Awesome F-35 info

Durak said:
Are you fucking kidding me? Fly-by-wire has been around for atleast 20 years and we haven't had a problem yet.
Click to expand...
I think he's refering to the direction in which things are heading (drone aircraft) and not the physical fly-by-wire systems installed in virtually all aircraft today.



JuggerNaught said:
i still havent figured out why we need this
Click to expand...
Because it is either signifigantly cheaper or signifigantly more effective than most of what is currently in service.

It will eventually be replacing:

F-15C (~$43 million)
F-15E (~$55 million)
F-16C (~$27 million)
F-14D (~$40 million+)
F/A-18C (~$40 million) (the F/A-18Es are also replacing these. I dunno what the ratio of F/A-18Es to F-35Cs is.)
AV-8B (~$27 million)

Those are appoximate unit costs. That does not take into account the fact that it will require less maintenance and will be signifigantly cheaper to maintain than any of those aircraft.
 
wait a minute...what happened to the A-10 being phased out? It's been a while since I looked at anything new about the JSF, but wasn't one of the configurations supposed to be used for ground support instead of the A-10?
 
Also add to the fact that now they can focus all their training on being able to service and fly just one type of aircraft. A huge reduction in upkeep cost will stem from that.
 
puneenup said:
wait a minute...what happened to the A-10 being phased out? It's been a while since I looked at anything new about the JSF, but wasn't one of the configurations supposed to be used for ground support instead of the A-10?
Click to expand...

I don't know if you've ever seen the A-10 in action, but it's CLOSE ground support, like 500 feet off the ground type of shit. I would think that swept wing aircraft would have a harder time manouvering at such a low altitude going sub-sonic. Plus, the punny cannon they have on the nose of F35 won't ever replace the monster that's in the nose of the A10.
 
puneenup said:
wait a minute...what happened to the A-10 being phased out? It's been a while since I looked at anything new about the JSF, but wasn't one of the configurations supposed to be used for ground support instead of the A-10?
Click to expand...
The Airforce brass has been saying that the A-10 was going to be "phased-out" since about two weeks after it went into service. This is said every 5 years or so, but whatever retarded replacement they consider is eventually realized to be stupid and useless. The A-10 has historically be unpopular with the "suits" for some inexplicable reason.

I'd bet a signifigant sum of money that the A-10 will be in service until 2020 or so.
 
why is the air force replacing f-16's? nothing can match it in the air not even a F-35.

And for the guys who think they will be taking pilots out of the f35 you are very wrong. It is so insanely hard to fly in a simulator compared to real life. Flying isn't just seeing and instruments, theres a lot of feeling and being in the moment to make it work. Sitting the pilot in a cubicle they will lose a lot of airplanes.

EDIT: btw i would love to fly an A-10. It looks like such a fun stick and rudder aircraft to fly, and i have heard nothing but good about it.
 
New Account said:
why is the air force replacing f-16's? nothing can match it in the air not even a F-35.
Click to expand...
Uh...
What makes you say that? The F-16 was designed a budget fighter. Even the F-20 outclassed the F-16 at the time of its debut.

It's a good plane, but it's hardly spectacular. That is why the F-15C remains the US' primary air superiority fighter to this day.
 
Durak said:
F-16 > *
Click to expand...
That can't be true even if you believe that statement. If the F-16 is the best aircraft flying, then it can't possibly be superior to the F-2. Therefore, the F-16 cannot be the greatest aircraft.
 
it's a general statement about the impact it has made on the developement of multi-role aircraft around the world

it is the premiere multi-role fighter until the F-35 goes into service
 
Durak said:
Also add to the fact that now they can focus all their training on being able to service and fly just one type of aircraft. A huge reduction in upkeep cost will stem from that.
Click to expand...


?
If they do use the F-35 that still have the F-22, F-117, B-52, etc..

New Account said:
why is the air force replacing f-16's? nothing can match it in the air not even a F-35.
Click to expand...

in the space it takes a f-16 to do a u-turn a f-22 can do a figure 8. F-16 is not the best thing we have.
 
Durak said:
it's a general statement about the impact it has made on the developement of multi-role aircraft around the world

it is the premiere multi-role fighter until the F-35 goes into service
Click to expand...
Oh.

I'll agree with that stament wholeheartedly. The F-16 is an incredible multi-role aircraft. It's just not the best at any of those roles. :p
 
Phantomstranger said:
in the space it takes a f-16 to do a u-turn a f-22 can do a figure 8. F-16 is not the best thing we have.
Click to expand...
And in a space that it takes an F/A-22 to do a figure 8, an Su-37 can do a backflip and change direction twice. :p

The F-16 is an old hat at this point.
 
was it someone here that had the link to some forums with people complaining about NATO designations for Soviet/Russian aircraft?

Su-37 is still Berkut right.

Google says Su-37 and 47 ved

Originally known as the S-37, Sukhoi redesignated its advanced test aircraft as the Su-47 in 2002 reflecting the decision to market the design as a production fighter rather than as an experimental prototype. Also commonly referred to as the Berkut (Golden Eagle), the Su-47 was originally built as Russia's principle testbed for composite materials and sophisticated fly-by-wire control systems.
Click to expand...

Oh, I hadn't been keeping up. Time to read :p

http://www.flymig.com/aircraft/Su-47/album.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top