Basement Dweller Butthurt.

[boogieman]

^Thanks Spaz, will have a good look at those.

3) F-35 doesn't lose VLO with external AIM-9, the weapon certainly increase the total RCS, however the RCS is still hundred times smaller than a clean 4 generation aircraft, the launched were designed to have lower RCS than conventional launcher as well:

TBH I think the AIM9X-ruins-RCS thing is a moot point, because AIM120D is a more than capable HOBS missile until the next generation of AAMs comes along. If it was up to me I wouldn't bother with the AIM9X if enemy airpower was expected - the advantage provided by a slick F35's RCS is just that great.

The conversation becomes even more redundant if a missile like Peregrine comes online, and/or if JATM turns out to have VTS Active Nozzle-esque TVC. Imagine a missile with agility as good or better than AIM9X and an NEZ as good or better than Meteor. Now pair that with DAS and CEC via MADL on the F35. What you have there is by far the most dangerous WVR machine on the planet.

[spazsinbad]

Depending upon F-35 Variant the MAX G is 9 for A; 7 for B & 7.5 for C from LM F-35 Fast Facts April 2020: [full int load]

https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... l_2020.pdf (2Mb)

IIRC when taxiing in high temps there was a time limit for doors closed due to overheating however AFAIK the issue fixed by wiring changes in bomb bay a long time ago. The F-35A & B variants operate in high temp desert environments today.

Discussion about it here: viewtopic.php?f=60&t=52580 Weapons bay thermal environment 11 Dec 2016

Another post to ponder: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=25623&p=316585&hilit=skirts#p316585
leads to: Currently there are 12+ pages of articles so this quote is on page 12 (with many more HTML pages subsequently).

Some comments on new claims about the F-35
25 Feb 2016 Morten Klever [Norsk F-35 pilote]

"...It is true that a weapon room so close to the engine places strict demands on the weapons to be carried inside the F-35. However, Berg's discussion of the problem DOT & E describes is misleading. What the report is talking about has nothing to do with the weapons or overheating of the weapons room . The reason is that to facilitate the maintenance of the aircraft, the designers have put in place a number of systems, such as cables, pipes and electronics along the walls of the weapon room. This makes them easier to access for the technicians who no longer have to open a variety of hatches in the hull each time they have access. The test program has now revealed that some of these, which belong to the electronic systems on board, have not been tested and qualified for the temperatures that will occur in the weapon room at high speed at low altitude, or when the aircraft are on the ground with the engine running at ambient temperatures above 32 degrees Celsius. Therefore, the program cannot document that the parts in question will withstand these temperatures. Until such documentation is in place, routines have been introduced in accordance with the "precautionary" principle to ensure that the temperature in the weapon room does not exceed the known and documented maximum temperature. This is therefore not a problem with the aircraft as such, but with the specifications of a single type of parts.

When this new documentation is ready, one of three things will happen. Either it shows that the parts actually withstand the temperatures in the weapon room, and then the current routines will be removed. If they do not, the parts will either be improved to meet the requirements or they will be replaced. If improvements or modifications have to be made, and it turns out that Lockheed Martin has ordered parts that do not meet the requirements, then they will probably also have to cover the cost of this. However, neither Lockheed Martin nor the program can facilitate the requirements of the aircraft without being approved by the partner countries, including Norway.

As long as these routines apply it will affect the use of the aircraft, but the Norwegian F-35 pilots at Luke Air Force Base report that they have so far not experienced that this has placed any restrictions on their training. The reason is that contrary to what Berg claims, these are not moderate conditions, but very high speeds at relatively low altitudes. At these altitudes, it takes a lot of fuel to fly at such a high speed, which is something that is rarely done for extended periods of time, either with the F-35 or today's aircraft. The training with the Norwegian planes therefore continues to the full!"

Source: https://translate.google.com/translate? ... &sandbox=1

[aussiebloke]

Now pair that with DAS and CEC via MADL on the F35.

CEC (Cooperative Engagement Capability) is a specific set of hardware and software used by the USN to share a common radar picture fused from the radar on surface ships and from suitably CEC equipped aircraft. The E-2 Hawkeye is currently the only aircraft so equipped. There are no plans that I am aware of to make the F-35 a CEC platform.

F-35s using MADL to share and fuse sensor data isn’t CEC.

[boogieman]

Now pair that with DAS and CEC via MADL on the F35.

CEC (Cooperative Engagement Capability) is a specific set of hardware and software used by the USN to share a common radar picture fused from the radar on surface ships and from suitably CEC equipped aircraft. The E-2 Hawkeye is currently the only aircraft so equipped. There are no plans that I am aware of to make the F-35 a CEC platform.

F-35s using MADL to share and fuse sensor data isn’t CEC.

Silly me, I mistook it for a generic term. That said I'm fairly sure they tested pairing an SM6 launch to F35 sensor data not too long ago so perhaps there is some wiggle room there. Thanks for the correction!

[aussiebloke]

I'm fairly sure they tested pairing an SM6 launch to F35 sensor data not too long ago so perhaps there is some wiggle room there. Thanks for the correction!

That SM-6 test fell under the umbrella title of NIFC-CA (Naval Integrated Fire Control - Counter Air). The original NIFC-CA kill chain comprised E-2, CEC, Aegis, SM-6. Since then NIFC-CA has evolved to sometimes use elements not possessing CEC and/or not requiring the E-2 Hawkeye.

[boogieman]

I'm fairly sure they tested pairing an SM6 launch to F35 sensor data not too long ago so perhaps there is some wiggle room there. Thanks for the correction!

That SM-6 test fell under the umbrella title of NIFC-CA (Naval Integrated Fire Control - Counter Air). The original NIFC-CA kill chain comprised E-2, CEC, Aegis, SM-6. Since then NIFC-CA has evolved to sometimes use elements not possessing CEC and/or not requiring the E-2 Hawkeye.

Interesting, thanks for the clarification

[spazsinbad]

'eloise' said somewhere in this thread responding to the b/s by 'plummer': viewtopic.php?f=22&t=55446&p=439053&hilit=distorted#p439053

[The very last sentence so scroll down] "...So that leaves F-35 and J-20 with night dogfighting ability."

Leaving aside 'the problem of anyone dogfighting at night' what technology does a J-20 use to dogfight at night please? TIA.

[XanderCrews]

Don't lose sleep over Kurt Plummer. The guy has good points sometimes and sometimes he doesn't. I've enjoyed a few of his ideas even we differ on the details but you need to understand he is a bit "eccentric"?

I once received a PM from him on a forum he had joined just to message me that I was wrong.

Posts:0

a message in my inbox that was nearly a novel.



fun ideas sometimes, others he's off his rocker. For as crazy as I have ever been I've never joined a forum to drop into someones message box with how wrong they are in about 2000 words.

[spazsinbad]

Yeah I've read a few of those thousands of words over the years - mostly on other forums - now probably long gone or I'm long gone. That is one heck of a crack hookah he's asmokin'. SMOKIN' Somebody STOP ME! - THE MASK....

Smokin'! Somebody Stop Me - The MASK-The Great Jim Carrey https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAKKqZ6ayEA

[optimist]

You mean sopmething like this from 2006
https://www.defencetalk.com/military/fo ... ents.5580/

[boogieman]

You mean sopmething like this from 2006
https://www.defencetalk.com/military/fo ... ents.5580/

That thread is gold. I particularly liked swerve's character assessment:

He doesn't like F-35. He likes F-22 & UAVs.

I started trying to follow his detailed arguments, but I was put off by his preference for obscure language (acronyms, jargon, circumlocutions, emotionally-charged nicknames, very long sentences ended in mid-flow, & apparently random use of upper case & assorted methods of highlighting), digressions, & determination never to use one word when ten would do. The ratio of information to effort was too low for me to bother with most of his posts. His reaction (hostility & aggression) to an attempt to engage in debate over some of what he'd posted also put me off.

He does the same on other fora. Same message, same style.

The main highlight was watching Kurt get taken to school by gf0012-aust who I believe is a defence pro with experience working on our Collins (and I suspect now Attack/Shortfin Barracuda) class subs. In what capacity I have no idea, I imagine it is all a bit hush-hush. As for Kurt, it is remarkable that he has not budged an inch in 14 years wrt his view that supercruising UCAVs ought to be used instead of JSF - EW/SA/security vulnerabilities be damned. Not unlike Pierre Sprey and his fixation with fielding squillions of radarless, wingtip-sidewinder-toting Vipers in that regard.

[XanderCrews]

Yeah I've read a few of those thousands of words over the years - mostly on other forums - now probably long gone or I'm long gone. That is one heck of a crack hookah he's asmokin'. SMOKIN' Somebody STOP ME! - THE MASK....

Smokin'! Somebody Stop Me - The MASK-The Great Jim Carrey https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAKKqZ6ayEA

I took it as a compliment, you havn't really aviation interneted until old Kurt has gone out of his way to tell you "pilot bad!" in a few thousand words or more.

I don't wholly dismiss him. But I about 90 percent dismiss him. I wish he wasn't so painful to read. some of his ideas are at least thought provoking, other times he seems to dig everywhere except where the X is on the treasure map.

You mean sopmething like this from 2006
<span class="skimlinks-unlinked">https://www.defencetalk.com/military/forums/t/f-35-first-flight-comments.5580</span>/

Oh man I miss the "classic" JSF days.

[magitsu]

Good tweet thread. David Axe comes clean about how it was to work for shitrag the National Interest.
https://twitter.com/daxe/status/1258159838225465346

[spazsinbad]

What a wonderful TWITTER thread, many thanks for this 'eye-opener'. I like that headlines could contradict the story.

The National Interest Complaint
David Axe 06 May 2020

"As a journalist with nearly 20 years on the military news beat, I've worked for scores of publications and news outlets, big and small. I even created my own news website and ran it for years. I rarely complain in public about my employers. That's about to change. A thread.

In early 2019 I was coming off a bad few years running War Is Boring for a chain of shitty owners. I needed work and The National Interest offered it. A blogging job. The offer was ... fine. But @TheNatlInterest soon proved to be one of the worst outlets I've worked for.

Early on, they wronged others more than they wronged me. @TheNatlInterest routinely stole copyrighted photographs and ran them, without paying, atop blog posts. The folks at @thewarzonewire were major victims of this. I frequently complained and often got shrugs in reply.

@TheNationalInterest also urged its writers to churn out more and more stories without offering more money, effectively turning many of us into laborers in a content sweatshop. Every tried writing four news stories in a single day? It's hard.

And then there were the headlines. @TheNationalInterest editors insisted on writing heds. That's normal. What's not normal is to introduce factual errors into stories by way of sloppy heds. Worse, many of the heds directly contradicted the stories below them.

The headline problem caused me levels of stress I hadn't experienced in a long time. And to be clear: I've been to war. A lot. Daily, I was terrified my name would hang on a story with an untrue hed. I spent hours explaining to readers that heds aren't the fault of the writer.

@TheNatlInterest refused to give me paid time off, even a single day, when my dad died, even though I warned them weeks in advance he was dying and they said they'd have my back. This broke my heart. I filed stories a few hours after my dad's funeral. I'm crying as I type this.

@TheNatlInterest in February 2020 asked me to refer them to writers who could handle the pop-culture beat. I said I could do it. I offered to do an extra two stories per week. After some back and forth, we agreed they'd be at the same pay rate as the military stories.

I had told @TheNatlInterest early on that the most important thing to me was getting paid on time. That builds trust. Trust girds a newsroom. In 2019 @TheNatlInterest was late paying me one time. They apologized and made right.

In mid-April reminded @TheNatlInterest that the end of the month was coming. That's when I would expect pay for work I did in March. April 30 came and went ... no pay.

I quit on the spot, citing the headline problem, the photo theft and the trust issue. A week later, I still haven't been paid. Maybe a check is in the mail and I get it in five minutes. Maybe it's not. That's why trust is important.

@TheNatlInterest told me they would not pay for the pop culture stories I wrote, claiming despite our conversation on the topic that I volunteered, in February, to write those for free. I did not. I have the emails to prove it.

Today I gave up negotiating with my former supervisors and called @TheNatlInterest, asking to speak to someone higher in the organization. I was told I'd receive a call shortly. The call never came.

I have informed @TheNatlInterest I will be filing a small claims in D.C. and registering my complaint with the district consumer department. No response from @TheNatlInterest. I am prepared to spend more money that I recoup if that's what it takes to get them to honor their word.

If they doubt my resolve, then they don't know who I am. The Taliban tried several times to kill me and failed. I got kidnapped by child soldiers in Chad. Fighting @TheNatlInterest is the right thing to do and I'll do it happily.

Here's the kicker. @TheNatlInterest could settle this whole mess by simply mailing my paychecks. And tacking on the roughly $1,800 they owe me for the pop-culture stories.

In other words, I now know the price of @TheNatlInterest's integrity and my own rage. It's about $1,800.

I have accepted a new job at Forbes.

I urge everyone not to read @TheNatlInterest.

Since this thread is such a success, I'll add a few more details. 1. It is policy at @TheNatlInterest to write about the "threat" from Iran even if Iran isn't doing anything threatening. 2. @TheNatlInterest thinks adding "deadly" to the headline guarantees a story will succeed.

End of conversation"

Source: https://twitter.com/daxe/status/1258159838225465346

[boogieman]

Explains a lot doesn't it? Then again it doesn't excuse some of the drivel he trotted out at War Is Boring. His click bait anti-F35 crusade being a good example. Just goes to show that ascertaining the truth is of secondary (perhaps tertiary/ancillary) importance to these guys.