| Author |
Message |
|
Destro
|
 Posted: Jul 08, 2006 - 04:03 PM
|
 
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Mar 12, 2005
Posts: 384
Status: Offline
|
| The paint scheme is gonna change over time too, especially if they sell it (the airplane) to other countries. |
_________________
WTF Over!
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Sponsor
|
 Posted: Sep 05, 2008 - 10:07 AM
|
|
|
F-16.net Sponsor
|
This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TenguNoHi
|
|
Posted: Jul 09, 2006 - 08:15 AM
|
|
|
Elite
Joined: Sep 29, 2004
Posts: 922
Status: Offline
|
Im more dissapointed that they opted to use the same canopy on every frame rather than use a bubble with better rear visibility for the A and Cs.
-Aaron |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dammerung
|
|
Posted: Jul 09, 2006 - 09:56 AM
|
|
|
Active member
Joined: Jun 27, 2004
Posts: 192
Status: Offline
|
| I think it looks nice. And if a JSF is in close, that means the F-22s didn't do their job, so I can see why they chose that canopy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LordOfBunnies
|
|
Posted: Jul 09, 2006 - 10:02 AM
|
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 21, 2005
Posts: 471
Status: Offline
|
| Have we forgotten that you can look THROUGH the plane. It's embedded with little camera and sensors all over so when the pilot turns his head, he sees outside of the plane. Canopy doesn't matter as much if you can look through your plane. Some of the F-35 guys have mentioned the existence of this system before and I'll defer to them. |
_________________
Please bear with me... I'm still learning.
Peace through superior firepower.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scorpion1alpha
|
|
Posted: Jul 10, 2006 - 03:50 AM
|
|
|
Elite
Joined: Oct 21, 2005
Posts: 757
Status: Offline
|
|
TenguNoHi wrote:
Im more dissapointed that they opted to use the same canopy on every frame rather than use a bubble with better rear visibility for the A and Cs.
-Aaron
RCS considerations. And.....visibility is just fine, even without the HMD. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
asiatrails
|
|
Posted: Jul 10, 2006 - 04:04 AM
|
|
|
Elite
Joined: Aug 30, 2005
Posts: 662
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
asiatrails
|
|
Posted: Jul 10, 2006 - 04:06 AM
|
|
|
Elite
Joined: Aug 30, 2005
Posts: 662
Status: Offline
|
|
boff180 wrote:
That paints scheme to me is Fugly :s
Its the NASCAR / F1 look. One good high speed pass through a rainstorm will improve it. (maybe) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TenguNoHi
|
|
Posted: Jul 10, 2006 - 04:50 AM
|
|
|
Elite
Joined: Sep 29, 2004
Posts: 922
Status: Offline
|
|
Quote:
RCS considerations. And.....visibility is just fine, even without the HMD.
See, I personally believe that visibility can never be "just fine". It can only get more perfect. Situational awareness is the precursor to victory in any kind of combat, whether it be air combat or other. A lot of people hear the term and think of things like Radars and Avionics almost immediatly. Has the Mk 1 Eyeball been forgotten? This is THE most reliable sensor or enemy position and activity there is, even if it is a bit short ranged. And we can't rely on one air frame to do their job so another air frame can do hers. F-22 is still not a proven fighter, and it is in limited and small quantities; and as a personal oppinion, even if I knew every air field within 200 miles of my target zone was cratered, I would still fly expecting an enemy fighter on my six at any moment. Additionally, enemy fighters aren't the only thing to be spotted visually, but SAM launches and strafing targets as well. Needless impeding obstacles are an aggrivation but I must say it's a step up from the F-117.
-Aaron |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RonO
|
|
Posted: Jul 10, 2006 - 08:15 PM
|
|
|
Active member
Joined: May 10, 2006
Posts: 128
Status: Offline
|
| Not sure that color will be customer choice given the LO considerations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
danimal1504
|
|
Posted: Jul 10, 2006 - 08:18 PM
|
|
|
Regular User
Joined: Apr 07, 2006
Posts: 29
Location: Ft. Wayne
Status: Offline
|
| anybody else think JSF is uglier than just about any other airplane theyve ever seen? i dont know, maybe im too old school or something... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LordOfBunnies
|
|
Posted: Jul 10, 2006 - 09:04 PM
|
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jul 21, 2005
Posts: 471
Status: Offline
|
Danimal, have you ever seen the X-32. It was the F-35's competitor, it is one of the most god awful ugly pieces of engineering ever to fly. Check the flying dumpster out.
 |
_________________
Please bear with me... I'm still learning.
Peace through superior firepower.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MKopack
|
|
Posted: Jul 10, 2006 - 09:11 PM
|
|
|
Elite
Joined: Apr 08, 2004
Posts: 733
Status: Offline
|
|
LordOfBunnies wrote:
Danimal, have you ever seen the X-32. It was the F-35's competitor, it is one of the most god awful ugly pieces of engineering ever to fly. Check the flying dumpster out.
What? The yawning hippo...?
Mike |
_________________
F-16A/B/C/D P&W/GE Crew Chief and Phased Maint.
56TTW/63TFTS 1987-1989
401TFW/614TFS 1989-1991
|
|
|
|
|
|
idesof
|
|
Posted: Jul 10, 2006 - 11:27 PM
|
|
|
Elite
Joined: May 29, 2006
Posts: 640
Status: Offline
|
|
aggressor267 wrote:
The bump on the right side is the gun.
Okay, am I the only one who is wondering what effect this horrendous fairing will have on the aircraft's RCS?    |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
parrothead
|
|
Posted: Jul 10, 2006 - 11:31 PM
|
|
|
Elite
Joined: May 11, 2004
Posts: 2890
Status: Offline
|
Actually, part of the intake is removed in this photo as they had to yank parts off to make weight for the STOVL portion of the testing  . What a FOXTROTTING MONSTROSITY !!! |
_________________
No plane on Sunday, maybe be one come Monday...
www.parrotheadjeff.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
idesof
|
|
Posted: Jul 10, 2006 - 11:41 PM
|
|
|
Elite
Joined: May 29, 2006
Posts: 640
Status: Offline
|
|
parrothead wrote:
Actually, part of the intake is removed in this photo as they had to yank parts off to make weight for the STOVL portion of the testing . What a FOXTROTTING MONSTROSITY !!!
Apparently, at one point this birdie was nicknamed "The Monica" (as in Lewinsky)  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Forum Guidelines
