I suggest the above post by Jessmo be deleted.

Why? He didn’t say anything we don’t hear everyday from the Eurofanboys.

Any positive report about the F-35 is a lie.

Any selection of the F-35 is the result of a conspiracy/bribery.

Anyone who advances any capability based theory of why the F-35 keeps winning must work for Lockheed.

Just look at how the nitwits are responding to this latest report. They were insisting it was a lie before they could even be bothered to find out what it said… all that really mattered was that it ranked the F-35 the highest, which means it has to be a lie. It is utterly inconceivable that maybe just maybe the F-35 actually offers capabilities operators want.

Here are some quotes from what appears to be a machine-translated version of the selection report.

They explicitly state that the Super Hornet airframe itself is cheaper than the F-35, but there are differences in accounting between the two as far as what is counted as an acquisition vs sustainment cost.

The acquisition cost of the SH and Typhoon both include the cost of initial spares compared to the F-35 which does not. The acquisition cost of the SH and Typhoon also includes outsourced initial pilot training, while the F-35 pilot training is rolled into the sustainment cost. There are also “mission system” procurement costs for the Typhoon and SH such as various pods and pylons that would not apply to the JSF.

You also have to consider that the SH and Typhoon prices are likely higher above cost than the F-35 since Denmark didn’t join the SH or Eurofighter programs in development as a partner like they did the JSF program; the US DoD will want to get back some of the money they invested in the development of the F/A-18F should a foreign military purchase it.

So once again we find that the haters didn’t understand what they thought they did.

Source? AFAIK the pre-flight glitches were caused by the same choking problem as the in-flight system crashes. The Blk 2B is a stable build with mean time between failure events being 32.5 hours (compared to about 4 hrs for the buggy Blk 3i build).

I think he is actually whining about a different and equally irrelevant glitch… flight test F-35s have been having trouble booting up because of some of the special equipment they have.

Although test pilots here often see shutdown events when trying to boot up a cold airplane, Lockheed Martin and government officials stressed that the number of these events that occur during DT is not representative of an operational environment. The DT startup sequence is unique in that the team has to use a special system, the data acquisition recording and telemetry pod, to monitor test data, according to Dan Osburn, F-35 integrated test force (ITF) deputy director and director of projects for the 461st flight test squadron.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/strike/2016/05/09/f-35-test-flights-struggle-boot-up-but-jets-fly/84018338/

Cancel the program, death spiral, horrible airplane… :stupid:

The F-35B. And the term IOC really has no merrit.. What is its current capability? Take-off and landing, when their not busy, rebooting its systems..?

Maybe you missed the part where the Marines were never subject to the glitch that caused those reboots, and that the glitch has been fixed anyway?

I love these charts made by people who haven’t even touched real thing.. And I also love the high scores in the mission effectiveness of the F-35, while the real aircraft can barely take off and land and there is practically no mission it can safely perform..

It sure is a good thing we have experts like you here to clear things up. Btw, could you post the resumes of the authors of the report since you have them? I haven’t been able to find them.

A Norwegian speaker has gone to the effort to translate a good article over at F-16.net.

An excerpt:

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=27253&p=337857#p337857

Isn’t this where the critics start saying the pilot must by a liar, idiot, or shill?

APA looked at some pictures and determined the F-35 can neither turn nor accelerate…

A Norwegian speaker has gone to the effort to translate a good article over at F-16.net.

An excerpt:

Superior in dogfights
They elaborate on the experience after one and a half hour of dogfight-training, one on one over White Tank Mountains, the training are west of the base.
The roar of the engines is unmistakable as they return. It’s the most powerful engine in any fighter ever and will be noticed well when stationed at Ørland in Norway. “Tintin” is sweating after the maneuvers, and his helmet-hair gets damper when he comes out of the plane into 35 degrees C desert air.
So far the plane is cleared for up to 7g. When the next software update comes alog it will be 9g like the F-16. Even now the F-35 has maneuvering capabilities that makes “Tintin” and “Dolby” rewrite the manual for dogfights. Traditionally, the one with the highest speed has the advantage in dogfights. The F-35 gives the pilots the possibility to maneuver with much higher AOA. In comparison to the F-16 it has much better nose pointing capabilities.
-The ability to point towards my opponent makes me able to deliver a weapon sooner than I’m used to. It forces my opponent to react more defensive and gives me the ability to slow down fast, Hanche says. -Since I can slow down fast I can point my plane at my enemy for longer before the roles are reversed. The backside is that you loose energy, but it’s not really a problem. The plane has so much engine power and low drag that the acceleration is awesome. With a F-16 I would have had to dive to gain as much speed after a hard turn.
Hanche has earlier put words to his experience of flying the F-35 in several post on “The combat aircraft blog” Here he describes how the aggressive F-35 gives him the ability to stick to an opponent and keep him in his sights:

“To sum it up, my experience so far is that the F-35 makes it easier for me to maintain the offensive role, and it provides me more opportunities to effectively employ weapons at my opponent.
In the defensive role the same characteristics are valuable. I can «whip» the airplane around in a reactive maneuver while slowing down. The F-35 can actually slow down quicker than you´d be able to emergency brake your car. This is important because my opponent has to react to me «stopping, or risk ending up in a role-reversal where he flies past me.”

Another trait of the F-35 emerges when in defensive situations. At high AOA the F-16 responds slow when moving the stick sideways to roll the plane. A bit like using the rudder on a large ship I think, not that I know what I’m talking about – I’m not a sailor. In the F-35 I can use the rudder-pedals to steer the nose sideways. At high AOA the F-35 still responds quick compared to the F-16. This gives me the opportunity to point the nose where I want and threaten my opponent. I can do this “pedalturning” impressively fast, even at low speeds. As a defensive capability I can neutralize a situation fast or even reverse the roles.

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=27253&p=337857#p337857

Flash news
Denmark appears to have selected the F35,officially to replace their aging F16. Number is 27 airframes, 3 less than current number of F16.
Boeing marketing campaign ,on local radio ,actually hard rock one, to place the SH, did not seem to have succeeded.No surprise there if you ask me.

Another win… awfully quiet around here.