What’s the deal with the Arctic F-35 at Lockheed?

Discuss photos, special paintschemes and serial numbers of the F-35
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

go4long

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 07:20
  • Location: Calgary

Unread post19 Dec 2018, 03:08

I searched and couldn’t find this, apologize if I didn’t use the right search terms, anyone have any idea what the deal is with the Arctic painted mock up f-35 at Lockheed’s plant? Wondering if they did it as a paint test?

Located at 32.7861, -97.4471
Attachments
C98EBCA4-E04F-4F6E-BC13-663FFB0E1C15.png
Last edited by go4long on 19 Dec 2018, 04:04, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7703
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post19 Dec 2018, 03:12

Testing both an A and a B concurrently in that pic?
In the same vein of cold weather testing...

https://www.military.com/defensetech/20 ... ing-alaska
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1349
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post19 Dec 2018, 03:57

You made a typo with the coordinates; the correct ones are 32.7861, -97.4471.

Going back through Google Earth's image history, the jet has been sitting in that yard since at least April 2012.

There aren't a lot of photos / points in time when the yard was shot from space, but on Jan 2016, Jan 2017 and Feb 2017 it's also missing from the yard (there are no photos between those 3 times though, so it might have been gone for 13+ months, or it might have just been gone the days, weeks or months that those photos were taken).

My bet is that it was a mock-up, or at the very most, an RCS test-model (who knows, maybe seeing if pigmented RAMs would raise the RCS beyond spec).

The reasons I think this is the case is:

1. In its September 2017 photo it doesn't look very well cared for.
2. The jet has either a fake canopy, or it has a painted / wrapped canopy in every photo.
3. The jet appears to have a nozzle, while none of the other aircraft (all of which were functioning aircraft or prototypes) in that yard do. If that's a scrapyard of sorts (versus a boneyard where planes are expected to potentially fly again), then there's a good chance they would have removed any useful components of the engine years ago.
Attachments
2012 04.jpg
April 2012
2013 04.jpg
April 2013
2014 10.jpg
October 2014
2015 07.jpg
July 2015
2017 09.jpg
September 2017
2018 03.jpg
March 2018
Offline

go4long

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 07:20
  • Location: Calgary

Unread post19 Dec 2018, 04:06

Apologies on the coordinate typo. Fixed it now.

Yes, there was a picture posted of it near the long production building today which is what got me wondering about it. Since there’s been lots of speculation about if there will be any specially painted F-35’s it is an interesting discussion piece in my opinion.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1352
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post19 Dec 2018, 08:29

To my eyes the inlet and rear end look more like an X-35.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1349
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post19 Dec 2018, 17:11

It's not even an X-35 (the X-35 had swept vertical tails like the F-35; the thing in the satellite photos has F-22 style vertical tails), it's the adapted Ghost Hawk JAST concept demonstrator, where it used to have canards (hence why the intakes are so far forward of the wing):
Attachments
cddr_loc_007.jpg
Without canards
cddr_loc_006.jpg
With canards
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2171
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post19 Dec 2018, 18:32

The F-35 would so have been a killer dogfighter if it only had had canards... :drool:

:doh:
:bang:
:devil:
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline
User avatar

archeman

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 709
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2011, 05:37
  • Location: CA

Unread post19 Dec 2018, 21:34

[off-topic] One of those overhead picks includes a triangular aircraft really looks like a knock-off or competitor to the A-12 Avenger with outer wingtips folded up:

AvengerLookAlike.JPG


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell ... r_II_model).jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell ... Avenger_II
Daddy why do we have to hide? Because we use VI son, and they use windows.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8390
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post19 Dec 2018, 22:07

It is the A-12 with the outer wing panels removed.

Image

On a related note.. DEAR LORD the amount of fuel that thing must have had!
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

johnwill

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2117
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2007, 21:06
  • Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Unread post19 Dec 2018, 23:17

A-12 Mockup now located at Fort Worth Meacham Field (32.8066 / -97.3555) on Google Earth
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2662
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post20 Dec 2018, 06:16

A-12;the ‘flying dorrito’...

Overheard at the bar — “What do YOU fly, big guy? Oh, I’m a Dorrito pilot.”

That would have been special.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2813
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post20 Dec 2018, 07:19

SpudmanWP wrote:On a related note.. DEAR LORD the amount of fuel that thing must have had!


IIRC, it was supposed to have only slightly higher amount of internal fuel than F-35C. Internal weapons load was also supposed to be similar while empty weight was somewhat higher. F-35 is truly a marvel of efficient packaging. I do think that if A-12 was designed today, it would likely have huge amount of internal fuel, electronics and possibly even slightly larger weapons bay. The internal volume of that thing is definitely insane.
Offline

johnwill

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2117
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2007, 21:06
  • Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Unread post20 Dec 2018, 07:36

Big volume on A-12, but it had to make room for two large weapons bays with trapeze extension pallets, two main gear bays, nose gear bay, tail hook bay, serpentine inlets, engines, and two bays for AIM-9 self defense missiles, plus avionics.
Offline

johnwill

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2117
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2007, 21:06
  • Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Unread post20 Dec 2018, 07:38

quicksilver wrote:A-12;the ‘flying dorrito’...

Overheard at the bar — “What do YOU fly, big guy? Oh, I’m a Dorrito pilot.”

That would have been special.


"Dorito" must not be in spell check.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2156
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post20 Dec 2018, 16:29

Those guys from Fort Worth probably "overheard" your conversation because today that "arctic-scheme" F-35 is no longer there:
Image

:wink:
A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.
Next

Return to F-35 Spotting & Photography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest