F-35C may not be suitable for carrier use

[Zombiee313]

My question is why are we wasting money on the F-35 when we could either upgrade the F-16 or just get the Eurofighter or Rafale?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter_Typhoon

In 2004, United States Air Force Chief of Staff General John P. Jumper said after flying the Eurofighter, "I have flown all the air force jets. None was as good as the Eurofighter."

Just to stir the pot a little bit

[AZGolf]

You don't have to make F-15/F-16/A-10 stealthy... cruise missiles, B-2 bombers, and electronic warfare take out the need for stealth.....

The F-35/JSF is an export aircraft, while the B-2 is not. While it's fine and dandy for the US to use the B-2 as our primary stealth bomber, that still leaves all of the partner countries without a stealth bomber, as they do not have access to our B-2's.

[Zombiee313]

... as they do not have access to our B-2's.

tough **** they should develop their own

Any of the countries that we want have their own ELECTRONIC COUNTERMEASURES.... plus we would probably help them out with our ECM / Stealth abilities... you only really need those when you are establishing air superiority... once you have air superiority then those measures are not as much of a concern

[Gern_Blanston]

My question is why are we wasting money on the F-35 when we could either upgrade the F-16 or just get the Eurofighter or Rafale?

Because they don't create any jobs in the districts of porky senators.

...it's fine and dandy for the US to use the B-2 as our primary stealth bomber...

All, what?... 2 dozen of 'em?

[Zombiee313]

Because they don't create any jobs in the districts of porky senators.

Stupid government fraud and abuse

All, what?... 2 dozen of 'em?

23.... didn't they crash and burn with one in Guam a couple months ago or something.... Wasn't that the Spirit of San Francisco.... get it crashed and burned.... because it went up in flames....

get it? don't worry I will be here all week folks... be sure to tip your waitresses

[Gern_Blanston]

[Zombiee313]

I posted a new thread with a Poll to talk about the F-35 vs other options.... just want to see your opinions

[dubfan]

Ack!! The F-35 program always gets me wound up when I think about it!
The thing that no one want to admit is that vertical landing, while it's a really neat stunt, is almost never used in combat conditions and imposes huge compromises on an aircraft's performance, basically turning it into a one-trick pony. Talk to a Harrier pilot some time. They are slow, short-legged (and maintenance hogs) that are fun to fly at airshows.

I actually did

Worked with one, as a matter of fact, David Poole, CDR, RN. He was VP of Engineering of a small aerospace startup I worked at in the 90s. He flew the Sea Harrier during carrier trials. Has a Martin-Baker tie from it, too. Also flew F-4s during the Falklands era, developed high-AOA air combat tactics for the Royal Navy. His specialty was controlling yaw at high AOA using differential thrust.

He quite liked the Harrier, actually, thought it a MUCH underrated air-to-air platform, particularly as a dogfighter (!) because of its low observable characteristics. Had a very small frontal cross section and relatively clean-burning exhaust. In contrast to say, F-14s, which he often went up against in simulated air combat exercises and which he derided as "great big smoky things".

When I pressed him to pick an airplane he actually would choose to go to war in, though, he somewhat shamefacedly picked the F/A-18 as the best compromise of airframe, avionics, weapons. He wasn't happy about it, though He really loved his F-4s -- "big, fast, loud -- very American".

[Zombiee313]

At least the F-35B can use a carrier

[AlexVespaTx]

Damn I miss the F-14...

[Ikey3125]

Damn I miss the F-14...

Think we need to go back to 1 mission 1 jet days...all these multirole do everything under the sun jets are horrible. Every hear the phrase "jack of all trades, master of none," thats what the JSF is gonna be. Be able to do alot, just not very good at all the task

[joness0154]

Think we need to go back to 1 mission 1 jet days...all these multirole do everything under the sun jets are horrible. Every hear the phrase "jack of all trades, master of none," thats what the JSF is gonna be. Be able to do alot, just not very good at all the task

That works fine and dandy when you have an airbase that can park tons of planes. On a carrier where space is an issue for parking/maintenance/etc. it would seem that multirole aircraft can solve a lot of the problems.

[Zombiee313]

That works fine and dandy when you have an airbase that can park tons of planes. On a carrier where space is an issue for parking/maintenance/etc. it would seem that multirole aircraft can solve a lot of the problems.

It solves some problems, but it also creates a bunch of problems.

Multi-role Aircraft = Compromised Airframe that can do different things, but none of it exceptionally well

I do like that they are replacing the EA-6B with the EF/A-18G ... that is a good job by the Navy

[efritsch]

I just caught this thread and just watched that video and I tend to agree.

The F-35 seems to be too big of a compromise to do everything everyone wants it to. While the B Version can land vertically, its appears that it would take longer to cycle jets that way than the 'old fashion' way.

I think different, purpose specific aircraft are still the way to go.

[NoDubJustYet]

When I pressed him to pick an airplane he actually would choose to go to war in, though, he somewhat shamefacedly picked the F/A-18 as the best compromise of airframe, avionics, weapons. He wasn't happy about it, though He really loved his F-4s -- "big, fast, loud -- very American".

Hell yeah! Best aircraft ever!