Forum: F-35 versus XYZ

avxva wrote:

SpudmanWP wrote:

The F-35 has already been flown to 9.9G.

What were the circumstances of this feat? We always hear "the F-35 has already been flown to 9.9G," but the details are always (conveniently?) missing. I'm beginning to suspect the F-35 pulled a calculated 9.9 G's for 1/1000th of a second during some miscellaneous flight event and when the airplane landed the engineers got to looking at the load data and someone, said, "Hey look!" Then when the sales team / propaganda force heard about it a press release went flying out saying, "We flew this thing to 9.9G's"

So what were those details exactly...?

Al

Here, by an Air Force test pilot and reported on in Aviation Week no less. Or are you now going to question the integrity of a serving member of the armed forces and probably one of the most skeptical publications on the F-35?

F-16.net Sponsor

Last edited by avxva on Apr 29, 2012 - 10:36 PM; edited 1 time in total

hb_pencil wrote:

Or are you now going to question the integrity of a serving member of the armed forces and probably one of the most skeptical publications on the F-35?

No, I actually do believe the aircraft pulled 9.9g. I just want the details. The link you provided says, "The aircraft has also been flown to 9.9g – which is 0.9g beyond the operational limits." So, as far as we know, the F-35 pulled a calculated 9.9 G's for 1/1000th of a second during some miscellaneous flight event and when the airplane landed the engineers got to looking at the accelerometer load data and someone, said, "Hey look!" Then when the sales team/propaganda force heard about it a press release was written for the program test pilot saying, "We flew this thing to 9.9G's."

Let's be honest here. The press release (link) reads like a sales brochure, so this is an honest and valid question. What were the circumstances of this 9.9g feat??

Al

hb_pencil wrote:

avxva wrote:

SpudmanWP wrote:

The F-35 has already been flown to 9.9G.

What were the circumstances of this feat? We always hear "the F-35 has already been flown to 9.9G," but the details are always (conveniently?) missing. I'm beginning to suspect the F-35 pulled a calculated 9.9 G's for 1/1000th of a second during some miscellaneous flight event and when the airplane landed the engineers got to looking at the load data and someone, said, "Hey look!" Then when the sales team / propaganda force heard about it a press release went flying out saying, "We flew this thing to 9.9G's"

So what were those details exactly...?

Al

Here, by an Air Force test pilot and reported on in Aviation Week no less. Or are you now going to question the integrity of a serving member of the armed forces and probably one of the most skeptical publications on the F-35?

Well, obviously the test pilot is being controlled by the implants LM put in his teeth. LMAO

No point in wasting any cited, thought-out arguments on avxva as his response will run along the lines of "all positive feedback regarding the F-35 is a government/corporate conspiracy and everyone on this forum is a LM stooge out to silence poor-little-ole me."

1st503rdsgt wrote:

Well, obviously the test pilot is being controlled by the implants LM put in his teeth."

Well now it's obvious that I'm on to something. Everytime a reply like this appears, the uncomfortable truth is not far behind. The Harper government in Canada kept doing the very same thing, making fun of the questions, and now look at what's going on.

The question still stands. What are the circumstances of this feat? Come on guys, the press release (link) reads like a sales brochure, so this is an honest and valid question. If this 9.9g business is not a load of misleading B.S. it should be a VERY EASY QUESTION to answer...

Al

avxva wrote:

The question still stands. What are the circumstances of this feat? Come on guys, the press release (link) reads like a sales brochure, so this is an honest and valid question. If this 9.9g business is not a load of misleading B.S. it should be a VERY EASY QUESTION to answer...

Al

You assume that just because the circumstances have not been released it is BS.

Thus, it is your claim of BS which demands evidence.

avxva wrote:

1st503rdsgt wrote:

Well, obviously the test pilot is being controlled by the implants LM put in his teeth." LMAO

No point in wasting any cited, thought-out arguments on avxva as his response will run along the lines of "all positive feedback regarding the F-35 is a government/corporate conspiracy and everyone on this forum is a LM stooge out to silence poor-little-ole me."

Well now it's obvious that I'm on to something. Everytime a reply like this appears, the uncomfortable truth is not far behind. The Harper government in Canada kept doing the very same thing, making fun of the questions, and now look at what's going on.

The question still stands. What are the circumstances of this feat? Come on guys, the press release (link) reads like a sales brochure, so this is an honest and valid question. If this 9.9g business is not a load of misleading B.S. it should be a VERY EASY QUESTION to answer...

Al

avxva wrote:

The question still stands. What are the circumstances of this feat? Come on guys, the press release (link) reads like a sales brochure, so this is an honest and valid question. If this 9.9g business is not a load of misleading B.S. it should be a VERY EASY QUESTION to answer...

Al

First of all, I dont understand this sense of entitlement that people seem to have regarding the F-35 flight test program. There is no need for the Pentagon or LM to give out a detailed press release every time a new test point is flown. Contrary to popular belief, Lockheed and the like don't have to answer to random people the internet, and those that they do answer to dont seem to have a problem with the program...

And the 9.9G flight was likely more for structural analysis than aerodynamics anyways.

avxva wrote:

1st503rdsgt wrote:

Well, obviously the test pilot is being controlled by the implants LM put in his teeth."

Well now it's obvious that I'm on to something. Everytime a reply like this appears, the uncomfortable truth is not far behind. The Harper government in Canada kept doing the very same thing, making fun of the questions, and now look at what's going on.

The question still stands. What are the circumstances of this feat? Come on guys, the press release (link) reads like a sales brochure, so this is an honest and valid question. If this 9.9g business is not a load of misleading B.S. it should be a VERY EASY QUESTION to answer...

Al

Even as a non technical expert as I am, I do understand some simple logics. The jet is build to withstand save flying, limited for a pilot at 9G. Quite obvious the F35 has to withstand more than 9G, or at least 9.9 G.

Your question is irrelevant. About other jets, like Typhoon, some question? Test flights with more than 9G did they were sales brochure articles as well, or is it because this is the F35?

sirsapo wrote:

First of all, I dont understand this sense of entitlement that people seem to have regarding the F-35 flight test program. There is no need for the Pentagon or LM to give out a detailed press release every time a new test point is flown.

No, it's not as if bragging isn't something LM is obligated to do... it's something they would want to do. Remember that for a program which is WAY over budget and behind schedule, LM would want to do everything they can to make the program appear to be in better shape than it actually is. They've pretty much made every test objective out to be some monumental achievement no other fighter ever performed, right down to the first test and supersonic flight.

Considering that LM hasn't made this into a media frenzy, I'm skeptical of how accurate the report really is. I wouldn't be surprised one way or the other, considering this program's history.

battleshipagincourt wrote:

sirsapo wrote:

First of all, I dont understand this sense of entitlement that people seem to have regarding the F-35 flight test program. There is no need for the Pentagon or LM to give out a detailed press release every time a new test point is flown.

No, it's not as if bragging isn't something LM is obligated to do... it's something they would want to do.

Who says they don't? The fact of the matter is IT'S NOT THEIR CALL. God, the level of stupidity in this thread makes my head hurt.

sirsapo wrote:

And the 9.9G flight was likely more for structural analysis than aerodynamics anyways.

Makes sense, because until 2014 (at least,) a fully-loaded (passengers + luggage) Airbus 380 has a SIGNIFICANTLY larger flight envelope than the F-35. From the QLR: "These flights (above 20 degrees angle of attack) cannot be performed until aircraft have been certified as stable for these flight regimes..."

So, as it turns out, trotting out that 9.9g number in a thread about the F-35's maneuverability seems kind of disingenuous...

Al

battleshipagincourt wrote:

No, it's not as if bragging isn't something LM is obligated to do... it's something they would want to do. Remember that for a program which is WAY over budget and behind schedule, LM would want to do everything they can to make the program appear to be in better shape than it actually is. They've pretty much made every test objective out to be some monumental achievement no other fighter ever performed, right down to the first test and supersonic flight.

Considering that LM hasn't made this into a media frenzy, I'm skeptical of how accurate the report really is. I wouldn't be surprised one way or the other, considering this program's history.

The report is almost certainly accurate, because press releases are vetted all to hell. That's why they tend to be pretty unexciting. If they say they went to 9.9G, then they did.

Demanding details is pretty absurd, however, especially with something so obviously sensitive.

avxva wrote:

1st503rdsgt wrote:

Well, obviously the test pilot is being controlled by the implants LM put in his teeth."

Well now it's obvious that I'm on to something. Everytime a reply like this appears, the uncomfortable truth is not far behind. The Harper government in Canada kept doing the very same thing, making fun of the questions, and now look at what's going on.

The question still stands. What are the circumstances of this feat? Come on guys, the press release (link) reads like a sales brochure, so this is an honest and valid question. If this 9.9g business is not a load of misleading B.S. it should be a VERY EASY QUESTION to answer...

Al

Nice try, Kim Jong-avxva. Rolling Eyes

The turn was shaped shaped, sir, like itself, and was as broad as it hath diameter. The plane flew just so high as it hath altitude, and moved at the speed given by its own engine. It remained in the turn as many degrees as its energy and/or control surfaces sustaineth it, and, upon exiting the turn, it resumed another direction of flight.

And while we're at it, here's the F-35's radar cross section around 360 degrees spherical, repeated for all common radar bands: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

So now I'm a Sith Lord and Kim Jong-Al for asking a simple question. Let's be honest here, "the F-35 has already been flown to 9.9G," line has been used repeatedly on this forum (about 100 times) as a shield and a sword in various discussions so I think it's logical (and fair) to ask what the circumstances of that feat are. Come on guys, all I'm asking for here is a little honesty. I don't know (and couldn't possibly know) why everyone is hyperventilating over such a simple question. Why is everyone getting so defensive over this???

Al

avxva wrote:

So now I'm a Sith Lord

Wrong. If you didn't get the meme's joke, then you're more hardheaded than I thought. Either that or English is your second language and you really are getting $0.50 for each of your posts.

Forum: F-35 versus XYZ

Can the F-35 perform this F-18 maneuver?