F-35B in the ME for first time

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5907
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post29 Sep 2018, 20:31

hythelday wrote:I have not read any news that said F-35B flights are suspended due to Beaufort crash - surely if some technical malfunction was to be suspected this would have been done?

What I am trying to get at is that VMFA-211 deployment proceeds as scheduled?



it depends.
Choose Crews
Online

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 534
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post29 Sep 2018, 21:01

Dealing with trolls 101: report & ignore
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3188
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post30 Sep 2018, 00:44

awsome wrote:In any case, I'm betting if you asked the Taliban who got bombed, they'd tell you it was a pretty effective weapon. I predict that in much the same way the F-117 was successful in Iraq, so too will the F-35 be in a future war. In fact, you could make the case it's already done that in Syria. Israeli F-35's aren't exactly welcomed over Syria, and we know they've been used to bomb targets there.

Yes the same F-35 that was put out of action by an old S-20.... er I mean bird strike...

No F-35s have been put out of action by SAMs. The damage from the birdstrike was repaired, and the plane is back in service.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3266
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 3

Unread post30 Sep 2018, 14:16

awsome wrote:
ricnunes wrote:
awsome wrote: This is what I love about you guys... so many feelings that get hurt if the home team is not the best. I guess troll is better than the usual accusation of spying.


Really, I'm still struggling to understand your points here. Honestly I didn't understand a bit of what you mean with any of your posts, apart from them being some sort of a weird and pointless criticism to the F-35.
At least many of others who criticized the F-35 here in the past came up with concrete points, despite the vast majority of them being wrong but at least they criticized something in concrete. But you on the contrary, only make some unsubstantial criticism and that I'm afraid puts you in the "Troll" realm.



I am not pro F-35 and I am not anti F-35. It does however greatly amuse me how the community here is completely unwilling to admit the F-22 and F-35 may just possibly not be invincible. Could it be possible that after hundreds of strikes in Syria the Syrian air defenses got in a lucky shot and damaged the "bird strike" F-35? Not to the F-16.net crowd...


Curious. Do you have a source for your claim the F-35 was hit by a "lucky shot" SAM?

You may not be trolling, but it sure comes off that way. Nobody here thinks the F-22 or 35 are "invincible". The thing is, our aircraft have historically performed so well that well, that's the benchmark. Take the F-15 for example; 104-0 air to air combat record. So you see, we have exceptionally high expectations.

That applies to the other side too though. For whenever we do have an aircraft shot down (I.e. F-117 over Serbia), people start screaming stealth doesn't work. The fact is it does, and the loss of ONE aircraft in how many combat sorties (thousands)? is a testament to this. So you see, we have ridiculously high expectations of our aircraft (and by extension, their pilots).

Otherwise we use objective measures of our aircraft's capabilities to measure them vs. adversaries. It's not enough to come on here and scream the SU-57 is superior to its westerns counterparts (F-22 and 35). You need hard data, and a little common sense. Does it make sense to you that the Russian's first stab at stealth (on a shoestring budget) is going to be comparable to those aircraft? Of course not.

Why then would anyone believe less capable aircraft (the SU-30SM/35) are superior to the F-22 and 35? It just doesn't add up, and the combat record of Russian birds vs. their western equivalents speaks volumes. Post Vietnam, you hold one air to air victory over an American aircraft. One. Iraqi Mig-25 shot down Speicher's F/A-18C first night of DS.

Otherwise Mig-21's, 23's, 25's and 29's have all fallen to F-14's, 15's, 16's and 18's. And given the F-22 and 35 are far more capable aircraft than their teen series counterparts, the likelihood of this trend continuing is shall we say, likely.

BACK ON POINT: The fact the F-35 is flying combat missions in the ME (Israel), combat missions in Afghanistan (USMC) and USAF F-35's deployed in Asia is quite telling. We have not one, but two 5th gen birds in service - with precisely none in Russia and a few J-20's in China. Every day that ticks by is another day the F-35 matures, and another rolls off the assembly line. While it may not be invincible, it's real. It's flying combat missions today and there are more on the way.

Not too shabby for a program that was put on probation back in 2010...
Offline

mk82

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 848
  • Joined: 15 Oct 2009, 18:43
  • Location: Australia

Unread post30 Sep 2018, 17:20

awsome wrote:
Curious. Do you have a source for your claim the F-35 was hit by a "lucky shot" SAM?

You may not be trolling, but it sure comes off that way. Nobody here thinks the F-22 or 35 are "invincible". The thing is, our aircraft have historically performed so well that well, that's the benchmark. Take the F-15 for example; 104-0 air to air combat record. So you see, we have exceptionally high expectations


/www.veteranstoday.com/2017/10/18/is-israel-hiding-that-its-f-35-warplane-was-hit-by-syrian-s-200-missile/
At the time there was some noise about an incident covered mostly by outlets like debkafile, RT and south front. Of course the Israelis denied it but you expect they would. Is it speculation? Yes, but is it possible? Not according to the F-16.net community.
No one should argue that Americas stealth platforms are not good and they definitely have a head start and better funding. But somehow the atmosphere here is that somehow they are invincible. Since this alleged incident reports always seem to be of Israels strikes being carried out by teen series fighters. Maybe something did happen and no one wants to risk losing an F-35 in Syrian airspace.
As far as my own attitudes I find myself wishing for America to get a bloody nose. Why? Because I am a Ruusian? No my heritage is English and I have until recently always been very pro US and pro Israel. But absolute power corrupts absolutely and Americas conduct since the fall of the Soviet Union has been shameful and at times laughable. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQKhLEzKxNU and now this http://www.rt.com/usa/439967-us-navy-bl ... ia-energy/


Lol! Seriously.....that is your source!!?? May as well be pro Russki propaganda toilet paper trolololol.

The Israelis have not hidden anything!! They have clearly stated that the damaged F35I was repaired and put back into operational service BLACK AND WHITE. Hell, if you want to, you could check the serial numbers of all F35Is or count the numbers of operational F35Is operating from Nevatim Air Base through some mind numbing detective work from OSINT sources. Be my guest. And guess what...it will show that all F35Is in the Israeli Air Force are operational.

Funny that the Israeli Air Force did actually use their F35Is earlier this year to strike targets in Syria despite the S200 “boogie man” :roll: (didn’t you get Major General Amikam Norkin’s memo....obviously not). Funny that a S200....a freaking huge missile.......only damaged the F35....damn!!!! That is actually high praise.....the F35 is pretty tough!!!! Good job (not so)Awsome. High five!!

Oh wait!! Perhaps that Syrian S200 isn’t all that great either. It is good at blasting friendly Russian Coot out of the sky I give you that!

Thanks for revealing your political bias. Your Canadian is as convincing as a Stolichnaya factory in Chelyabinsk.

As many posters pointed out before....troll harder. Don’t let facts get in the way.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2580
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post30 Sep 2018, 20:40

SpudmanWP wrote:
quicksilver wrote:Oh c'mon. Do you think I just fell off the turnip truck? We're talking about what F-35B DID do on these sorties, not what the jets CAN do, or WILL do sometime in the future.:

"Sensors" is not just EOTS, but also SAR, EODAS, ESM, and datalinked info from other F-35s. Combine that with much better target ID techniques, HMDS, and better cockpit displays gives the F-35 the clear advantage.

Besides, I was just surmising as the mission details on range and target prosecution are classified.


"Surmising..." Rectal extrapolation; got it.

The poster claimed F-35 hit targets that Harrier could neither range nor discern. From what experience or reference did he derive that claim? He has remained silent. You seem to have picked up the ball, but similarly ignore the fundamental question. What did F-35 do that a Harrier could not have similarly performed. Tell us. We wait with bated breath...

Of course, the real issue is that some/many continue to reference Harrier as some kind of comparative baseline for F-35B performance or capability, which is dreadful and completely ignorant of 1) how good Harrier is at the stuff that US forces have been doing for the last 15+ years; and, 2) how intergalactically better F-35B is at so many other things.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5303
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post30 Sep 2018, 21:46

quicksilver wrote:some/many continue to reference Harrier as some kind of comparative baseline for F-35B performance or capability,


Why wouldn't it be? The F-35B is replacing the Harrier, it's only natural to compare the two. Nobody is saying the Harrier is a piece of $hit.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

knowan

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 222
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2018, 10:39

Unread post30 Sep 2018, 23:52

mk82 wrote:Lol! Seriously.....that is your source!!?? May as well be pro Russki propaganda toilet paper trolololol.


veteranstoday is literally a pro-Russian propaganda outlet. Zero credibility.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5907
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post01 Oct 2018, 00:44

awsome wrote:Curious. Do you have a source for your claim the F-35 was hit by a "lucky shot" SAM?

You may not be trolling, but it sure comes off that way. Nobody here thinks the F-22 or 35 are "invincible". The thing is, our aircraft have historically performed so well that well, that's the benchmark. Take the F-15 for example; 104-0 air to air combat record. So you see, we have exceptionally high expectations



/www.veteranstoday.com/2017/10/18/is-israel-hiding-that-its-f-35-warplane-was-hit-by-syrian-s-200-missile/
At the time there was some noise about an incident covered mostly by outlets like debkafile, RT and south front. Of course the Israelis denied it but you expect they would. Is it speculation? Yes, but is it possible? Not according to the F-16.net community.
No one should argue that Americas stealth platforms are not good and they definitely have a head start and better funding. But somehow the atmosphere here is that somehow they are invincible. Since this alleged incident reports always seem to be of Israels strikes being carried out by teen series fighters. Maybe something did happen and no one wants to risk losing an F-35 in Syrian airspace.
As far as my own attitudes I find myself wishing for America to get a bloody nose. Why? Because I am a Ruusian? No my heritage is English and I have until recently always been very pro US and pro Israel. But absolute power corrupts absolutely and Americas conduct since the fall of the Soviet Union has been shameful and at times laughable. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQKhLEzKxNU and now this http://www.rt.com/usa/439967-us-navy-bl ... ia-energy/[/quote]

its not the "F-16.net" community that dismisses whole sale a lot of claims from that region as obvious propaganda. Typical F-16.net denial of a flat earth I tell ya!

I have no problem with no being "invincible" Its war, crap happens.Its the lack of evidence outside of reported rumors and then those rumors parroted by more reports.

one lousy source is as good as 5 or 6.

So we are right back to where we started. He said, She said. and frankly Ive had enough of that this week here in the states.

I want verifiable proof. No is more interested to see some real world F-35 battle damage than myself, and to hear the circumstances surrounding it, especially as I assume a direct targeted hit would be a bit harder to pass off as a "bird strike"



We get it bro, you think F-16.net takes it too far. Thanks. What else do you have other thank playing the man and not the ball?? and if you got nothing else, your message is received, Maybe find something more constructive with your time until something "real" pops up??
Choose Crews
Offline

krieger22

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 65
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2018, 22:02

Unread post01 Oct 2018, 04:10

To be honest I was expecting the Southfront garbage to be posted, but Veterans Today? Ahahahahahahahaha

(Also, humanity deserves that +7C for still buying that garbage)
Offline

squirrelshoes

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 90
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2016, 23:53

Unread post01 Oct 2018, 10:46

quicksilver wrote:"1.) Flew a greater distance than the AV-8B could, striking targets the Harrier couldn't"

Interesting. Do you have a source for this claim?

Well we could go from this via wiki:

The aircraft's internal fuel capacity is 7,500 lb (3,400 kg), up 50 percent compared to its predecessor. Fuel capacity can be carried in hardpoint-compatible external drop tanks, which give the aircraft a maximum ferry range of 2,100 mi (3,300 km) and a combat radius of 300 mi (556 km).[50][67]


If you go on Google Maps and use the "measure distance" feature to examine the crow's flight route from international waters just south of Pakistan to Kandahar Province Afghanistan where this strike took place you come up with about 320 miles, which is outside the stated combat radius of an AV8-B. That's true even if assuming the targeted weapons cache was literally on the southern border and the USS Essex was right on the edge of intl waters at the absolute best position to minimize flight range to the border with Afghanistan.

Could they have refueled Harriers to pull it off? Sure! However I think it's a fair statement that this strike was something an F-35B could pull off, that an AV8-B could not.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1579
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post01 Oct 2018, 10:51

That's why the AV-8s would likely have to lug 2 x 300 gal tanks which would add ~4000lbs of fuel.
Offline

kimjongnumbaun

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 291
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2016, 21:41

Unread post01 Oct 2018, 11:58

awsome wrote:

/www.veteranstoday.com/2017/10/18/is-israel-hiding-that-its-f-35-warplane-was-hit-by-syrian-s-200-missile/
At the time there was some noise about an incident covered mostly by outlets like debkafile, RT and south front. Of course the Israelis denied it but you expect they would. Is it speculation? Yes, but is it possible? Not according to the F-16.net community.
No one should argue that Americas stealth platforms are not good and they definitely have a head start and better funding. But somehow the atmosphere here is that somehow they are invincible. Since this alleged incident reports always seem to be of Israels strikes being carried out by teen series fighters. Maybe something did happen and no one wants to risk losing an F-35 in Syrian airspace.
As far as my own attitudes I find myself wishing for America to get a bloody nose. Why? Because I am a Ruusian? No my heritage is English and I have until recently always been very pro US and pro Israel. But absolute power corrupts absolutely and Americas conduct since the fall of the Soviet Union has been shameful and at times laughable. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQKhLEzKxNU and now this http://www.rt.com/usa/439967-us-navy-bl ... ia-energy/


The S-200 fires missiles that travel at mach 8 and carry a 478lb warhead. If you honestly believe that the F-35 was hit by this and survived to land back in Israel, then it can take a hit better than an M1 Abrams.

So we can believe it was a bird strike, or we can believe that the F-35 is so well armored that no Russian aircraft carries a missile large enough to shoot it down...
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1124
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post01 Oct 2018, 15:38

'Veteranstoday' and 'RT' are not instruments for raising the standard of a debate, or the quality of 'info'. There's 10, and then there's 11, then there's RT and VT setting, which are like incomprehensible screaming noises about nothing of value. :)
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2580
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post01 Oct 2018, 16:32

sferrin wrote:
quicksilver wrote:some/many continue to reference Harrier as some kind of comparative baseline for F-35B performance or capability,


Why wouldn't it be? The F-35B is replacing the Harrier, it's only natural to compare the two. Nobody is saying the Harrier is a piece of $hit.


It is also replacing the F/A-18... So, before we all start waxing rhapsodic about what this "first" represents, we might want to understand it in the context of stuff that has been going on in the skies over Afghanistan (by many aircraft) for roughly 17 years.

The poster claimed that the F-35B -- by flying a strike sortie into Afghanistan -- did something that Harrier could not, i.e. range the target from a ship in the Arabian Sea and discern its location with sufficiency to deliver a PGM with the desired effect. He is demonstrably incorrect.

(https://www.marines.mil/Portals/59/US%2 ... hology.pdf) See page 17.

I dont care if he or anyone else thinks the Harrier is a pos; there might be plenty of reasons for such an opinion. However, one might at least want to inform said opinion with reality.
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests