dark light

FBW

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,651 through 1,665 (of 2,935 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • FBW
    Participant

    This thread seems like a topic that has been recycled over and again. The flight manuals for the: F-16CJ, F-16A, F-15E, F-15C, some E-M diagrams for Mig-29, Su-27 are available. There are not, hopefully won’t be for some time, flight manuals for the likes of Rafale, Typhoon available.

    These types of comparisons lead to non-productive p*ssing contests.

    in reply to: Rise of the 6th Generation Fighter … #2156241
    FBW
    Participant

    Approach to the engine or to the whole 6th gen concept?
    In the first case I would say that Izdelje 30 is geared to be a variable cycle engine about the next generation, something has been edited by Russia part.
    L.

    There is no firm evidence that the Izdelje 30 second stage engine for the Pak-fa is planned as a variable cycle engine. Not to mention, the timeline for introducing said engine is being pushed to the right.

    in reply to: Yeager says F-22 and the F-35 are a waste of money #2156257
    FBW
    Participant

    I guess I would rather believe a stick jockey than computer key board jockeys that post here.

    so, let’s get this straight. YOU prefer the opinion of a 93 year old man (who has been getting into trouble on twitter lately with disparaging remarks of all kinds, some aimed at the U.K.), who’s last TAC command was F-4’s? He did fly F-15’s and F-20’s after retirement, mostly as PR.

    Current pilot’s opinions who’ve all praised both aircraft are null and void over Yeager’s tweet, is this about the long and short of your position? Perhaps it’s time to change your name to “illogical1” because that is about hight of illogical thinking.

    (My Grandfather was a superb fisherman, I stopped taking his advice on where to fish when he got into his 80’s. Not because he was any less knowledgeable about trout or techniques. His knowledge was outdated, his favorite streams no longer held trout. Things change and the world advances.)

    in reply to: Yeager says F-22 and the F-35 are a waste of money #2156502
    FBW
    Participant

    IMO is there is someone that should know what makes a good war plane, it would be Yeager. In the last few days he has come out and stated both the F-22, and the F-35 are a big waste of money since they both fall short of the job at hand.

    Yeager is 93. Great test pilot and man of strong ( not always correct) opinions. Btw, all he said on Twitter was “waste of money” the rest you ad libbed.

    He also advocated for the F-20 over the F-16, that also would have been a mistake.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2156875
    FBW
    Participant

    And then there was This

    Brilliant! The Bird of Prey’s grandfather.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2156896
    FBW
    Participant

    no, i’m referring to a fighter around the same time as F-117

    HAVE BLUE was flying before the MBB lampyridae was designed.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2157061
    FBW
    Participant

    i believe F-14 was the first fighter with irst.
    n

    1950’s F-101 F-102

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2157392
    FBW
    Participant

    So how it comes that all other military producers are creating new technologies, introducing new models of planes and vehicles and not wasting such amount of money?
    Or you really think that the only innovation in this field are “made in USA”?

    Really? Have you ever examined the program unit costs of the Typhoon? Rafale? Where exactly in the world are they getting this free lunch of introducing new technologies and airframes without major expenditures?

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2157848
    FBW
    Participant

    No no no no, the F-22 was cancelled because they thought the F-35 was going to ramp up really fast. The USAF would never have stopped procuring F-22 if they had nothing else to put in production.

    No, no, no & no. The USAF had nothing to do with the decision to stop F-22 production. Several generals ruined thier careers pushing for more F-22’s in the face of Gates telling them to stop advocating for more F-22.

    Even as Gates was cancelling further production, the USAF was presenting studies that 240 F-22 represented the “minimum acceptable risk”. Gates cancelled the F-22 to direct funding to UAV and MRAPS, and various sundry weapons that the US military is trying to divest themselves from as useless since the troop drawdowns in Iraq and Afganistan. He accused the USAF of “Next war-Itis” and claimed that the decision was “not even close”. This was while the F-35 program was in the midst of foundering so claiming the cancellation of the F-22 was due to the F-35 is patently incorrect.

    in reply to: USAF not F-35 thread #2157925
    FBW
    Participant
    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2158307
    FBW
    Participant

    I understand that, but what happens if next year they figure that the plane can’t eject its AMRAAM at mach 1.6 from the internal a/g station. That means that about 200 F-35s that have been build won’t be usable as fighters, including international ones. The JPO would say that it’s unlikely but you never know.

    Well, because the already have modeled weapon separation. They don’t just strap a weapon to a 100+ million dollar fighter and say ” k, bob get her up to 600 knots then drop that sucker and let’s see what happens”.

    They model it, do pit testing. obviously there are still unknowns and some risk. Here is a Lockheed presentation on it:
    http://pages.mscsoftware.com/rs/mscsoftware/images/F-35%20Joint%20Strike%20Fighter-%20Store%20Separation%20Flight%20Test%20and%20Analysis.pdf

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2159606
    FBW
    Participant

    Have the weapons releases from the bay been tested in supersonic?

    F-35 has launched AMRAAM at supersonic speeds. Will have to check on JDAM.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2161122
    FBW
    Participant
    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2161570
    FBW
    Participant

    Metric?!!

    No, greater than 2 tonnes. 2,440kg.

    in reply to: F-35 News and discussion (2016) take III #2161646
    FBW
    Participant

    Also, why would you hamper an Air Force fighter with thousands of pounds of structural modifications, heavy landing gear, of a carrier based fighter.

    There is a greater than 2 1/2 ton difference between the A and the C.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,651 through 1,665 (of 2,935 total)