Let’s go to a something completely different….F-35 dogfighting capabilities.
What if the F-35 Lightning II air superiority fighter couldn’t dogfight ( as the test pilot claims )….could it still out come as a winner 100/100 in an aerial combat ?
I mean does stealth and all systems combined make the difference ?
There are several air combat cases where even an outdated i-153 biplane downed a P-39 Airacobra.
Similarly wingloaded F-104E was a quite a hod rod and able to zoom and do many other things.
Is the future of aircombat all about better awareness ?
In Vietnam the F-4 pilots still needed to go to guns, but are those days long gone ?
I hate knowing something but not KNOWING something, so I opened up the last 15 years of budgets and crunched the numbers.
1. The USAF budget site (for you masochists out there who feel like repeating my calculations) is http://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/budget/
2. I used the complete Rec Flyaway costs, including ECO for the F-35 even though it was not an F-22 line item.
3. I used Tom’s Inflation calculator http://www.halfhill.com/inflation_js.html
4. I included both then-year (Green Row) and inflation-adjusted to 2016 numbers (Red Row)
5. I use Rec Flyaway numbers for comparison because they are the only numbers that can be used to judge manufacturing efficiency over a long period of time and across platforms.Conclusions:
1. The entire F-22 production run was in 10 batches of 179 planes.
2. The first 10 years of F-35 production will end with FY2016 and 178 planes, yes, that is only a 1 plane difference in the F-22’s favor.
3. The F-22 benefited from a faster ramp=up (2/10/13/21/22 = 68) for the 1st 5 years vs (2/6/7/10/25 = 58) for the F-35.
4. The F-35 did not overtake the F-22’s annual build rate until it’s 9th LRIP.
5. Even when looking at Then-Year dollars, the F-22 was ALWAYS more expensive than the F-35 in all but one year (in LRIP6 the F-22 was $1.29mil less)
6. The average Then-Year cost of an F-22 was $161.53mil and while the F-35 is $143mil
7. In Then-Year dollars the F-35 was on average $18.22 mil cheaper and in FY16 dollars, $53.72 mil cheaper.Without further ado, the numbers.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]241767[/ATTACH]
Wouldn’t it have been then cheaper to just build more of those F-22s ?
Let’s do apples to apples and make an average cost of the F-35 from a similar batch of ~180 aircraft.. There you go with $142mil average price.
I think reading the F-22 was 380 million a piece.
The statement in bold is complete BS. The rest I won’t comment.
He was possibly referring to higher bypass ratio.
There is a reason why a bulk of the development money for the F-35 has gone to sensors & data fusion.
“Speed is Life” has been replaced with “Information is Life”.
I guess you won’t need the AWACS when you have F-35s then ?
Not DB Cooper.
Probably.
We dunno how his previous Boeing 727 jump went. :eagerness:
IDF has shot down an civilian 727 at least once over Sinai.
have you heard what Sprey said about the F-15 and Su-27 as well :highly_amused::highly_amused:, according to that guy, radar, ECM and BVR are all useless, all aircraft need to carry is a cannon :highly_amused:
He is Ivy-league and fighter mafia guy with passion on high fidelity recorders and record players.
In his vocabulary F-35 is a turkey…wich is a bird…not very stealthy tough.
Wonder if the pressure vessel of the fuselage was damaged in a previous landing accident ( if there was a such ) ?
You can still fly it at MS FSX. 😉
Sounds are awesome.
Would it be a time to reintroduce the parachute to commercial aviation ?
Indeed, like on a different forum a moderator told me that Mr t is slightly “reality challenged”…:)
You could also claim that the moderator could be a bit too earth bound…if you know what I mean ( not necessarily a retard ). All moderators bann you if you cause too many complaints from the other forum goers. I unfortunately back up my theories and views with solid facts and some have hard time to say they were wrong.
Anyway I can confess that I did use the finnish site in the beginning as a test bed to sorta test my ideas with the readers..and I did learn a lot about aviation in two megathreads that are still there.
The well under 70 kg plane would be also the lightest motorized aeroplane to fly…at least on electric engine.
I think 54 kg is the lightest so far.
Sales could be good too as the plane can be sold in the gategory that needs no lisence to fly.
It is a heavy contest in aeroplanes in Finland…I applied twice funding for this in 2014 and did not get any.
I did get the funding in 2010 ( for previous model ) but I was asked to work as a representative for a well known stone house brand ( which lasted to 2011 ). Also the low wing without a pilot lisence would have been for most too difficult to fly. There is heavy liability and insurance costs are high in this business. I had iterated all pieces of the aeroplane and the judge who valued the design for the board later started a plane company that uses a slightly similar veneer+foam+veneer structure I had on it.
I am in process of taking this woodcomposite study into main university in Helsinki/Espoo and get my doctorate in aviation in the process.
I am too often labelled as a nut case like the great aviator mr Päätalo from the same city…this cannot be a good thing if you run a major aviation company in the future. :eagerness:
I recently also designed a concept for an electric car with 1000 km range which used the know phenomena called ” inverted pressure gradient matching ” to get 20-30% lower drag along with structure that would have saved few hundred kilos in weight.
I take the reality challenged as a compliment as I am far a head of my time…as are all the great inventors…I wouldn’t like it any other way !
—-
I was taken for a fool with my high flying solar/electric hybrid all the way until I was able to prove that low wing loading and adequate but yet low out put aeroplane actually had better changes/combined ratio than U-2 jet spy plane.
This project is top secret at the moment. It will proceed after this smaller project is ready.
Was the F.VIIa a fully wooden aeroplane or just wings made of wood ?
Mr topspeed has indeed been banned from just about every Finnish aviation forum because of his trends of discussing with himself, on matters that no one else is actually interested in. Or if someone is, it is clear that Mr t has not understood that “designing” airplanes is different from just drawing profiles of them.
Are you saying 3D modelling would be better way to design world class aeroplanes outa woodcomposite ?
See I have first learned to use XFRL-5 and made the greatest airfoil so far created then made 1 year work to develope woodcomposite 70% stronger than aluminium and ½ as heavy.
Then just 6 years looking for the right concept.
Who says how fast you have to build them ?
Here is the 1/3 scale inboard section for the model wing.
Our of curiosity I wanted to watch a bit & went to the youtube channel.
“This youtube channel is not available in your country”
Ah the joys of censorship in freedom land.
This is dangerous to watch if you don’t know the facts for sure.
Just keep clicking the the smaller videos and they will open.
There is a axis history forum which is well moderated and all even small incidents and killings are well documented.
This document is almost good, but it gives one sided info ( as it is the intention of the maker ).
Part 7 tells about Stalins terror is USSR; http://thegreateststorynevertold.tv/portfolio/part-7-stalin/
You will get an overdose of Adolf Hitler and the NSDAP if you watch all the episodes at once.
Well look on the positive side of that. If we had had Nazi boots on our mainland*, D-Day and the liberation of France would have been somewhere between really f*cking difficult and impossible and may well have ended up with parts of France nuked. That said, Germany got out of a really big bill a lot easier than they should have.
And we do pay tribute to the French resistance, have you never seen ‘Allo Allo’?:D
*They did take an island.
Germany lost the war ( and it’s allies ), but what do you think of this new “document” ?