hopsalot@Vnomad, gripen has ZERO need for a dragchute and has been operating in the artic for many years..
Even if the F35s dragchute would have alimited drag, does anyone here with good aerodynamic know how dare to make an estimate of the added drag index?
The F-22 has also been operating in the arctic for many years without a drag chute. Does that mean it could satisfy Norway or Canada’s requirements?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234807[/ATTACH]
The devil is in the details. How long is the runway? To what extent has snow and ice been cleared? What load must the aircraft land with?
It is quite possible the Gripen NG could satisfy Norway’s requirements, but absent some actual data I don’t see any reason to assume it does.
hopsalotYet again you post with ZERO sources. You do know how sources work right?
He doesn’t need sources to sling mud. This isn’t about having an informed discussion, it is about trying to everything possible to sow doubt about the F-35 program.
If the F-35 is being designed with a LO-compliant housing for a drag chute it becomes a “giant RCS-enhancing wart.”
The Gripen meanwhile is just assumed not to need a chute because… Sweden.
hopsalotWhy isn’t a special piece of equipment needed by <120 aircraft out of a planned total production run of >3,000 aircraft standard on all of them? Gee, lets put on our thinking caps and ponder that. :confused:
As for its impact on RCS/aerodynamics, it will presumably have some trivial impact, but of course that isn’t what you would like to believe is it? It would be much more fun to cluelessly call it a “huge RCS-enhancing wart.”
What do you call a single piece of external ordinance on a 4th generation jet? What about one of Boeing’s nifty external weapons pods?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234804[/ATTACH]
If the LO housing for the F-35’s drag chute is a “huge RCS-enhancing wart” then maybe those are “colossal RCS-enhancing goiters?”
Cluelessly flinging mud at the F-35 isn’t going to somehow save European fighter aviation. The only thing that can do that would be the Europeans deciding to spend money on something other than social programs.
hopsalotGood luck to the Noggies. Especially as they’ll be flying half the year with a huge RCS-augmenting wart on the jet’s back end.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234798[/ATTACH]
It is really amateur hour around here isn’t it? That or the chicken littles of the internet really have run completely out of things to cry about. :rolleyes:
11/24/2014 Fokker signed an agreement in principle today with Lockheed Martin for the delivery of the drag chute fairing assembly for Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II. The drag chute fairing assembly is a composite /metal construction that enables the F-35 Lightning II to release the drag chute.
…
The fairing is designed to preserve the aerodynamic and stealth capability of the F-35. First activities start end of 2014 and this agreement in principle reaffirms Fokker’s position as a strategic supplier in the F-35 program.
hopsalotIF Norway Will but 56 aircraft, 4 Will be based in US so only 52 available for norwegian/ north european safety. MSphere’s Numbers makes more sense than Eskodas.
In what universe do MSphere’s numbers have any relevance? Even by his standards this is a particularly poor effort. He has found some numbers somewhere (sound not included :stupid: ) that he claims show ridiculously low operating costs for a third world airforce. As always, the problem with this type of comparison is that there is no way to tell it is apples to apples. (of course it isn’t) Some things are likely cheaper in Bangladesh, but others, including fuel are going to be similar to everywhere else in the region.
hopsalotYes, but why are stealth aircraft equipped with low observable nozzles then? Lowering the exhaust temperature has to make a difference.
Yes, but it is like all LO technology… an effort to reduce detectability, not to render them utterly undetectable. Certainly IR signature reduction efforts must make a difference given the apparent effort invested in them, but by the time you are talking about the merge you are simply way too close to expect to go undetected.
This combined with the lethality of modern WVR weapons is one reason many believe WVR combat would be very nearly a coin toss between similarly competent pilots.
hopsalotOk, I am still not 100% convinced, but maybe they really dropped it after all.
I really don’t see what cause you have to doubt it.
We know that the F-35 is in the midst of a major weapon integration effort and that the SDB-II was on the list of weapons to be integrated.
hopsalotSee this video of AIM-9x testing, it includes the feed from the seeker where you can see how clearly it can distinguish the airframe of its target.
hopsalotThat may be true but are we sure it is not a pit test? I am a bit skeptical because there has not been any pic and video released.
Right but as far as I understand, block 2b testing does not include external JDAMs and GBU12 release, they have done only the flutter tests so far. The pdf I posted before about weapon integration is not very clear as to whether there will be external weapons activated for block 2b or 3i.
The SDB-II completed initial fit/pit tests back in the summer:
LONDON, July 14, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN), the U.S. Navy, and the U.S. Air Force have begun Small Diameter Bomb II (SDB II) integration activities on the F-35, F/A-18E/F, and F-16 aircrafts. Preliminary SDB II fit checks and pit tests have been completed on the F-35, supporting the Joint Strike Fighter’s ability to carry eight SDB IIs internally.
http://investor.raytheon.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=84193&p=irol-newsArticle&id=1946945
At the pace things are now moving (compare to Typhoon) I don’t think we can expect a photo and press release for every new weapon that makes an incremental step towards integration.
hopsalotLets take a brief pause from the mud slinging clowns to deliver some news.
Death-spiral continues:
(Bloomberg) –The Pentagon will request funding in fiscal 2016 to buy 57 F-35 jets made by Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT), two more than previously planned, according to two government officials.
The Defense Department’s previous five-year plan had projected buying 55 of the fighter jets during the year that begins Oct. 1, said the officials, who asked not to be identified before President Barack Obama submits his budget to Congress on Feb. 2.
If approved by lawmakers, the acquisition would mark a major increase for a program that’s experienced cuts amid tight defense budgets and setbacks in testing of the costliest U.S. weapons system. The Pentagon had requested 34 of the jets for the current year, and Congress increased that to 38.
IOC remains on track:
(Reuters) – Lockheed Martin Corp’s F-35 fighter jet is on track both to meet the Marine Corps’s July target to declare the jet ready for combat use and to meet the Air Force’s target date a year later, top U.S. military officials said Thursday.
The F-35 B-model, which can take off from shorter runways and land like a helicopter, was making good progress and should meet the Marine Corp’s target for initial combat use, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus told reporters after a speech at the annual conference of the Surface Navy Association.
Air Force Chief of Staff General Mark Welsh told a separate news conference at the Pentagon that he was confident the Air Force would meet its target date of declaring the F-35 A-model ready for initial combat use by August to December 2016.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/15/us-lockheed-martin-fighter-idUSKBN0KO1YP20150115
You may now return to your usual frothing at the mouth…
hopsalotMore…
NEW DELHI: India on Monday said France would have to adhere to the conditions specified in the original tender for the $20 billion MMRCA (medium multi-role combat aircraft) project, even as defence secretary R K Mathur left for Paris amid the deadlock over the mega deal for 126 Rafale fighters.
…
Apart from this refusal to take responsibility in terms of liquidity damages and production timelines for the jets to be made in India, the MoD is also upset with Dassault’s attempts to “change the price line” that had led to Rafale’s selection over the Eurofighter Typhoon as the L-1 three years ago.
Sources said Mathur, on a two-day visit to France, will discuss a wide range of issues, including the need for Dassault to stick to the terms and conditions laid down in the original MMRCA tender or RFP floated in August 2007.
India wants to take a final call on the MMRCA project before Prime Minister Narendra Modi visits France and Germany in April. If Dassault does not honour its commitments made in its bids submitted to the RFP, India may be left with no option but to scrap the entire MMRCA project despite having invested almost a decade in the selection process.
Sounds like they think Dassault under-bid… not pretty.
hopsalotGuys, please, stop it. The 35 went from a low cost affordable Stealth supportive asset for the fleet of 22 (and A12 – I might mix the schedule) to an all wonder viral asset for all the service and its allies… Even so that today the 22 is upgraded with… Ex-JSF tech!
This come at a price. If you are a taxpayer in the US, thx whoever you had alrdy in your visor because the increase in price is just the result of a logical process. Nothing irrational if you keep your feet on solid ground (just as the Raf in India cost ended-up costing twice more, Damn !).
if I had to tune up my old student car (a Zip Zip 89 Corsa) like is my drive today, I will end up paying much more than a brand new (not so ZipZip) 2015 Corsa… This is a bit pejorative, but I guess every one understand
You commit to this (this is not my car)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234523[/ATTACH]You get this (at a slightly higher price tag but still a bargain)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234524[/ATTACH]
People around here really seem to be having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that modern fighters are extremely expensive. What car would you pick for a Rafale, Eurofighter, or Gripen NG? None of these aircraft are affordable in the way the original F-16 was… of course they aren’t daylight-only WVR-only fighters are they?
If a buyer wanted a new F-16 with the same basic performance/capabilities as an F-16A, but at a similar or lower price (adjusted for inflation) Lockheed could likely accommodate them, though of course nobody wants any such thing. Instead all discussion around here revolves around one or another extremely expensive aircraft. (Though oddly enough it is generally the F-35 we hear about being too expensive…)
hopsalotFlyaway cost target was $28M in 1994 dollars. That’s about $45M in 2014 dollars.
Now its $85M in then year dollars or $75M in 2014 dollars.An increase from 45 million to 75 million or two thirds. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Ah well, in hindsight it was a good idea to drop the A for affordable in CALF when they merged it with the JAST project. On the other hand, it could be worse…
1994 dollars? When was that estimate from?
The JSF program didn’t award the contracts to develop the X-32 and X-35 until late 1996. Lockheed wasn’t officially selected to develop and build the F-35 until 2001.
No question the F-35 program has been a mess but even an updated F-16 or Super Hornet is going to be way more than 45 million in 2014 dollars and you can forget about a Eurofighter or Rafale…
hopsalotThe F-35 project goes far farther in “gadget land” than any of the other designs. Which increases the complexity (and price) by an order of magnitude. I am not certain if I apply double standards here, I’ll be honest so I am open to your critique.
Uh oh, don’t let the “anything but F-35” crowd hear you. They have been insisting that the F-35 offers nothing that its various predecessors don’t…
Nomad, please take your unsubstantiated BS to another thread. There is no solid evidence about F-35 systems being superior in any way.
hopsalotWhile I don’t have access to the law covering the whole “open competition”, I wonder if being a Partner in the JSF program (on a government level) fits an exemption in the law?
Does anyone have access to the law itself?
These things come down to requirements as well. If Canada wants a 5th generation fighter then only the F-35 is available. It is the same problem Korea had. They wanted a competition, but structuring one is almost impossible if only one aircraft offers what you really want. You have to either lower the bar enough that another aircraft could have a chance of winning (obviously presenting the possibility that your forces could be saddled with an inadequette platform for the next 3 decades) or you are honest about what you want and nobody but the F-35 bids.
Sign In
