1
1st503rdSGT
Guest
siegecrossbow said:
Aaaawe, cute. Finally got the plane that he wanted. He should learn Chinese and write for their magazines.
Offtopic Shenyang J-31 versus F-35 versus Gripen slanging match
Aaaawe, cute. Finally got the plane that he wanted. He should learn Chinese and write for their magazines.
1st503rdSGT said:
What's with all the hostility directed at Bill Sweetman?
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,871
- Reaction score
- 10,918
DonaldM said:
I was going to ask "are you new here?" but with 3000+ posts. . . Did you change your name? Never seen you before.
edit: Duh, "formerly known as Triton".
Suffice it to say, anybody who's followed BS for more than three seconds knows why he catches "hostility" . (I'd characterize it more as pity, disparagement, disdain, contempt, etc. but not "hostility".)
1
1st503rdSGT
Guest
Look at his avatar. It says "formerly known as Triton."sferrin said:
sferrin said:
So you disagree with Bill Sweetman pointing out that in the case of the F-35 STOVL:
Isn't this a case of shooting the messenger? Isn't the F-35 program over promising and under delivering? That the problems in the program require a lowering of expectations? I don't see any evidence that Sweetman delights in these problems.
1
1st503rdSGT
Guest
DonaldM said:
Seems like pretty weak sauce to me. I Wasn't aware that munitions had a problem with noise ; isn't it kinda loud on an external pylon anyways (maybe they'll get VA compensation)? The heat problems are news to me; either we'll hear more about it soon or he's just guessing. The bays seem to be forward of the engine's hot end to my untrained eye. As the F-35 program progresses (overbudget and behind schedule as it is), I get the impression that BS is grasping at any straw that might save his professional reputation. We'll just have to see how it all pans out; he may have the last laugh yet.
TaiidanTomcat
"A wretched hive of scum and villainy."
- Joined
- 19 July 2011
- Messages
- 857
- Reaction score
- 67
sferrin said:
My favorite was when he hoped that everyone associated with the F-35 would be terminated when the project failed.
LowObservable said:
- Joined
- 24 January 2006
- Messages
- 1,296
- Reaction score
- 373
1st503rdSGT said:
It's not necessarily so much noise as it might be vibration. Vibration can damage the electronics of weapons after prolonged exposure. I seem to remember the USN imposing "shelf-lives" on warshots carried externally, the idea being to limit the number of hours they are carried without being expended to reduce the chances of failure. One can only imagine that these issues are greaty inflamed by the Super Hornet.
- Joined
- 12 July 2008
- Messages
- 394
- Reaction score
- 131
All munitions and components have limited if in some cases very considerable flying lifespans, as well as limited storage shelf lives. One of the Sparrow missiles worked so badly in the Vietnam War was it was only rated for a single sortie! I doubt a weapon in an F-35 bay will get hotter then it would hung on an aircraft parked on blacktop in the Arabian sun.
1
1st503rdSGT
Guest
SOC said:
Frankly, I have problems understanding how being nestled in a weapons bay would be more stressful for ordnance than being stuck half-sideways on a Superhornet's pyrotechnic-laced pylon, but then I'm no engineer. Besides, the J-31's bay seems to go all the way back to the engines as well; surely a JDAM/AMRAAM-class weapon would find it even more uncomfortable between two howling RD-33s.
sferrin said:
I see. I have only been following the articles in Aviation Week and the Ares Blog. I was not aware of the identity of LowObservable.
- Joined
- 17 October 2006
- Messages
- 2,354
- Reaction score
- 988
Most if not all of the "controversy" referenced above comes from a group of SPers that you could count on the fingers of one hand.
Add in the f16.net denizens, the odd blogger, and the somewhat overlapping group of obsessive Air Power Australia detractors, and you might need both hands and a foot or two.
Add in the f16.net denizens, the odd blogger, and the somewhat overlapping group of obsessive Air Power Australia detractors, and you might need both hands and a foot or two.
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,871
- Reaction score
- 10,918
LowObservable said:
Yeah, sure. How was the trip out to the Wasp for F-35B trials? Ooooh, guess your invite was lost in the mail. One only need read Ares to see how obvious your bias is. If there's something negative to be said about the F-35 (like it got a flat tire) there'll be daily rants on it with the usual cheerleaders making an appearance (ELP & Co.). If by some miracle something positive about the F-35 appears on Ares one can't help but notice it had to be written by someone else because "Bill Sweetman" sure as hell wouldn't write it. (Though "he" won't hesitate to damn with faint praise if backed into a corner.) And dissenters are banned by Sean. Nope, no controversy at all. :
- Joined
- 2 August 2006
- Messages
- 3,203
- Reaction score
- 1,302
The simple facts are when it comes to how the F-35 program has been managed it's a freaking embarrassment. Hell, I could have built you an F-35 if I knew you were willing to not work to a budget and would just keep dumping money in until it was figured out. Or, to put it another way, if my performance at any job I've ever had was like Lockheed-Martin's has been on the F-35 I would have been fired a lot. Also, any company that has ever been contracted by us where I work <i>has been fired.</i>
Has Bill been snarky about the F-35 program? Definitely. But, unfortunately, the F-35 program keeps proving him right. Will the F-35 be a descent combat aircraft? Sure it will. But that isn't the point. The point is it will cost the rest of the Pentagon budget because it was so poorly managed and it will cost the users because it is way over the cost of what was promised and because it will be delivered very late.
My biggest concern is larger than the F-35, though. It's obvious that our aerospace corporations and military are ill equipped to manage these kind of programs or they lied to us to get us into the program to the point where we couldn't back out (LRIP). Hell, we still have a bunch of F-22's that aren't ready for prime time as well. There is something very wrong with a system that can't get us what we need at the costs promised in the time required. I don't have a problem with Bill pointing that out. In fact, I thank him for it.
Has Bill been snarky about the F-35 program? Definitely. But, unfortunately, the F-35 program keeps proving him right. Will the F-35 be a descent combat aircraft? Sure it will. But that isn't the point. The point is it will cost the rest of the Pentagon budget because it was so poorly managed and it will cost the users because it is way over the cost of what was promised and because it will be delivered very late.
My biggest concern is larger than the F-35, though. It's obvious that our aerospace corporations and military are ill equipped to manage these kind of programs or they lied to us to get us into the program to the point where we couldn't back out (LRIP). Hell, we still have a bunch of F-22's that aren't ready for prime time as well. There is something very wrong with a system that can't get us what we need at the costs promised in the time required. I don't have a problem with Bill pointing that out. In fact, I thank him for it.
- Joined
- 2 January 2006
- Messages
- 3,622
- Reaction score
- 3,687
Sorry guys ... but can You plese tell me what this pro & con, bashing and cheering the F-35 has to do with the latest news on this type ??
Please stol this or begin a seperate tread in the "Bar" !
Deino
Please stol this or begin a seperate tread in the "Bar" !
Deino
1
1st503rdSGT
Guest
Deino said:
A lot, according to Sweetman apparently. Not to worry, I'm sure the thread will move more back on topic once more articles come out. In any case, good luck stomping out all comparisons with the F-35. :
Evil Flower
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 12 October 2006
- Messages
- 223
- Reaction score
- 59
Our government should be bying this instead of sending 70 billion down the drain on Gripen NG.
1
1st503rdSGT
Guest
Evil Flower said:
Which gov is that? I can't really think of any Gripen customers the Chinese would be willing to sell their highest technology to. Besides, Gripen NG will be ready some time before the J-31 is; plus, there's that whole build quality thing that tends to matter a great deal to Gripen customers.
Evil Flower
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 12 October 2006
- Messages
- 223
- Reaction score
- 59
Which government do you think is funding Gripen NG development again? That program might well cost us a whole branch like the army or the navy, or possibly both. They persisted with it back in the 90's when it was clear it was both unaffordable and last-gen and now they're going to do the same thing again.
Btw, why wouldn't the Chinese be willing to sell their tech? Seems to me the problem is rather that Western states refuse to buy "eastern" equipment out of principle.
Btw, why wouldn't the Chinese be willing to sell their tech? Seems to me the problem is rather that Western states refuse to buy "eastern" equipment out of principle.
1
1st503rdSGT
Guest
Evil Flower said:
Here's hoping. I'm sure the US and Europe would be absolutely thrilled if the Swedes canceled NG and were able to buy the J-31. We'd have one less competitor and an intelligence goldmine to boot. ;D
Ok, time to be serious. It is well-noted that China and Russia aren't picky about arms exports, but even they wouldn't be so dense as to sell absolute top-of-the-line to close allies of NATO/America. As for not buying eastern equipment out of principal, I'm pretty sure it has more to do with the principal of "does it actually work" rather than high-minded ideology.
Who'll be the J-31's first export customer? My bet's on Pakistan, but that's probably 15-20 years off and a lot can change in two decades.
Evil Flower
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 12 October 2006
- Messages
- 223
- Reaction score
- 59
What good is developing and procuring a new fighter of marginally superior capability (which is still inferior to 5th gen fighters) if it costs the entire capability to conduct operations on land or at sea? The navy doesn't even have full weapons capability on the Visby corvettes even after 10 years of service due to inadequate funding, ffs. Gripen itself was too expensive to procure already back in the 80's and has never been anything other than an attempt to prop up indigenous design capability in the case of SAAB. Not much of an export success story when each deal comes with counter-investment deals etc that cost more than the sold planes.
1
1st503rdSGT
Guest
Evil Flower said:
Sweden's longstanding tradition of designing fighters to match the world's best has indeed become somewhat impractical of late, but I've always been impressed with the Gripen. If costs and capability were everyone's only concerns in fighter procurement, the Gripen would have a lot more customers by now IMO.
Unfortunately, geopolitical realities are what they are, and Sweden isn't going to get the J-31. Besides, wouldn't the F-35B better suit the Flygvapnet's style anyways?
- Joined
- 24 January 2006
- Messages
- 1,296
- Reaction score
- 373
sferrin said:
Say what now? I don't ban anybody, I just try not to make a total mess of things when I merge threads and delete spam. If this is power that I have to be yielding and it has slipped my attention, well, WTF is wrong with me? ;D
Evil Flower said:
Really?
- Joined
- 24 January 2006
- Messages
- 1,296
- Reaction score
- 373
Evil Flower said:
Yeah, because things like existing logistical support, combat-proven systems (in a good way), communications and systems interoperability, and political relations...they never play a part in any procurement decision.
If all things above were equal, Patriot would have exactly zero export clients.
As an example, the Greeks got ahold of some S-300PMU-1 batteries due to Irrational Fit #3495. Their main complaint with the systems is that they can't talk effectively to the Greek NATO-standard air defense infrastructure.
- Joined
- 17 October 2006
- Messages
- 2,354
- Reaction score
- 988
SOC - Mr Angry is referring to a different blog and a different Sean - to whom he owes a massive apology, because (as usual) he's making stuff up. I don't expect any such apology because that is not the stuff he is made of.
There have been people banned from Ares, but for persistently breaking rules against ad hominem attacks, after multiple warnings. If people were banned for dissent it would be very quiet there.
There have been people banned from Ares, but for persistently breaking rules against ad hominem attacks, after multiple warnings. If people were banned for dissent it would be very quiet there.
1
1st503rdSGT
Guest
LowObservable said:
Had a look just for $hits and giggles. Seems it actually is pretty quiet over there. Most of the posts have 0 comments, and almost all have fewer than 5.
TaiidanTomcat
"A wretched hive of scum and villainy."
- Joined
- 19 July 2011
- Messages
- 857
- Reaction score
- 67
LowObservable said:
Its just those people who disagree with you... oh and:
lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Bae, Pratt and Whitney, most US states senators and congressman, the entire federal government, the DoD the USMC, USN, USAF, UK, Australia, Japan, Italy, and multiple international partners.
Other than that small group though. most people think the F-35 is a bust
Its too bad the F-35 doesn't come down to a vote on Secret Projects Bill, because you would certainly win. But in the mean time, the real world has other ideas.
TaiidanTomcat
"A wretched hive of scum and villainy."
- Joined
- 19 July 2011
- Messages
- 857
- Reaction score
- 67
Welcome to the wonderful world of military/government procurement. You must be new here.
Really because I think its 180 the other way
I really don't know why we are crusading against the F-35 symptom rather than the procurement disease then. I think a lot of people mix those things up.
Evil Flower
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 12 October 2006
- Messages
- 223
- Reaction score
- 59
When the only real competition takes place before the contract is awarded, the contractor has little incentive to do the job on time or on budget.
Avimimus
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 15 December 2007
- Messages
- 2,274
- Reaction score
- 581
Quite frankly the J-31 has won a major victory:
- It is acknowledged that F-35 data was badly compromised
- China is well known for reverse engineering (inappropriately)
- It looks vaguely like the F-35...
Conclusion to the relatively uninformed observer: China has a simplified F-35 in service. Therefore, the F-35's technical edge is dubious. Therefore, we should invest in a new, more expensive 6 gen project.
Which works out well for Lockheed Martin's future employment...
- It is acknowledged that F-35 data was badly compromised
- China is well known for reverse engineering (inappropriately)
- It looks vaguely like the F-35...
Conclusion to the relatively uninformed observer: China has a simplified F-35 in service. Therefore, the F-35's technical edge is dubious. Therefore, we should invest in a new, more expensive 6 gen project.
Which works out well for Lockheed Martin's future employment...
- Joined
- 4 May 2008
- Messages
- 2,439
- Reaction score
- 733
Avimimus said:Quite frankly the J-31 has won a major victory:
- It is acknowledged that F-35 data was badly compromised
- China is well known for reverse engineering (inappropriately)
- It looks vaguely like the F-35...
Conclusion to the relatively uninformed observer: China has a simplified F-35 in service. Therefore, the F-35's technical edge is dubious. Therefore, we should invest in a new, more expensive 6 gen project.
Which works out well for Lockheed Martin's future employment...
If anything China seems at least to manage shorter development time - at least to first flight. That in itself is not bad.
TaiidanTomcat
"A wretched hive of scum and villainy."
- Joined
- 19 July 2011
- Messages
- 857
- Reaction score
- 67
AeroFranz said:Avimimus said:Quite frankly the J-31 has won a major victory:
- It is acknowledged that F-35 data was badly compromised
- China is well known for reverse engineering (inappropriately)
- It looks vaguely like the F-35...
Conclusion to the relatively uninformed observer: China has a simplified F-35 in service. Therefore, the F-35's technical edge is dubious. Therefore, we should invest in a new, more expensive 6 gen project.
Which works out well for Lockheed Martin's future employment...
If anything China seems at least to manage shorter development time - at least to first flight. That in itself is not bad.
Typically the kid that cheats off the kid who studied doesn't waste as much time studying.
I think this is why cheating is so popular in general, along with theft, and general corner cutting.
sigh why do 'we' always have too assume the 'other side' has been 'cheating' or creating derivative designs, a typical response unfortunately seen in more and more defence forums (id once hoped 'sp' would have been a bit more mature but alas the usual suspects never fail to denegrade and drown out the majority)
Have some of you not heard of convergent design evolution, and configuration design trends, of course we should expect similarities, i have seen the same over decades of aircraft development, its not dodgy copying or anything suspect, merly normal development
maybe the issue here really is that another state has the ability to work quickly and get designs to a prototyping stage quicker than we seem able to
I recall the dismissive comments when the new Sukhoi T.50 was first unveiled as again 'derivative' (yawn) ok maybe it was developed as a response to a percieved design threat hence configurally similar, but it is very much Sukhoi's own design and definately not a warmed over (and improved) F.22
cheers, Joe
just a thought, if 'we' were seen to be a bit more 'open' im sure we would have more site contributing members from the countries we usually dismiss (eg. the Iranian aircraft development thread) ... just a thought
Have some of you not heard of convergent design evolution, and configuration design trends, of course we should expect similarities, i have seen the same over decades of aircraft development, its not dodgy copying or anything suspect, merly normal development
maybe the issue here really is that another state has the ability to work quickly and get designs to a prototyping stage quicker than we seem able to
I recall the dismissive comments when the new Sukhoi T.50 was first unveiled as again 'derivative' (yawn) ok maybe it was developed as a response to a percieved design threat hence configurally similar, but it is very much Sukhoi's own design and definately not a warmed over (and improved) F.22
cheers, Joe
just a thought, if 'we' were seen to be a bit more 'open' im sure we would have more site contributing members from the countries we usually dismiss (eg. the Iranian aircraft development thread) ... just a thought
Similar threads
-
-
-
Lockheed Martin SeaMax multi-mission seaplane
- Started by Triton
- Replies: 2
-
-
Mystery Aircraft from Area 51? - from Ares Defense Technology Blog- Started by bobbymike
- Replies: 9