not believe they are spending all of the money on that ONE particular design.The money is being funneled into a secret weapons program codenamed "Hookers and Coke"
I wonder what his views on the Leonardo Da Vinci Codex are ?
-
CosmoBuszard
- Rank 0
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:54 pm
Re: F35 critique
+1
it seems that most of the countries involved are putting orders on hold, etc... how do you get this far in a project that was so obviously wrong from the outset?
Problems i've heard other than the ones mentioned in this video:
- Our tankers aren't compatible with this plane (seems that all extra equipment like a fuel probe will be at extra cost)
- One engine is a huge liability when the pilot is operating 1000 miles from BF nowhere and it's -40 outside (consider that the US only operates twins (f22's and f15's) from alaska on basically the same mission we'll be doing)
- Our far north runways are (laughably) not suitable for the plane because it lacks equipment for tailhook ops (apparently a drag chute is 'going to be developed' at, again, extra cost to the buyer)
Whenever i hear people who know flying talking about how the f35 is 'just what canada needs' in the media, i can't help wondering if they've had their pockets greased in some way.
PS the version we're buying is not vectored thrust.
PPS turns out all the flying f35's in the US are currently grounded due to discovery of a 'faulty control valve problem,' whatever that is.
PPPS super hornet is cheaper!?!
it seems that most of the countries involved are putting orders on hold, etc... how do you get this far in a project that was so obviously wrong from the outset?
Problems i've heard other than the ones mentioned in this video:
- Our tankers aren't compatible with this plane (seems that all extra equipment like a fuel probe will be at extra cost)
- One engine is a huge liability when the pilot is operating 1000 miles from BF nowhere and it's -40 outside (consider that the US only operates twins (f22's and f15's) from alaska on basically the same mission we'll be doing)
- Our far north runways are (laughably) not suitable for the plane because it lacks equipment for tailhook ops (apparently a drag chute is 'going to be developed' at, again, extra cost to the buyer)
Whenever i hear people who know flying talking about how the f35 is 'just what canada needs' in the media, i can't help wondering if they've had their pockets greased in some way.
PS the version we're buying is not vectored thrust.
PPS turns out all the flying f35's in the US are currently grounded due to discovery of a 'faulty control valve problem,' whatever that is.
PPPS super hornet is cheaper!?!
