Is the F-35 JSF a failure?

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by dopey, Feb 27, 2013.

  1. dopey

    dopey Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,577
    Likes Received:
    1,911
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    I am posting this here in the hope of getting manton's view, since he has been banned from CE.

    http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-pentagons-new-trillion-dollar-jet-is-a-garbage-can

    "The U.S.'s Stealth Fighter Is Too Heavy and Slow, So the Pentagon Made Its Performance Tests Easier"
    Excerpt:
    Can we re-start the F-22 program or is that too dead and too hopeless?
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2013
  2. Manton

    Manton RINO Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    41,568
    Likes Received:
    2,807
    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Location:
    In Hiding
    Well, much may be said here, but the F-22 and the F-35 were never meant to be interchangeable. The 35 was always going to be an inferior plane but more versatile, buildable as a Navy, Marine (VTOL) or AF plane, also usable in a bomber role, and designed for export to allies (There was a ban on exporting the F-22).

    The F-22 was pure air superiority, replacement for the F-15, not for carriers, not for anything but controlling the skies and killing other planes. When it was cancelled on the ground that we no longer had to ever worry again about air superiority, the government came up with the BS explanation that "Not to worry, the F-35 can do all that anyway just as well" which was not true and never true.

    Even if we could restart the F-22 production line (which I think we could), it could not "replace" the 35 because you can't land it on a carrier and there is no VTOL version.
     
  3. dopey

    dopey Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    14,577
    Likes Received:
    1,911
    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    OK. What do you think of treating the F-35 like kids from bad schools - failing to make the grade results in lowering the standards? I don't know that I trust Vice magazine, but I don't know enough to judge for myself.

    This, also from the Article, presumes that the F-35 was supposed to be good at air combat, but now isn't:
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2013
  4. tesseract

    tesseract Senior member

    Messages:
    1,883
    Likes Received:
    576
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    In this day and age where the internet makes everybody and expert on everything, i have a hard time reading a Vice author who obviously is against the program.
     
  5. aravenel

    aravenel Senior member

    Messages:
    5,624
    Likes Received:
    1,171
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Location:
    New York City
    

    Well said.



    I'd love to hear what Manton thinks. Personally, I obviously don't like it, but so far as I can tell, the fact is that the F-35 is so far into development, with so much money already spent, and existing F-16 and F-18 airframes are so old, that pretty much no matter what, they are going to get this thing into production as fast as they can. If that means dropping the acceptance criteria (and that's really what these "specs" read as to me--criteria by which the Pentagon will say "OK, we will accept this" rather than actual performance ability), then that's what's going to happen. Hopefully some of the issues can be ironed out later, though some of them clearly cannot--for example, I recall reading that part of the problem was that the airframe itself is less aerodynamic than first expected, which you can't really do too much about once it's rolled off the assembly line.

    I'm not any expert, so I'm not sure where the delays and issues are coming from, but I'd guess a lot of it came from trying to make it so modular. Combine this with the need for a VSTOL version, which will have some pretty large fundamental differences, and you have a huge amount of complexity introduced, which I'd imagine has sent them back to the drawing board on many parts of the aircraft many times. Hopefully they can make up for some of this added complexity on the back end (simplified maintenance), but who knows--my gut says no.

    Manton, not to derail, but if you're familiar with it, I'd be curious to know what you think of the oxygen issues the F-22 has been having.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2013
  6. HORNS

    HORNS Senior member

    Messages:
    15,160
    Likes Received:
    3,040
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Location:
    Waiting for Saturday to Come
    Isn't the F-35 supposed to be a "jump jet" for Marine usage as well?
     
  7. aravenel

    aravenel Senior member

    Messages:
    5,624
    Likes Received:
    1,171
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Location:
    New York City
    Yeah, the Marines are the primary customer of the VSTOL version. The Navy has ordered some as well, as have the British navy and some others I believe. The US Navy has primarily ordered a version that has foldable wingtips (to allow tighter packing of jets on a carrier) and larger wings (to allow better control at the slower speeds jets are launched/recovered from on a carrier).
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2013
  8. aravenel

    aravenel Senior member

    Messages:
    5,624
    Likes Received:
    1,171
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Location:
    New York City
    Also, people keep throwing these $1 trillion number around, which is somewhat misleading. That's the full projected lifetime cost of all of the aircraft they are planning on acquiring--it's not the money that has been spent, or even what it will cost to buy the >2000 planned aircraft. It's how much everything, all in, maintenance included will cost over the next 50 years.
     
  9. jrd617

    jrd617 Senior member

    Messages:
    14,553
    Likes Received:
    2,281
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Too bad about the Marine version. A friend was supposed to fly it, but now it looks like they're ordering more souped-up F-18's
     
  10. aravenel

    aravenel Senior member

    Messages:
    5,624
    Likes Received:
    1,171
    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Location:
    New York City
    Another tidbit I read today--apparently, the aft visibility out of the cockpit is terrible, which is a huge handicap in a dogfight.

    http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/03/f-35-blind-spot

    Granted, dogfighting isn't the primary mission of the aircraft, but still, it seems to be pretty poor.
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by