No, that's the civilian version. They mean the military version, like this:
Posted on 10/18/2017 2:28:39 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler
https://www.f35.com/about/history
“In 1997, Lockheed Martin was selected as one of two companies to participate in the Joint Strike Fighter concept demonstration phase. In October 2001, the Lockheed Martin X-35 was chosen as the winner of the competition and teamed with Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems to begin production.
The first production F-35A rolled out of the assembly in Fort Worth, Texas, in February of 2006. “
20 years and still not deployed.
Haha, that’s an awesome shot — my friend’s family had one in late 70s’ - truly one of the worst cars I’ve ever driven.
No, that's the civilian version. They mean the military version, like this:
The major point of delay on the F35 program has been spent developing the software, not perfecting the hardware. What advantages the F35 has are largely due it’s advanced avionics, sensors, and other applications that are software driven. Changing to a new platform will not lessen the software development effort, unless some of the existing software for the F35 could be reused.
Should have gone with the YF-23.
Simplicate...?
Not likely. The F35 has problems, but most of them are likely due to political constraints, such as allowing foreign companies (BAE, etc) to participate in this software task.
The P51 was a great aircraft, but try to land it on a carrier.
Never mind how well it worked out for CAS missions. Turns out you’d end up needing a Mustang II, Hellcat II, and Thunderbolt III, or some such combination. Would that save money? Probably not at this point.
I won’t claim to know the answers, but my experiences in the evil MIC have taught me a great deal of cynicism.
My cynicism tells me that articles like this likely really only need one tagline: St. Louis.
They had their chance, and the produced a prototype that only a guppy could love, or maybe their CEO.
So, the ball is in LM’s court, and maybe they’ve dropped the ball a time or three. Thing is, this kind of stuff is the same stuff we heard about the F22, and now everybody is wishing we’d bought the full order. It’s also the same thing we heard about the M1, the F14, the F15, the F16, etc. etc. etc. It never changes.
Remember Chuck Yeager and the F20 Tigershark? Yeah, that one went a long way too.
...
(Disclaimer: Don’t work in Fort Worth no more.)
Wait nine years and it will be completely unnecessary. By 2026, air superiority, fleet defense, and close support will be jobs done best by RPVs and semi-autonomous drones.
The plane they really want to resurrect is the P-47 Thunderbolt. You could shoot cylinders off it's engine and it would keep on flying.
Imagine that, A-10 Thunderbolt IIs being replace by P-47 Thunderbolts.
Synonym of simplificate.
Antonym of complificate.
The advantages of the P-51, as I am given to a understand them, were in CAP at high altitudes. In CAS its liquid cooling was a vulnerability. CAS was more of a role for a rugged battle wagon like the P-47. It is no accident that the official name for the A-10 is Thunderbolt II.
The environments that the air to air and air to mud fighters operate in are very different. I don’t believe one platform can ever adequately span the gap.
“20 years and still not deployed.”
You must not have looked very close at the site you liked. Look again and ready the stories about the operational F-35 squadrons.
Here is a list for ya.
https://www.f35.com/about/who-is-flying
The Air Force declared their first combat ready squadron over a year ago. Do we have to start another war before you are happy to call them ‘deployed’?
“I don’t believe one platform can ever adequately span the gap.”
The First P-51 (family) planes deployed were dive bombers. It took lots of mods and new engine before they were useful in the CAP role. Heck it is a TERRIBLE example of a development if you are trying to argue for something where everything went smooth and the initial idea was a success right away. At least the F-35 does not need a whole new engine before it can get the job done.
26+ years as a USAF Control Tower Air Traffic Controller/Watch Supervisor, and 5 years time in the FAA, has taught me that the future of combat fighters is in UNMANNED COMBAT AERIAL VEHICLES (drones), and yes, d they can be recalled.,br>
This is another way for the FAILED F-35 politicians to try to save their political carriers at home by repurposing all those useless F-35 parts.
The Chinese are going to do this, and if we rush in to them all "Tally Ho!" with the "Knights of the sky" (typical Air Force pilots and Navy Aviators) attitude, the Chinese drone swarms are going to take us out like the English long bowmen did to French heavy armored knights at Agincourt.
As long as the USA is the leader in this type of technology, we're safe. WATCH the enemies and adversaries!
The days of manned aircraft are coming to an end, whether we like it or not.
* I know, SkyNet. But if we don't our enemies will.
” Embodying the spirit of the P-51 Mustang, the best and most important fighter of the Second World War, the F-45 Mustang II, our new air-superiority fighter, will cost less than the newest version of the multi-role F-16 Viper.”
This dude is smoking something. The only way to achieve this is to make the plane with zero software and there for zero avionics. Anyone that knows jack about modern fighters knows most of the capability comes from the computing systems and not the airframe. The flight envelope is only on par with most 4th generation fighters.
” vendor-independent fighter-design team led by actual fighter pilots,”
HAH!!!!
Yeah get a team of guys that know how to fly but don’t know jack about building jack and you are SURE to get a cheap simple plane... HAH! Funniest thing I have heard in weeks.
Don’t worry about our drones. While the F-35 gets all the press we are... well never mind ;D
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.