It was included as a response to the question hence is perfectly valid here.Meant for another topic? (Uk F-35s not part of the deployment, unless I’m mistaken F-35s not even mentioned?)
It was included as a response to the question hence is perfectly valid here.Meant for another topic? (Uk F-35s not part of the deployment, unless I’m mistaken F-35s not even mentioned?)
They are also on the vertical tails.As those are only seemingly present on the fuselage, it does reaffirm my belief that those are related mainly to IR mitigation.
How long have you been waiting for a chance to post fish pictures, on an aviation site? without being ruled offside?Say what you want of the F-35, but on that picture it is sexy as hell. Never thought I would ever feel that way in my lifetime.
Reminds me of a tarpon, a large muscular predatory fish with silver scales.
How long have you been waiting for a chance to post fish pictures, on an aviation site? without being ruled offside?Say what you want of the F-35, but on that picture it is sexy as hell. Never thought I would ever feel that way in my lifetime.
Reminds me of a tarpon, a large muscular predatory fish with silver scales.
Shhhhush now! He's fishing for a compliment.How long have you been waiting for a chance to post fish pictures, on an aviation site? without being ruled offside?Say what you want of the F-35, but on that picture it is sexy as hell. Never thought I would ever feel that way in my lifetime.
Reminds me of a tarpon, a large muscular predatory fish with silver scales.
As I understand it, AIM-9X, when it is carried, is mainly on the outer pylons as per below with the AIM-120s used in the bay:will AIM-9X be mounted internally or a stealth pod be used instead? Does the former really depend on LOAL capability integration? I recall the option of mounting AIM-9X on the bay door being discussed before and I think the seeker should have some field of view in that configuration.
Or its more to do with radar stealth and has to do with skin depth penetrating of electromagnetic energy... Penetrates decays exponentially little is reflected back. and like a one way window\mirror the energy is trapped.Looking at how reflective the new coating is, they probably testing the new low emissivity coatingThey reduce it. They’re testing how to apply it, how durable it is, etcDo the tiles reduce signature, or increase it?The tiles are interesting. A lot of them around the nose almost look like stickers, something applied to the skin of the plane.^ reminds me of the metallic coating/skins that were common in 50s era aircraft.. aside from the geometric shapes
Most of them appear to be the same size too.
I believe F-35 sometimes make their presence apparent, to hide their real capabilities.
View attachment 683264
Shouldn't be too hard to replace, it's just a material. From link:F-35 deliveries suspended after finding Chinese alloys in magnets - Breaking Defense
It is unclear when F-35s with magnets made from the new alloy will begin rolling off the production line, and if the Chinese alloy is found to violate defense acquisition regulations, it would take a national defense waiver for deliveries to resume.breakingdefense.com
The F-35 program office has assessed that the Chinese alloy does not present a safety or security risk that could expose the stealth jet to cyber attacks or other malfeasance, and an alternative source for the alloy has already been identified, F-35 JPO spokesman Russell Goemaere said in a statement. As a result, there are no plans to ground the F-35 fleet or return jets already accepted to Lockheed.
Chinese magnets? What about Russian titanium to build the a12\sr71 fleet? In my last job, there was a 1 year lead time to source a simple replacement magnet.... That's the new world we live in
I cannot access this article. Does it tell anything new about the circumstances that led to this unfortunate incident?Plastic engine cover blunder to blame for F-35 fighter jet crash
Pilot forced to eject on take-off from HMS Queen Elizabeth after the object was left in place and then sucked into the machinewww.telegraph.co.uk
A British F-35 fighter jet crashed into the sea last year after a plastic cover left on the aircraft was sucked into an engine, a Ministry of Defence report has confirmed.
The stealth fighter crashed in the Mediterranean Sea during an attempted take-off from HMS Queen Elizabeth last November.
After a three-week search, the aircraft was found on the seabed in “significant large parts” according to a Ministry of Defence spokesman at the time.
The interim crash investigation report said the "primary causal factor" of the accident was a plastic cover, that was designed to protect the engine from debris, had been left inside the aircraft prior to flight and was sucked into the machine.
When the aircraft tried to take off the pilot noticed the left-hand engine was not producing enough power. The pilot tried to abort the take-off but was too close to the end of the ship to stop in time and had to eject.
Crash investigators said this was "most likely due to a combination of human, organisational and procedural factors" but added other lines of inquiry "across a range of possible causes" would be addressed.
A member of the crew was arrested at the time in relation to the unauthorised release of footage of the loss of aircraft ZM152.
The jet had plunged into the sea close to the ship on November 17 2021.
The pilot, who landed back on board HMS Queen Elizabeth after a successful ejection, was taken to hospital for a routine medical check-up in Greece.
Other factors examined
The interim report said comparisons between UK servicing procedures with other F-35 operating nations would be conducted.
"The Service Inquiry continues to examine other factors, including equipment design, workforce resource, fatigue management, quality assurance and post-occurrence management of the event, to identify any relevant lessons that may prevent reoccurrence and enhance Air Safety," the report stated.
No date was given for the release of the final report.
When the aircraft tried to take off the pilot noticed the left-hand engine was not producing enough power.
When the aircraft tried to take off the pilot noticed the left-hand engine was not producing enough power.
There's only one engine. Really curious what the author of the article misread to reach this point.
Prior to sinking, the left-hand intake blank was observed to float clear of ZM152's wreckage and was subsequently impounded.