Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

More Fighter than Pilot
National Review Online ^ | January 15, 2007 | W. Thomas Smith Jr.

Posted on 01/15/2007 6:09:17 AM PST by AlbertoMG

merica’s brand-new F-35 Lightning II is currently undergoing a series of tests over Fort Worth, Texas. The third flight on Wednesday tested the aircraft at 23,000 feet, the highest altitude the aircraft has ever been. And this week, Lockheed Martin’s chief test pilot Jon Beesley — the only man on the planet to have flown the F-35 — plans to take the jet even higher. The F-35 is not the first fighter ever tested by Beesley, a 56-year-old former Air Force officer and grandfather of six. He also is the second man in the world to fly the Air Force’s latest air supremacy fighter, the F-22 Raptor (designed to replace the F-15 Eagle). And he was one of the first to fly the now aging F-117 Nighthawk (the world’s “first operational stealth aircraft”).

(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: aircraft; fighter; military; war
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

1 posted on 01/15/2007 6:09:21 AM PST by AlbertoMG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Aeronaut

Ping.


2 posted on 01/15/2007 6:15:18 AM PST by AntiKev ("No damage. The world's still turning isn't it?" - Stereo Goes Stellar - Blow Me A Holloway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
Ping.

Interesting comments from Beesley in this article regarding flying and thinking, and thinking while flying.

3 posted on 01/15/2007 6:17:51 AM PST by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AntiKev

Jon Beesley is also the head of the local Morman Church in Fort Worth.


4 posted on 01/15/2007 6:45:14 AM PST by TexPride
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AlbertoMG

Was this the JSF project, that was finally designated with an "F" series number???

I bet someone along the way, had to do some serious arm-twisting to get the Navy to sign off on a single engine aircraft again...but if it performs, I can't see an aviator gripe-ing too much about it...


5 posted on 01/15/2007 6:49:32 AM PST by stevie_d_64 (Houston Area Texans (I've always been hated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlbertoMG

Mr. Beesley has one of the best jobs on the planet. I bet he goes to work every day with a smile on his face.


6 posted on 01/15/2007 6:50:34 AM PST by Spruce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlbertoMG

I can see replacing the the other planes, but why would you want to replace a low cost A-10 ground attack plane with one the costs $45 Mill per copy?


7 posted on 01/15/2007 6:59:41 AM PST by F-117A (Who is Jamil Hussein?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rokke
Thanks for the ping. I don't really know what to think of those comments. On one hand I guess he is correct, but we are already seeing in the Hornet a decline in airmanship with these point and shoot fighters. The computer doesn't know how or why to wind up a guy or kick rudder/boards in a high reversal. I don't know if I like his attitude. I want the pilot to be thinking about FLYING all the time, and about fighting when the time comes.
8 posted on 01/15/2007 7:01:30 AM PST by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AlbertoMG
But it is the first-ever aircraft designed to replace four existing aircraft from three services.

I think the F-111 may have been first. Hope the F-35 does a better job of it.

9 posted on 01/15/2007 7:10:10 AM PST by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AntiKev; Tijeras_Slim; FireTrack; Pukin Dog; citabria; B Knotts; kilowhskey; cyphergirl; ...

10 posted on 01/15/2007 7:41:26 AM PST by Aeronaut (Hebrews 13:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AlbertoMG

The keyword "AEROSPACE" has been added to this post.

I wouldn't say that Beesley is the first to fly the F-35, since this is still a pre-production prototype, not a production airframe. It's very close, though. It is the overweight airframe, and has only a fraction of the avionics slated for the F-35.

The first "true" production model will be the F-35B that is currently in producion. It has all of the weight saving measures built into the airframe, and will also have most of the produciton avionics installed.


11 posted on 01/15/2007 8:10:05 AM PST by Yo-Yo (USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stevie_d_64

The Navy has had single engine aircraft in the past. The F-8 Crusader (a name that should be returned to the inventory!) and the A-4 Skyhawk to name two.

It wasn't until the F/A-18 that the Navy said that two engines were better than one. Before that, two engines had more thrust than one, which is why the F-14 was a twin engine aircraft.

A-4 Intruder was also a twin enging design, but it was a non-afterburning aircraft so I can't say that the Navy purposely chose a twin design for safety vs. thrust.



12 posted on 01/15/2007 8:17:13 AM PST by Yo-Yo (USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Aeronaut

aviation ping, please.


13 posted on 01/15/2007 8:20:21 AM PST by jmcenanly (Do not handicap your children by making their lives easy. -- Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: decimon

Nope, the F-111 was designed to replace aircraft from two branches, the USAF and USN. The F-111 was never slated for use by the USMC.

The F-111 was a fine tactical strike aircraft, and a lousy dog fighter, which is why the Navy rejected the F-111B. Grumman learned from the F-111's shortcomings and applied lessons learned to the F-14, a very sweet plane indeed.

The A-10 will never be replaced by the F-35. The A-10 might eventually be replaced by a UAV, however.


14 posted on 01/15/2007 8:20:48 AM PST by Yo-Yo (USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jmcenanly
aviation ping, please.

See #10.

15 posted on 01/15/2007 8:33:53 AM PST by Aeronaut (Hebrews 13:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

Flight of the Intruder (1991)
Directed by
John Milius

Writing credits (WGA)
Stephen Coonts (novel)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099587/

Lt. Jake Grafton: "Fighter pukes make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY!"


16 posted on 01/15/2007 8:44:19 AM PST by Valin (History takes time. It is not an instant thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
A-4 Intruder was also a twin enging design, but it was a non-afterburning aircraft so I can't say that the Navy purposely chose a twin design for safety vs. thrust.

I can't say either, but it sounds reasonable from a survivability point of view, to have a low flying attack bomber with two engines in case one gets hit.

17 posted on 01/15/2007 8:44:30 AM PST by AFreeBird (If American "cowboy diplomacy" did not exist, it would be necessary to invent it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Valin

I liked the book much better.

I also had the video game for the Amiga. That was so darn confusing and complicated to play on such a slow (by today's standards) computer.

The movie was good, too, but they had to throw a lot out from the book, as always.


18 posted on 01/15/2007 8:49:20 AM PST by Yo-Yo (USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird

I have to agree. Count the number of engines on the A-10.


19 posted on 01/15/2007 8:55:07 AM PST by Yo-Yo (USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

Yep...Very familiar with those airframes...

I forget who it was that championed the twin engined specifications for future Navy aircraft (at the time), but I can see where the technology, performance and ease of maintenance crowd has successfully, (and rightfully so), woo'd the brown shoes...

I think those Marines are going to like this thing!!!

I personally don't care that it looks kinda funny...There still is no foreign airforce that can match us anyway...


20 posted on 01/15/2007 9:20:50 AM PST by stevie_d_64 (Houston Area Texans (I've always been hated))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson