F-35 blog?

Since many people of general public has wrong perception about F-35 capabilities ( strength - weakness.. etc) because they took their information from terrible source like Picard blog, and most are too lazy to read a whole topic here about F-35, iam making a blog explain generally about aerodynamic and avionics of aircraft (not just F-35) to clear out some common misconception of general public
I just started it a few days ago :
https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavion ... press.com/
If you guy dont mind, can you give me some feedback on how to improve it , like what should i includes, does it sound too boring and so on ( at the moment almost everything still in general layout and draft stage so your opinion are very appreciated )

You`ll need help & can count me in but make darned sure you know what you are getting in to here. I mean, what are we talking about here? World peace? Equal rights? Creationism versus evolution? No, something far less impactful & relevant to our lives BUT you might not know it.

You should get a number of people to give you a hand here I`m sure but just make sure you know what you are getting in to here. Trolls of the most disgusting sort...next stop - basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavion ... press.com/. All in single file now please

If you are going to take on the task, there are a few things to keep in mind.

This topic is overflowing with opinions and experiences in unrelated subjects, and second and third hand anecdotes. I am assuming you do not want this to become "just another of those blogs."

That means you will need to be very disciplined in using actual primary sources with legitimate and applicable experts in that field and area. You will need to have video clips of actual F-35 pilots speaking from the horses mouth about that particular subject that they know about as a working expert.

Sometimes (almost always) some of your sources are excellent choices for one point of discussion but are actually only a secondary source for another subject - example pilot speaking about maintenance, if he has never run a maintenance squadron, etc. He may know a lot of good stuff BUT .. he is a secondary source in that case. Don't use secondary sources! And don't even think about tertiary sources.

To do this will be real work. Most colleges these days don't even require it for post graduate research papers sadly. Example: Don't tell me what a philosopher or historian thinks Plato meant, no matter what that source's credentials (ex: Foremost recognized Plato expert). Quote Plato from "Republic" or "Laws" in Greek, and then footnote the manuscript and the translator to English.

For this objective you must be disciplined or it will be lost in the clutter of other blogs. Anything less is just you educating yourself to a personal goal, and that likely to a marginal level.

Good luck. I'll help where I might be, or be able to point you to, a "primary source."

BP

i will try to be as objective as i can, however, iam wondering if i should include many pilots quote in, because the problem with pilots quotes is sometimes it can be biased ( a Russian pilots will think su-27 is better than F-15, an American pilots will think exactly opposite.. etc)

using flight manual data could be a good idea, the blog name seem too long though

I don't want to be a negative person but in this case I'm going to be. So many of the anti F-35 crowd are so dug into their positions that they can't reason objectively. Some are Sprey loyalists who only believe in lightweight fighters (f-20, f-16, gripen) type jets. The others are sukhoi obsessed, and then there are the f-22 purists who believe nothing else is worthy in the air to air arena.

At the end of the day is it worth the B.S. you will put up with?
The F-35 is so far along now that the public's opinion really doesn't matter

The F-35 is so far along now that the public's opinion really doesn't matter

Bingo. Starting a blog of this kind is probably not even necessary. The naysayers are getting more and more desperate, and the F-35 is gearing up for full rate production.

I think you'll be working hard for little effect, and probably a lot of swearing at what the internet does best: Drooling idiots.

I love the idealism though

It's something that I've considered doing, but haven't really put the time into it.

There are already a number of blogs along this vein, comprehensiveinformation.wordpress.com being one of them, elementsofpower.blogspot.com being another one. You should think about what you would bring that would be different. How would you present your information that is different (more compelling, easier to digest, etc.) than what is already out there? What expertise (analysis, modeling, aerodynamic background, etc.) do you bring? What viewpoint are you presenting from? Etc.

One thing you can potentially consider, depending on your background and expertise, is to look at the arguments against the F-35 in detail. (This is something that I wanted to do after I saw how stupid the arguments were once you really examined them.) Take the F-35 vs F-16 "dogfight" for example. You can examine 1) whether or not the test was really about dogfighting (if it were, why does the conclusions section say nothing about dogfighting tactics, i.e. "you should use scissors when the opponent uses paper", and instead just talks about changing the control law parameters? Why does the very first sentence of the test report directly say the purpose of the test was to test the F-35's control laws under high AOA? Is energy maneuverability relevant when the test was with the F-35 under high AOA and thus, losing energy rapidly? etc.) 2) How to look at the different responses properly (for example, the detractors' argument when the JSF responded was "see we're right, they didn't dispute the test pilot", but is that appropriate? After all, the test itself was part of the JSF program, of course they don't dispute the results or what the test pilot did, what they dispute is the detractors claiming it had anything to do with dogfighting), 3) what the test really implies about the F-35's abilities. I think elementsofpower.blogspot.com does this but it's too informal and snarky for my personal taste (i.e. in the same way that the Picard blog is overtly pro-Rafale, EoP is overtly pro-F-35, just with actual facts and data, but presented in a snarky way -- whereas I prefer a more dispassionate "by the facts" approach). But that's a personal preference.

Or you can make up a bunch of unsourced numbers like the Picard blog. I still shake my head that he rates the Rafale as having more stealth features than the Typhoon, Gripen, J-10, and J-20 combined. (He credits the Rafale with 11 stealth features, while the other 4 planes has a combined total of 10 according to him.) This includes giving the Rafale's permanently mounted refueling probe a plus as a stealth feature because it's angled, while ignoring that the refueling probe of other planes like the Typhoon are actually retractable and thus should be stealthier because they are simply retracted and out of sight in normal operation.

I don't want to be a negative person but in this case I'm going to be. So many of the anti F-35 crowd are so dug into their positions that they can't reason objectively. Some are Sprey loyalists who only believe in lightweight fighters (f-20, f-16, gripen) type jets. The others are sukhoi obsessed, and then there are the f-22 purists who believe nothing else is worthy in the air to air arena.

At the end of the day is it worth the B.S. you will put up with?

I understand that many people have such strong agenda that they cannot be reason with, however i also believe that many of the general public simply dont have alot of knowledge about aerodynamic or avionics , hence they are easily amused by statement from people like Sprey, Carlo Kopp or Picard, my aim is only to teach enthusiasts about the basic, whether they decided to keep their position or not is up to them

Writing blog is what i love to do, so i dont mind

It's something that I've considered doing, but haven't really put the time into it.

There are already a number of blogs along this vein, comprehensiveinformation.wordpress.com being one of them, elementsofpower.blogspot.com being another one. You should think about what you would bring that would be different. How would you present your information that is different (more compelling, easier to digest, etc.) than what is already out there? What expertise (analysis, modeling, aerodynamic background, etc.) do you bring? What viewpoint are you presenting from? Etc.

One thing you can potentially consider, depending on your background and expertise, is to look at the arguments against the F-35 in detail. (This is something that I wanted to do after I saw how stupid the arguments were once you really examined them.) Take the F-35 vs F-16 "dogfight" for example. You can examine 1) whether or not the test was really about dogfighting (if it were, why does the conclusions section say nothing about dogfighting tactics, i.e. "you should use scissors when the opponent uses paper", and instead just talks about changing the control law parameters? Why does the very first sentence of the test report directly say the purpose of the test was to test the F-35's control laws under high AOA? Is energy maneuverability relevant when the test was with the F-35 under high AOA and thus, losing energy rapidly? etc.) 2) How to look at the different responses properly (for example, the detractors' argument when the JSF responded was "see we're right, they didn't dispute the test pilot", but is that appropriate? After all, the test itself was part of the JSF program, of course they don't dispute the results or what the test pilot did, what they dispute is the detractors claiming it had anything to do with dogfighting), 3) what the test really implies about the F-35's abilities. I think elementsofpower.blogspot.com does this but it's too informal and snarky for my personal taste (i.e. in the same way that the Picard blog is overtly pro-Rafale, EoP is overtly pro-F-35, just with actual facts and data, but presented in a snarky way -- whereas I prefer a more dispassionate "by the facts" approach). But that's a personal preference.

Or you can make up a bunch of unsourced numbers like the Picard blog. I still shake my head that he rates the Rafale as having more stealth features than the Typhoon, Gripen, J-10, and J-20 combined. (He credits the Rafale with 11 stealth features, while the other 4 planes has a combined total of 10 according to him.) This includes giving the Rafale's permanently mounted refueling probe a plus as a stealth feature because it's angled, while ignoring that the refueling probe of other planes like the Typhoon are actually retractable and thus should be stealthier because they are simply retracted and out of sight in normal operation.

I agree, i think what i bring is a non biased view point regarding all aircraft, instead of trying to say whether aircraft A is better than aircraft B or not, I will only write about how things work ( how aircraft turn, what limit their turn ability , speed.. etc) From the information i provide reader can come to their own conclusions which aircraft is better
My only problem is that iam not quite good at drawing haha

. I think elementsofpower.blogspot.com does this but it's too informal and snarky for my personal taste (i.e. in the same way that the Picard blog is overtly pro-Rafale, EoP is overtly pro-F-35, just with actual facts and data, but presented in a snarky way -- whereas I prefer a more dispassionate "by the facts" approach). But that's a personal preference.

for Elementsofpower... the guy might be snarky but when the man makes a 3 or 4 piece article; you can't deny the facts. His is one of the very few blogs that will go in depth to actually explain and back his assertions. This is the polar opposite from Picard as you pointed out. The man pulls crap out of 4th point of contact, mixes it with bovine fecal matter, and then tries to push them as fact with NO REAL supporting articles (if any).

I wish you luck in your blog Garrya. Just remember that it is your blog. Put up what you have to say and support it with FACTS and verifiable articles. Let the trolls say and do what they want, just ignore them... you can't fix stupid. It would be good to see an honest and factual counter argument to the swarm of stupid flying around on the interwebs...

Idk what you can do at this point. Blogs are useful for people seeking the information in the first place, if your going after the general public, then the info has to come to them. Aka trying to use a blog to beat back anti F-35 blogger getting picked up by yahoo news, ABC news, FOX news, you will lose. Those are already sources for the general public that they accept as accurate news sources, they didn't search out that F-35 information it was brought to them. Unless you can get a major news agency to pick up a article from your blog, which isn't likely since it's the opposite of the news they were reporting 3 months ago, then the general public won't pick it up. As far as just getting good information out there that's easy to find I think Dragon's approach has worked best, youtube videos pop up easily in a google search, and we can link people to those videos in comments on bad articles, which helps to avoid copy pasta spam (which gives off the impression of the "paid by Lockheed" crap). The blogs already up like Sgt. Mac's elementsofpower have pretty much covered all the controversies, and I (and others) can pull off them for data, or point people to them. They are already established and have a lot of content up. Realistically this website right here is prob one of the best sources on the net for F-35 news and info. Do a specific F-35 search on any major search engine and one of the hits (usually towards the top of the list too) will be F-16.net forums, this has the links to the blogs in it, lots of experienced and expert opinions thrown in and we talk about just about everything aviation here not just F-35 (and F-16's) so you get comparisons of all the air power flying out there. If you want to go for a blog the doors there but don't expect a ton of the general public to come walking into it, if you want to make the largest impact just counter the crap articles on the web in the comments sections, or invest the time and effort into youtube videos, a information sources that's easiest for the general public to access and digest, keep adding to the forums here and the info gets out the same way.

As far as just getting good information out there that's easy to find I think Dragon's approach has worked best, youtube videos pop up easily in a google search, and we can link people to those videos in comments on bad articles, which helps to avoid copy pasta spam (which gives off the impression of the "paid by Lockheed" crap). The blogs already up like Sgt. Mac's elementsofpower have pretty much covered all the controversies, and I (and others) can pull off them for data, or point people to them. They are already established and have a lot of content up.

I am aware of elementspower blog and Dragon's YouTube channel , but AFAIK they seem to focus mostly on the Aerodynamic part of F-35 , my blog will cover the electronic part as well

Realistically this website right here is prob one of the best sources on the net for F-35 news and info. Do a specific F-35 search on any major search engine and one of the hits (usually towards the top of the list too) will be F-16.net forums, this has the links to the blogs in it, lots of experienced and expert opinions thrown in and we talk about just about everything aviation here not just F-35 (and F-16's) so you get comparisons of all the air power flying out there.

I agree that F-16.net is a very good source of information but I think reading 20-30 pages of discussion can be quite discourage for many people , And while there are alot of information here , they are somewhat cluttered around , and could be hard to find , I think one of the reasons Picard and Carlo kopp's nonsense spreading so quickly is that they all center in one place and easy for reader to find .
Hence the decision to write the blog

Anyway , new post going up today , hope you guy enjoy
https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavion ... olocation/

finally finished this todays , cheers
https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavion ... -benefits/