zoony Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 I'm just not convinced that Russian avionics are more advanced than what I could build in my garage out of spare Tandy computer parts. The Russians have always built a good plane with a good engine, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kubstix Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 Okay, that's why every pilot I've spoken to says it's junk. I guess you have more first hand knowledge of the the jet than they do. In concept the F35 is a great aircraft and it's a concept the military should have adopted a long time ago. Being able to have an aircraft with interchangable components across all branches of the military is awesome. Being able to have an aircraft that serves many different roles is also awesome. However, you do realize that the version the Air Force uses won't be able to land on an aircraft carrier or take off like a harrier and vice versa. They're all different aircraft configured specifically for that mission. A marine won't be able to jump into an AF F35 and take off like a helicopter. They're still extremely different but share basic components. Dude, you seem to have a hard time comprehending these are 2 different style aircrafts. I highly doubt you talk to any pilots of an F35 who come back and say they are junk. You should do some reading on the new helmets they wear. The double projectors that project images right on their visor. Their ability to target multiple targets simultaneously. 20mm cannons much like an A10. The weapons system in the F35 is FAR FAR more superior then a F22 which rightfully so because they are 2 different roled aircrafts. If you talked to any F16 pilot who moved to an F35 they would absolutely not tell you it's junk. Read up on aircrafts before you make bogus comparisons and tell everyone that pilots are saying they are junk. That's just crazy. You must be talking to pilots of Microsoft Flight Simulator who consider themselves pilots but that is a bunch of BS saying that pilots are coming back saying its junk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kubstix Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 Shart here http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/02/airforce_f35_pilots_020309/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoEd Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 Shart herehttp://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/02/airforce_f35_pilots_020309/ Actually I have the copy of Airman magazine on my desk. You see being in the Air Force and not PA I've kind of had first hand knowledge of the aircraft you're talking about. So the microsoft pilots that I've spoken to, who by the way actually fly the F16, F22, F15, have actually told me that from what they've heard plane has a long way to go and it's going to take a lot to get used to. They also said that from everything they've been told the plane isn't as nimble as they'd like it to be. Now, they've raved about the technological advance that's been made as far as the weapons system but it too is a long way from being reliable. (BTW before you ask, I actually had about a thirty minute conversation with these pilots during a BBQ after an exercise where the F15 and F22 were involved so in case you think I'm blowing smoke) So, you're right they fill two different roles but the F35 still isn't the "answer", not yet anyway. It has a way to go before all the kinks are worked out. From the article you've quoted Not that O’Malley is criticizing the F-16. “I’ll miss the thrust-to-weight ratio ... the pure dogfighter,” he said. And The lieutenant colonel acknowledged there could be delays if the F-35’s testing falls behind schedule and operational jets are not available for the school.“There are still a lot of milestones,” Pieper said. So, for now it's not the answer and there are many who doubt it will ever live up to the hype of being a true "hybrid" fighter. Is it a successful aircraft because it can do the same thing as the F16 and A10 even if it does so less adequately? Again, in theory it's a great aircraft but it has proven nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kubstix Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 Actually I have the copy of Airman magazine on my desk. You see being in the Air Force and not PA I've kind of had first hand knowledge of the aircraft you're talking about. So the microsoft pilots that I've spoken to, who by the way actually fly the F16, F22, F15, have actually told me that from what they've heard plane has a long way to go and it's going to take a lot to get used to. They also said that from everything they've been told the plane isn't as nimble as they'd like it to be. Now, they've raved about the technological advance that's been made as far as the weapons system but it too is a long way from being reliable. (BTW before you ask, I actually had about a thirty minute conversation with these pilots during a BBQ after an exercise where the F15 and F22 were involved so in case you think I'm blowing smoke)So, you're right they fill two different roles but the F35 still isn't the "answer", not yet anyway. It has a way to go before all the kinks are worked out. From the article you've quoted And So, for now it's not the answer and there are many who doubt it will ever live up to the hype of being a true "hybrid" fighter. Is it a successful aircraft because it can do the same thing as the F16 and A10 even if it does so less adequately? Again, in theory it's a great aircraft but it has proven nothing. No problem man, you win. Your right, the F35 is absolute JUNK. I would take an A10, F16, or Harrier over it anyday of the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 oh and one more thing we are forgetting, having the best equipment, best technology, and best trained forces is meaningless if the person holding the oval office doesn't have to guts to use them when necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skin'Em84 Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 UAVs are the way to go now :-p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighOnHendrix Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 Sorry but you are wrong. Shape is the major factor. The coating is the finishing touch. And since the F117 we have learned that subtle changes can work wonders. An aircraft doesn't have to look like a flying gem. Note the angle of the tail fins. Note that all leading edges are angled back just like the F22 or F35. Note the edge from the nose back to the wings. Also note the lack of external hard points for missiles... just like the F22. And who is to say that they don't have radar absorbing coatings? It would be foolish to assume they don't. They may not be as exotic but I'll bet they work pretty well. I have to say that this is what I have always read in articles and seen on television shows. Note the similarities between PAK-FA and the YF-22 and YF-23 prototypes: PAK-FA YF-22 YF-23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 I get the feeling that our guys will be able to track this thing as if it were a flying neon light bulb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.