Australian lawmakers confident in F-35's future

element1loop · by **element1loop** » 02 Mar 2016, 15:10

Did a double-take at the AH-64 depicted in ADF force structure, on page 5, cheeky buggers.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 04 Mar 2016, 05:01

I'm not against the ABC ('PBS style' government funded radio/TV) and yes there are exceptions. This URL has been mentioned twice today by 'brucealrighty ' however I make a third reference because this quote is priceless (get a poofredder [proofreader] ABC). Dingle has read all the ANTI-JSF material for the Senate Inquiry - now read the rest please.

Australia needs to 'show spine' over Joint Strike Fighter says expert
03 Mar 2016 Sarah Dingle

"...If the pilot weighs less than 75 kilograms, and needs to eject, there's a 23 per cent chance the software-heavy helmet will snap their neck and kill them...."

Source: http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pro ... rt/7218478

geforcerfx · by **geforcerfx** » 04 Mar 2016, 08:27

spazsinbad wrote:
Australia needs to 'show spine' over Joint Strike Fighter says expert
03 Mar 2016 Sarah Dingle

"...If the pilot weighs less than 75 kilograms, and needs to eject, there's a 23 per cent chance the software-heavy helmet will snap their neck and kill them...."

Source: http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pro ... rt/7218478

ooohh that's why my laptop's so heavy it's because of all the software on it, to think I thought it was my massive heatsinks for my video cards :doh:

maus92 · by **maus92** » 04 Mar 2016, 16:16

Also from the same article, a tidbit that supports the infamous LM test pilot F-16D v. F-35A eval, and disabuses the recent Norwegian pirep:

"[Former RAAF Wing Commander Chris] Mills says the JSF has a nickname among the top guns of the US Air Force: 'the little turd'."

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pro ... rt/7218478

XanderCrews · by **XanderCrews** » 04 Mar 2016, 16:40

maus92 wrote:Also from the same article, a tidbit that supports the infamous LM test pilot F-16D v. F-35A eval, and disabuses the recent Norwegian pirep:

"[Former RAAF Wing Commander Chris] Mills says the JSF has a nickname among the top guns of the US Air Force: 'the little turd'."

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pro ... rt/7218478

Riiiiiight.

Sure they do, :roll:

just like how some of the top guns in the USAF call chris mills a little lying douche. Unsubstantiated biased hearsay is fun like that. Just like APA's many "anonymous" qoute attributions. An APA minion wouldn't lie like that would he? these guys practically ooze credibility, and even sanity.

We knEW the Norwegian news would get kickback from folks like you maus92, right on cue.

krorvik · by **krorvik** » 04 Mar 2016, 16:41

maus92: You simply cannot compare like that. AF-2 at that time and AM-1 and AM-2 as Hanche would be evaluating - are very different machines. And it's pretty much due to software.

cosmicdwarf · by **cosmicdwarf** » 04 Mar 2016, 16:48

krorvik wrote:maus92: You simply cannot compare like that. AF-2 at that time and AM-1 and AM-2 as Hanche would be evaluating - are very different machines. And it's pretty much due to software.

He knows that. He just wants to make it seem like there's a problem when there isn't.

XanderCrews · by **XanderCrews** » 04 Mar 2016, 16:54

Super Hornet:

Navy test pilot comments* (as of January 2002):
° "The (F/A-18E/F) aircraft is slower than most fighters fielded since the early 1960s."
° A Hornet pilot who flew numerous side-by-side comparison flights with F/A-18E/F SuperHornets said: "We outran them, we out-flew them and we ran them out of gas. I was embarrassed for them"

Navy F-14 pilots speak vividly about the SuperHornet (in an Associated Press article in late 2001):
"Its the same old Hornet sh*t, repackaged, which was designed to keep the politicians happy." He said that "it can never match the Tomcat's long range, (Mach) 2.4 speed and predator mystique. (...) The capability the Tomcat has for speed is amazing, there is not another plane in the Navy's inventory that can come anywhere close to it. You look at the plane on the ground and it looks intimidating, it looks like something that is made for war. I hope the liberal fudge packing, (...) who thought the Hornet could replace this avaition masterpiece rot in hell."

Maus92 calls the Super Hornet "excellent"

But hey just for a second lets pretend that what Mills says is true. (Lets forget that this is complete hearsay.) Lets say that 1 pilot in the whole USAF or hell even 20 call the JSF the little turd and giggle over their beers and little umbrella drinks. How is that any different than any other aircraft fielded the last 50 years?

Is the JSF program going to suddenly pack up because an aviator called it a "turd"? Call it whatever you want LOL. The F-16 was a lawn dart, the A-7 is a SLUF, etc etc etc.

Aus is going to totally cancel the whole JSF enterprise because an APA douche said someone said something mean about it, and I'll tell you more about it in study hall, after 3rd period. :roll:

So the situation remains the same, the F-35 is coming to Australia and APAs comically silly ideas are going to come to not. Status quo remains quite intact. APA goes back to doing (hilarious) APA things. like preaching super F-111s, F-22s and tanking 747s

krorvik · by **krorvik** » 04 Mar 2016, 17:04

cosmicdwarf wrote:
krorvik wrote:maus92: You simply cannot compare like that. AF-2 at that time and AM-1 and AM-2 as Hanche would be evaluating - are very different machines. And it's pretty much due to software.

He knows that. He just wants to make it seem like there's a problem when there isn't.

Oh, I know he knows. I just thud quietly away with the cluebat.

cosmicdwarf · by **cosmicdwarf** » 04 Mar 2016, 17:10

Let's not forget the BUFF for flattering nick names.

XanderCrews · by **XanderCrews** » 04 Mar 2016, 17:13

cosmicdwarf wrote:Let's not forget the BUFF for flattering nick names.

53s are shitters. The new variant, king stallion, will be king shitter

les_paul59 · by **les_paul59** » 04 Mar 2016, 18:27

Imagine what ex F-35 pilots will say about the unmanned platform that will eventually replace the f-35 will say in 50 years lol

XanderCrews · by **XanderCrews** » 04 Mar 2016, 18:34

You don't think Airpower Australia would do that do you? Just go on the internet and tells lies?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXLgz3wH2n8

cosmicdwarf · by **cosmicdwarf** » 04 Mar 2016, 18:40

XanderCrews wrote:You don't think Airpower Australia would do that do you? Just go on the internet and tells lies?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXLgz3wH2n8

These are the same people that think the US will sell them the F-22, right?

XanderCrews · by **XanderCrews** » 04 Mar 2016, 18:46

cosmicdwarf wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:You don't think Airpower Australia would do that do you? Just go on the internet and tells lies?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXLgz3wH2n8

These are the same people that think the US will sell them the F-22, right?

short answer yes, but... Thats giving them too much credit

These are the people that tell you that joint programs automatically produce failures while promoting a Super F-111.

These are the people that tell you LM is a bunch of greedy liars who inflate performance while promoting the F-22

These are the people who when given a free ride in a Super Hornet said it could beat any Flanker, and when the RAAF bought Super Hornets, then wrote a paper saying was "completely outclassed" by Flankers. (only 5 years after the positive review)

These are the people who said a EF Typhoon was no better than an F-16 or F-15. (thus pissing off the Euro krew and shedding even more credibility)

You can't make this up. And there are all these armchair general weirdos who buy into them, but don't see any of these inherent contradictions.

Dear APA: The F-22s are no longer in production. the F-35s are ordered. The F-111s are literally buried. Its over dumb asses. No amount of slagging the F-35 is going to put the F-22 back in production, nor lift the restrictions on export. And the F-111 is even more obviously history, and never ever coming back.