tequilashooter
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 1 January 2021
- Messages
- 699
- Reaction score
- 889
and a question on the F-35 in response to steve of a physical feature got deleted but its ok to talk about something similiar to the su-57 thread, why?
I'm going off memory here and a post I made in 2016, but I believe the problem was some avionics system (implied to be a vehicle system, not a mission system) was moved into the weapon bays for greater ease of access for maintenance, etc. The problem however was that the weapon bays are a hot environment due to their proximity to the engine, and temperatures in the bay (when flying fast and low with a warm ambient air temp) were hotter than what at least one component within that avionics system was certified for.That may be it. I remember that there are certain conditions where the weapon bay doors are open to facilitate avionics cooling.I think you are confusing the fact that the bay are kept open after landing or lengthy ground roll prior to takeoff for that purpose. Heat management can require secondary systems to be shut off when fuel quantity is low (heat sink). But then, what you are suggesting is unheard.
I'm going off memory here and a post I made in 2016, but I believe the problem was some avionics system (implied to be a vehicle system, not a mission system) was moved into the weapon bays for greater ease of access for maintenance, etc. The problem however was that the weapon bays are a hot environment due to their proximity to the engine, and temperatures in the bay (when flying fast and low with a warm ambient air temp) were hotter than what at least one component within that avionics system was certified for.
and a question on the F-35 in response to steve of a physical feature got deleted but its ok to talk about something similiar to the su-57 thread, why?
pretty much an inside joke of users hating anything crediting Russia, I was also talking about the high RCS cylindrical shape on the right side of the F-35 they could have edited the answer instead of fully deleting it. Whats the service life of the F-35 anyways, just trying to understand its purpose a little more.Consider that it was laced with the absurd notion that the Slavic surnames of some high level individuals in the F-35 program indicate that the aircraft should somehow be owed to Russia’s genius. Wonder why it wasn’t taken seriously then.
It's current service life is 8000 flight hours, which under the USAF's estimated usage of 250 hours per year would give each jet a service life of 32 years. The last USAF F-35A is scheduled to be delivered in 2044 though that's always subject to change, which theoretically means (and this is what the services have programmed) that the jet would serve with the USAF until 2077 (33 years later because the last jet to roll out likely wouldn't fly 250 hours in its first year).Whats the service life of the F-35 anyways, just trying to understand its purpose a little more.
I don't know...you just asked what it was...Okay.... and what does that have to do with anything?
The Pentagon is exploring its options for a more efficient and powerful F-35 engine
Upgrades and new engine tech are under development, but will the military have the money?www.defensenews.com
The F135 is already being operated in excess of its specifications as new capabilities have been added to the F-35, Latka said.
That is only going to become more of a problem as the Pentagon upgrades the F-35 with Technology Refresh 3 — a new core processor, memory unit and panoramic cockpit display — and adds the Block 4 hardware and software capabilities, which will further tax the jet’s existing weight and cooling thresholds.
Makes you wonder what scenarios is USAF testing in their Red Flags
I swear this is not a troll bait response. But isn't the f-16 like 1m2 and the f-35 lower than .0001m2? That entire graph should be blue, I guess the aircrafts I have in mind do have a chance after all since those are f-16A/C variant aircrafts. I am going to have a field day with this graph.
Aggressor F-16 has IRSTI swear this is not a troll bait response. But isn't the f-16 like 1m2 and the f-35 lower than .0001m2? That entire graph should be blue, I guess the aircrafts I have in mind do have a chance after all since those are f-16A/C variant aircrafts. I am going to have a field day with this graph.URL unfurl="true"]https://billieflynn.com/f-35-war-gaming-fear-mongering/[/URL]
Advance 4 generation fighters can also be F-15E and F-18E/F working together or F-15E and F-16C.I swear this is not a troll bait response. But isn't the f-16 like 1m2 and the f-35 lower than .0001m2? That entire graph should be blue, I guess the aircrafts I have in mind do have a chance after all since those are f-16A/C variant aircrafts. I am going to have a field day with this graph.
What do you mean by entirely blue? 20:1 kill-loss ratio that F-35As running Block 3i software (2x AMRAAM only, no gun, 7G max loading, reduced mission systems functionality) got going up against F-16A/Cs, Draken International aircraft, and F-15Cs (the 125th FW had their jets augment Red Air at times) - remember too that the dedicated aggressors are designed to use range instrumentation systems to emulate the capabilities of MiG-29s, Flankers, etc (even using virtual radars, etc to emulate the mission systems of other jets).I swear this is not a troll bait response. But isn't the f-16 like 1m2 and the f-35 lower than .0001m2? That entire graph should be blue, I guess the aircrafts I have in mind do have a chance after all since those are f-16A/C variant aircrafts. I am going to have a field day with this graph.
I mean I guess infrared is better than radars, i have no idea.Aggressor F-16 has IRST
Read his source, read the graph, may I kindly ask where you are getting that only 2 amraams were used? Since I am assuming that your looking at a different source than the one I am looking at from Forest Green unless my vision is that bad that I have to see an eye doctor or ask lasik for a refund? This article was published in October 2021, graph is showing January, February 2017 red flag exercies and I am assuming that block 3I isnt used by that date correct but full weapons? I just want to be sure were both on the same page here before I decide to pass judgement.What do you mean by entirely blue? 20:1 kill-loss ratio that F-35As running Block 3i software (2x AMRAAM only, no gun, 7G max loading, reduced mission systems functionality) got going up against F-16A/Cs, Draken International aircraft, and F-15Cs (the 125th FW had their jets augment Red Air at times) - remember too that the dedicated aggressors are designed to use range instrumentation systems to emulate the capabilities of MiG-29s, Flankers, etc (even using virtual radars, etc to emulate the mission systems of other jets).
That chart on the right is then running through 5 scenarios where a Blue Air comprising of 40 jets (100% 4.5th gen on the left, then 75%, 50%, 25% and then finally 100% F-35s on the right) goes up against 120 Red Air jets of equivalent 4.5th gen capability. Red losses are shown above the horizontal axis, Blue losses underneath. Colours designate what Blue Air jet made the kill or was killed.
So initially on the left 6x 4.5th gen Red Air fighters are killed and 20x Blue Air 4.5th gen fighters are killed. On the second-last from the right all 120 Red Air are killed, with something like 95-99% of kills made by F-35s and the remainder made by the Blue Air 4.5th gens. Meanwhile 19 Blue Air jets are killed, with about half being 4.5th gen and half being F-35s.
It's a very simplistic / simplified analysis that's just running those 2 kill ratios, the availability rate and force sizes (40 vs 120) through the Lanchester laws, but it delivers the intended message.
It's indeed referencing the results of Red Flag 17-1 (which happened Jan / Feb 2017). Block 3F however wasn't delivered to the fleet until 12 months later in Feb 2018 (news outlets like Aviation Week reported on it in early March, but some like this story mention jets getting it in February).This article was published in October 2021, graph is showing January, February 2017 red flag exercies and I am assuming that block 3I isnt used by that date correct but full weapons?
Iron Eagle paint scheme.That camouflaged F-16 is sexy as hell !
So what, why?More F-35s have been delivered to the RAF:
More F-35 jets delivered to the UK
Three more F-35B aircraft have been delivered to the UK, bringing the fleet to 24 aircraft.ukdefencejournal.org.uk
Lockheed Re-Affirms Spanish F-35 Talks Despite Madrid Denial | Aviation Week Network
At the Dubai Airshow a Lockheed Martin executive says discussions continue with the Spanish government on orders.aviationweek.com
A little scrutiny and double-checking is no bad thing. They could just as easily arrive at the same decision as overturn it.Swiss parliament to probe decision to buy US fighter jets
Swiss MPs are set to look into the government's decision to buy US F-35 fighter jets on the back ofwww.thelocal.ch
Given Switzerland's history in this arena, can anyone really say they are surprised? It's almost as if its part of the normal Swiss procurement process.Swiss parliament to probe decision to buy US fighter jets
Swiss MPs are set to look into the government's decision to buy US F-35 fighter jets on the back ofwww.thelocal.ch
To remind their readers that the loony politicians wasted all their money on one plane, and now its crashed, therefore it was rubbish, therefore politicians are rubbish, therefore the newspaper is very clever.Why do the reporters keep saying it's a £100 million aircraft when it's around US$80 million
Click bait plus 100 is a nice big round numberWhy do the reporters keep saying it's a £100 million aircraft when it's around US$80 million
They got one part right though!To remind their readers that the loony politicians wasted all their money on one plane, and now its crashed, therefore it was rubbish, therefore politicians are rubbish, therefore the newspaper is very clever.Why do the reporters keep saying it's a £100 million aircraft when it's around US$80 million
The F-35's price per aircraft depends on what one considers to be part of the JSF project. In my opinion, the US DoD has been extremely creative in the project's accounting.Why do the reporters keep saying it's a £100 million aircraft when it's around US$80 million
And journalists and detractors even more so. How many times has the $Trillion number been thrown around?In my opinion, the US DoD has been extremely creative in the project's accounting.