Discussion on canning the F-35 for the US Air Force

Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
191
Location
Puget Sound
This opinion piece appeared in The Hill a few days ago. There is a rebuttal opinion by the president of the International Machinists Union appearing in The Hill today (3/30/21) touting the F-35 as a great jobs program.
 
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
17,019
Location
Colorado Springs
This opinion piece appeared in The Hill a few days ago. There is a rebuttal opinion by the president of the International Machinists Union appearing in The Hill today (3/30/21) touting the F-35 as a great jobs program.
Of course.
 

y_p_w

Thread starter
Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
8,898
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Here's an F-35 pilot (now in the USAF Reserves) who thinks the demise of the F-35 is misplaced. He also talks about stuff I'm familiar with, such as bit-flip with electronics that are radiation hardened or not. I'd try to explain it, but that might cause eyes to glaze over.



Of course the source is someone who seems to be writing about this stuff for a living now that he's no longer active duty.

 
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
17,019
Location
Colorado Springs
Here's an F-35 pilot (now in the USAF Reserves) who thinks the demise of the F-35 is misplaced. He also talks about stuff I'm familiar with, such as bit-flip with electronics that are radiation hardened or not. I'd try to explain it, but that might cause eyes to glaze over.



Of course the source is someone who seems to be writing about this stuff for a living now that he's no longer active duty.


He is taking what he wants to fly, not what a strategic goal is.
There are calls to arm Ukraine now to send a message to Russia. Calls are also specific to rebuilding UKR air force. How would F35 operate in UKR? If we are going to rebuilt UKR air force we have to use F16's. Yes, these planes are future, but the problem is not just plane itself but the way all process was done and how Lockheed was chosen, which led to the plane like this.
 

ZeeOSix

$100 site donor 2022
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
35,103
Location
PNW
Yes, these planes are future, but the problem is not just plane itself but the way all process was done and how Lockheed was chosen, which led to the plane like this.
Lockheed was most likely chosen because they were also prime contractor on the F-22 and had lots of background and technology to use on the F-35.
 

y_p_w

Thread starter
Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
8,898
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Lockheed was most likely chosen because they were also prime contractor on the F-22 and had lots of background and technology to use on the F-35.

There was a lot of speculation that the X-32 lost out because it wasn’t sexy looking enough. Probably would have refined the look of the prototype, but it was still pretty homely looking. Wondering if Boeing could have delivered where Lockheed couldn’t.


message-editor%2F1526775816835-jaj91.jpg


I think they had a non-flying mock-up in addition to the drawings.


message-editor%2F1526773604046-x-32_jsf-boeing-chart2.jpg
 
Last edited:

ZeeOSix

$100 site donor 2022
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
35,103
Location
PNW
There was a lot of speculation that the X-32 lost out because it wasn’t sexy looking enough. Probably would have refined the look of the prototype, but it was still pretty homely looking. Wondering if Boeing could have delivered where Lockheed couldn’t.
I know the Air Force made comments that they didn't like the "looks" of the Boeing X-32. There are a lot of videos on YouTube that show actual completion video and talk about the completion and the details of which plane did better in which categories.
 

y_p_w

Thread starter
Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
8,898
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
I know the Air Force made comments that they didn't like the "looks" of the Boeing X-32. There are a lot of videos on YouTube that show actual completion video and talk about the completion and the details of which plane did better in which categories.

Three different aircraft might have been a better choice. The F-4 worked OK as a joint platform, but the F-111 didn’t.

Several air forces around the world adopted the F/A-18, so I wonder why the USAF didn’t, other than in a few movies.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
1,784
Location
Las Vegas
Three different aircraft might have been a better choice. The F-4 worked OK as a joint platform, but the F-111 didn’t.

Several air forces around the world adopted the F/A-18, so I wonder why the USAF didn’t, other than in a few movies.
Actually, the F-4 wasn't developed as a joint fighter. It was a Navy only project, pressed into service with the Air Force because the Air Force had no decent fighters at the time. Interceptors like the F-104 and F-106, fair weather light bombers like the F-105 fought in Vietnam and performed poorly. Both the Navy F-4 and A-7 were adopted by the Air Force out of necessity.
The F-18 was a different story. Basically a Northrop YF-17 (the competition for the General Dynamics F-16) built by McDonnell Douglas (the Navy wouldn't have a Northrop plane since they did not have experience building carrier aircraft), bought by the Navy. Under the agreement between Northrop and McD, Northrop was supposed to be sub-contractor for the Navy planes, and prime contractor for the foreign sales land based versions. In a stroke of marketing genius, Micky D sold other countries the carrier version, to be based on land.
So, no, the Air Force wouldn't buy the "loser" of the YF-16/YF-17 competition. That is not to say the YF-17/F-18 is a lesser aircraft.
The F-111 was another story. It was a plane nobody wanted, except the Secretary of Defense, who was not quite as smart as he thought he was. The Navy, wisely seeing the way the wind was blowing, let the aircraft be developed and kept their mouths shut. About the time they were handed the monstrosity, they correctly declared the "fighter" was too heavy for carrier ops.
The Air Force got stuck with that underperforming pig. The aircraft did shine during the Gulf War though.
 
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
7,336
Location
Caldwell Idaho
What concerns me about the F35 is this. Should the Russians or Chinese suddenly develop a tracking system that makes stealth redundant, what are we left with? In the case of the F22 it would still be the premier air defence fighter in the world. I am not really sure what the F35 would do any better than the latest fourth generation aircraft.
I would bet the radar/sensor needed to detect the F35 will be easier to make than the F35 was.
 

y_p_w

Thread starter
Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
8,898
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
I would bet the radar/sensor needed to detect the F35 will be easier to make than the F35 was.

There's been talk about that for decades. The difficulty would likely be in tracking something with that small a radar signature and maintaining the tracking.
 

ZeeOSix

$100 site donor 2022
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
35,103
Location
PNW
There was a lot of speculation that the X-32 lost out because it wasn’t sexy looking enough. Probably would have refined the look of the prototype, but it was still pretty homely looking. Wondering if Boeing could have delivered where Lockheed couldn’t.
Long but pretty interesting documentary video - goes over lots of things on the fly-off completions.

 
Last edited:

y_p_w

Thread starter
Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
8,898
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Actually, the F-4 wasn't developed as a joint fighter. It was a Navy only project, pressed into service with the Air Force because the Air Force had no decent fighters at the time. Interceptors like the F-104 and F-106, fair weather light bombers like the F-105 fought in Vietnam and performed poorly. Both the Navy F-4 and A-7 were adopted by the Air Force out of necessity.
The F-18 was a different story. Basically a Northrop YF-17 (the competition for the General Dynamics F-16) built by McDonnell Douglas (the Navy wouldn't have a Northrop plane since they did not have experience building carrier aircraft), bought by the Navy. Under the agreement between Northrop and McD, Northrop was supposed to be sub-contractor for the Navy planes, and prime contractor for the foreign sales land based versions. In a stroke of marketing genius, Micky D sold other countries the carrier version, to be based on land.
So, no, the Air Force wouldn't buy the "loser" of the YF-16/YF-17 competition. That is not to say the YF-17/F-18 is a lesser aircraft.
The F-111 was another story. It was a plane nobody wanted, except the Secretary of Defense, who was not quite as smart as he thought he was. The Navy, wisely seeing the way the wind was blowing, let the aircraft be developed and kept their mouths shut. About the time they were handed the monstrosity, they correctly declared the "fighter" was too heavy for carrier ops.
The Air Force got stuck with that underperforming pig. The aircraft did shine during the Gulf War though.

I get all that. Yeah the F-4 turned into a joint platform even if it wasn’t conceived as such. But that’s perhaps the one platform that worked well for everyone concerned. The F/A-18 was popular with nations that wanted greater range than the F-16 and the security of two engines.

The FB-111A was actually quite good at its primary mission, which is as a fast strategic bomber. I heard somewhere that it could include a coffee maker. It just had to be fast in a straight line and drop a lot of small
bombs or just a few big bombs. But it wasn’t a great idea as a fleet defender. At least Grumman learned a few things. But the TF30 was never designed for the duty that the Navy had for it.
 
Joined
May 12, 2018
Messages
554
Location
England
Hi
HMS Queen Elizabeth is deploying to the far east this month. It will carry a grand total of 8 F35B. Seems an expensive way of transporting 8 aircraft. Plus, of course, asw and aew helicopters.

It will be accompanied by 2 royal navy type 45 destroyers, 2 RN type 23 frigates, a nuclear attack sub and two supply vessels.

Interestingly it will also be accompanied by the USS The Sullivans.

As Astro said earlier, it is great to see RN Aviation playing a roll on the world stage once more.
 
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
2,243
Location
.
Hi
HMS Queen Elizabeth is deploying to the far east this month. It will carry a grand total of 8 F35B. Seems an expensive way of transporting 8 aircraft. Plus, of course, asw and aew helicopters.

It will be accompanied by 2 royal navy type 45 destroyers, 2 RN type 23 frigates, a nuclear attack sub and two supply vessels.

Interestingly it will also be accompanied by the USS The Sullivans.

As Astro said earlier, it is great to see RN Aviation playing a roll on the world stage once more.

Will also include a squadron of USMC F-35Bs.
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2020
Messages
3,192
Location
FL
Blue Angels are performing this weekend in Ft Lauderdale, Super Hornets will definitely put on an amazing show. 👍

F-35 will also perform and it will be my first time seeing it fly.

Maybe I’ll bump into Cujet at the show....
 
Top