Forum: F-35 Lightning II

Then who is going to purchase these vast numbers of PAK-FA's???? The India Market is only 200 Aircraft. While, the Russian Defense Budget is actually going down in real dollars! The Chinese btw are developing their own 5th Genaration Fighter.

Anyone who doesn't want to pay 100 million plus for an aircraft which is compromised to death, that's who. Why do you think the F-35 is over budget to the tune of 100% and late by.. what 5/6 years? They can't make it work, that's why. It has a 43000lb(!!) engine and it's performance is still classed as 'around the F-18s'. All those stories about it being overweight, of course it's overweight, they're trying to fit so much crap into that skin that it's literally bursting!

And when you get down to the feature set it's pretty vague too. Pretty Stealthy but not so much if you're not American (but better than everyone elses because...hmmm?...because we've been doing it longer and no one could possibly work it out! (phew, that was a close one!) , Supercruising...ah...no. Sensor fusion?..Oh yeah, in spades! it'll be fantastic, no bugs at all don't worry about that. Good range? Well reasonable range...how much range do you need? Good payload? Well yeah you can carry payload but if you do it ain't so stealthy so. Hmmm, anything else? Oh yeah, it's got infra red viewers man! Oh yeah, yeah I've heard of those, haven't the Russians had them for years? Yeah , but our ones better...

And yeah the chinese are building fifth generation fighters too, which may also compete for international sales with the F-35 and the T-50. Say it and the T-50 have around 75% the performance of the F-35 (which is pretty unlikely because they're obviously aiming for F-22 performance) but they're willing to sell it for 50% of the price. Every sale of one of these things to a foreign buyer is one less F-35 sold and one more hike to the price of F-35's for the dopes that do buy them. You know that thing that retailers do, they offer you three choices: one that's cheap crap, one that's obviously over priced and one that's still over priced but less than the most expensive one. Which one do you usually buy? Which one of those do you think the F-35 is?

Really, the only impact the PAK-FA will have on the fighter market. Is to sell more F-35's....... So, keep the spin going. Its good for Lockheed Martins Business.

Pure la la land.

It would be interesting to get a feel for the activity levels of the LM sales force at the moment. They must be working like devils trying to smooth buyers concerns that this thing is an overpriced piece of crap. Can't you just see the LM lobbyists just throwing bales of money at congress people at the moment "shoring up support for the F-35".

Um, I would like to point out the A and C have longer ranges than the F-22 from what anyone can tell...

certainly not as good as the aircraft it's replacing in the RAAF!

The F-35A isn't as good as the Super Hornet? Someone better tell RAAF quick...

No, what I'm referring to is whether the ac is late or not. Most sources say the aircraft is around 5 or 6 years overdue. Current delivery is 2014...I guess we'll see.

Ah, that would be the whole system...you know the one that they couldn't deliver on time or within budget.

So like I said, performance similar or "around" that of the F-18, a tween series jet.

Yes I am aware of that, and that's an amazing amount of weight to lose isn't it. The question which immediately comes to mind is "what did they cut out?" closely followed by "How did the design get to be 3000lb overweight in the first place?"

The export models will have the same RCS as the US models.

Nope. This is definitely wrong. The engine is not designed for it and the wingform precludes it. It can reach 1.6 in burner.

I haven't, but how many bleeding edge systems have you seen go into production with out bugs appearing?

certainly not as good as the aircraft it's replacing in the RAAF!

Well now the EODAS refers to the whole thing and thus to the sensor fusion thing, whether the physics used in the infrared sensors is significantly more advanced than the russian equipment is open to debate. After all, we're all using the same physics texts (unless you're in Texas ). But you're right, no other aircraft has anything like the EODAS...yet.

Russian Aircraft have always been cheaper than Western Types. Yet, you don't see the free world purchasing it nonetheless. As for the performance of the F-35 vs say a Hornet. The latter is clean and so is the Hornet. Yet, in the real world of air combat the Hornet would be loaded down with external stores. Which, means the F-35 would be a "vastly" superior performer in the "REAL WORLD".

From whats been quoted from Indian Government sources the F-35 will be markedly Superior to PAK-FA in RCS. As for range the F-35 will carry between 18,000 lbs -20,000 lbs internally in a very clean and aerodynamic package. The PAK-FA is very heavy with two large and thirsty older generation powerplants. Which, are likely less efficient. If, you compare the F-35 to a 4.5 G Type with 3-4 large external tanks its no contest at all. Which, doesn't even touch on "huge" performance penalty for doing so.

If, the PAK-FA offers 75% of the F-35. I doubt you will find many buyers. At least not Europe nor Major Pacific Powers like South Korea or Japan. Looking pretty thin to me........

Well, put your money were your mouth is! Which, country do you believe would seriously consider the PAK-FA over the F-35. As I am all ears???

LOL

Wha? The PAK-FA flight test article is very heavy? Weighed it have you? Figures I’ve seen say it weighs essentially the same as most of the T-10 sukhois which, considering it’s smaller than a T-10, makes it surprisingly dense (maybe they’ve made it out of steel ). It has two ‘large and thirsty engines’ which are rated to generate around 32000lbs of thrust each; which is more than the F100-229s on the F-15E. Back of the envelope calculations suggest a thrust to weight ratio just below the F-22 and comfortably ahead of the F-35.

Remember that the (conservative) $110 million price tag is based on the assumption that they’ll sell over 3000 units to the US gov and foreign air forces.

Look, it may turn out to be a fabulous aircraft but it won’t be affordable and it wont be good value for money if it’s facing 2-3 times as many semi-stealthy sukhoi variants. Each one clean and stealthy can only carry 6 (untested) 120D's, when they run out what do you do? You hope you got all the opposing fighters is what you do because if you didn't the buddies of the guys you just splashed are gonna squash you like a bug.

Here is the Dubai 2009 Air Show Super Hornet selling brief (1Mb): http://www.boeing.com/dubai2009/media/P ... Hbrief.pdf

More RAAF shiny new Super Hornets here (in flight):

http://www.defence.gov.au/media/downloa ... /index.htm

It is true that the economy can get much worse. I don't think that what's happening now is just a normal cycle in the economy. What can happen can become absolutely catastrophic.

Personaly I think a joint USAF/USN F-18 would be good choice at this point. A large USN/USAF would enable to even lower their bid on the indian MRCA contract, which would make the F-18 very tempting to the Indians. With 130 F-18s for the USN, 130 for the AF and 130 for the indian that would reduce the unit significantly.

An land variant would also probably be cheaper. LM would lose 260 aircraft.. TOO BAD.

Look, this whole arm-chair-aeronautical-engineering discussion is really fun to read; but it ain't worth a grande Starbucks Caffe Mocha.

To summarize my entire hatred of all thins related to the F-35A/B/C:

The USA owned the skies over the entire globe. We had a long ranged multi-target capable (but aging) fleet defender in the F-14. We had at the time, the best twin engined USAF plane in the F-15C/E. We had an awesome gun slinger in the F-16. We had a sizable force of true stealthy attack bombers in the F-117, and we had the venerable F-111.

Fast forward a decade, and we're building the BEST airplane the USAF has ever had, the F-22. Supercruised, multiple shot BVR capability, puts a lot of T into a2a and a2g munitions. So what do we do? Hmmm, lets build this jack-of-all-trades and master of nothing that has LESS.... LESS performance than what we're ending. Not only less flight performance, but less LO performance. And its going to carry few weapons to the battle, and if the need arises to pull out the 23mm. then it ain't going to turn with the best of the best.

We (the USA) owned the stealthy supercruising long ranged deep strike penetrating market; we not only owned the game, but we owned the entire LEAGUE. So what do we do? Let's cancel it.

FACT: we do not know the production run of the Pak Fa.
FACT: the Pak Fa will out perform the F-35 (physically)
FACT: 186 (now that we lost one last year) F-22s is not enough for air dominance.
FACT: with the -22 production ending, spares are going to be worth their weight in plutonium, and just as rare.

If we had at least the USAFs requested run of 381 -22s, I'd sleep a little better at night, but I've got insomnia anyways, so. . . . But if we had 381 -22s then, fine go ahead and replace the -16s with the -35A. Its got advantages over the -16 that can't be retrofitted into the Falcons. Let the -35s play Wild Weasel, and let them be the bogies buzzing around at low alt and let them overwhelm ground based air defenses because of their sheer numbers. It will be a better strike bomber than the F-16, thats a fact.

But for goshes sakes, lets have some .300 hitters on our team, otherwise known as th F-22. I don't hardly know a thing about tooling for composites, but if we end the -22 line, I fear that it my not ever be able to be re-opened.

I know there are complex simulations showing the -35 is good enough, but the -22 is better. Especially if they'd open up the piggy bank and give it a nice IR sensor and helmet sighted 9x dispenser. The only thing the -35 has over the -22 is the frickin' EOTS/helmet/cockpit, and yes it carries 2 2k pounders; but what the -22 carries inside ain't exactly M80s. We'd be better off with more, a lot more, -22s, and hundred (or approx 100) specialized extreme LO attack bombers. I guaranty you too it'd be the less costly way to go.

As I said: we used to let the bad guys have a better riffle. Now we're letting them have better airplanes too? Its bad enough we suffered for decades with the sparrows.

We've gained so much capability in the F-22, and we're literally scrapping the production line after not even 190 copies. Makes zero sense to me.

...
But the Russians aren’t the great enemy anymore and eventually someone’s going to sit down and start looking at the math on this. ...

I think he's talking about the F-111. Yes it's true that the F-111 has more range, more speed, higher internal payload, but what he's forgetting is that against modern air defenses, the F-111's survivability is highly questionable at best. Additionally, keeping F-111s flying is only going to get more expensive as they get older, and their availability rates are not going to be getting any better either.