Posted on 09/17/2015 2:14:46 PM PDT by pabianice
“Bet some of these would work... “
Are you kidding!!?? Those cost too much money! /sarc
This is what happens when the Marines want their "jump jet" in an Air Superiority Fighter design, which takes an engine the size of a compact car along for the ride. They never got over the Battle of Guadalcanal, and they never wanted to admit that the Harrier was a piece of $%^&. They also never wanted to admit that the "jump jet" tactical concept has never worked.
I am an Aerospace Engineer and former military pilot, and I knew from the very beginning this program was doomed.
The reason this catastrophe went through was because of Congress ineptitude, jobs in Districts, cowardice, and stupidity.
Anyone still defending this flying piano either has a job associated with Lockheed Martin, has stock in the company or related stock, has their career married to this sham, or is brain synapse challenged.
My SIL works on the lift fan...well the money’s good...;-)
Bravo to your most excellent post, sir, and thank you for your service!
“But the Pentagon’s top weapons tester said in a report in July that the exercise was so flawed that it “was not an operational test... in either a formal or informal sense of the term.” Furthermore, the test “did not — and could not — demonstrate” that the version of the F-35 that was evaluated “is ready for real-world operational deployments, given the way the event was structured.” “
This says the test procedures and structure did not measure up. This does not say the aircraft was found deficient. If you test a car going 25mph in a parking lot and then declare it ready for NASCAR that would be a poor test. However that does not mean the car itself was to blame.
There ya go! Scrapped just when the airframe was coming into its own.
Stupid.
“I knew from the very beginning this program was doomed.”
So you admit you were biased since before there was anything concrete to be biased about yet you accuse others of bias in the next breath. Way to blow all credibility. There are plenty of engineers and pilots that disagree with you.
Oh, give me a break. ANY modern fighter would lose in that situation. In WWII faster planes sometimes had a hard time shooting down the oldest and slowest biplanes because of the speed difference. The slower you go the tighter you can turn (in general) and a jet simply can’t go as slow as the top speed of a WWI biplane. Those things turn on a dime.
Were the JSF to be built by another company, Lockheed Martin would have fought much harder to keep F-22 production going, and we would have ended up with may more of them.
But in any case, Lockheed Martin is also still producing F-16s and C-130Js, so it's not as if they would have starved if the F-35 wasn't awarded to them.
Besides, have you seen the X-32 that Boeing submitted? It couldn't even complete all of the flyoff trials properly. The X-35 looked like a champ in comparison. If the F-35 is having development issues, I shudder to think about how poorly the F-32 would have gone.
LOL! Nice pic. Funny thing is; even though the F4 was considered a flying brick, it at least had the power to make it work.
Ya know, I’m just a lowly civilian, but from what I can see, and read, man I’m pissed. For all that money they’ve spent thus far, we could have us quite a few more F22s that would own the sky. Then all this other crap with the 35 wouldn’t have mattered.
Scrapping the A10 in favor of the 35 is just plane (sic) insanity. IMHO.
You know, testing a 35 against the 16 in three dimensional space is not a parking lot. Sorry, I don’t buy your analogy.
One report I read from a 35 pilot, said the AC was energy deficient in “every engagement”!
The 16 is a 70’s era AC. Come on!
Wow. You are dead on. Either you have inside info or you are very observant.
Not to mention the F35 is a thing of beauty compared to the unbelievable design choices they made on the X32. UGLY. And the old ‘if it looks right it flies right’ does apply.
I’m sad the F35 has been so slow and costly. I’m also sad NASA is now delaying Orion launch too. America is paying good money for this stuff but these companies are not performing. NASA does need more money though and it would probably be much faster. The military spending is there but there’s just so much waste.
God Bless you sir. May He bless you.
"A group of Internet aviation fans once debated the subject of the worst fighter of World War II. Their hands-down favorite: the Brewster Buffalo. Two books are titled The World’s Worst Aircraft. The Buffalo is the only fighter from any era to have a chapter in both of them.
The Royal Air Force fobbed the Brewster fighter onto the Fleet Air Arm and British Commonwealth squadrons; the U.S. Navy gave it to the Marines. Pilots thought it was a sweet plane to fly, but noticed that the wheel struts sometimes broke, that the engine leaked oil, and that the guns sometimes didn’t fire. And when they flew it against the nimble fighters of Japan, too often they didn’t come back.
Yet all the while, the Finns tore great holes through the Russian air force with essentially the same plane. The Buffalo’s problems began with its manufacturer. In 1932, an aeronautical engineer named James Work paid $30,000 for the aircraft division of Brewster & Co., a firm that over the years had built horse-drawn buggies, auto bodies, and aircraft assemblies, but now did little more than represent Rolls-Royce in the United States. Jimmy Work was a balding man with soulful eyes, a gentle smile, and a good suit. You might have picked him to manage your retirement account – probably not the best idea you’d ever have. Serving as president of Brewster Aeronautical, he hired himself as a consultant and leased a factory from himself. Double-dipping in this fashion, he landed contracts for seaplane floats and wing panels, mostly for the Grumman company, the preeminent builder of warplanes for the U.S. Navy.
But what Jimmy Work really wanted to do was build planes on his own account.
Boeing wound up redesigning the front intake and the way the hover worked but didnt have time to do the trials with it.
I just remember the LM guys in the video documenting the xplane basically saying they were going to be in trouble if LM didnt get the contract. Face it Boeing had a lot less to lose than Lockheed Martin.
Congress gave Boeing the commercial (and military after they pitched a 3 yr old political hissy fit about the replacement for the KC-135) business, and Lockheed Martin the military business. Lockheed absorbed or destroyed every other legitimate competitor out there through political means.
They also lost the delta wing plan for a more conventional wing and tail in their final proposal submission, but never built an example. I don't think it would have helped.
Oh, give me a break. ANY modern fighter would lose in that situation. In WWII faster planes sometimes had a hard time shooting down the oldest and slowest biplanes because of the speed difference.
Why not.. some bi-planes with modern avionics and weapons..
be like trying to swat a mosquitoe.. with air to air rockets.. for perimeter watch dogs.. and some A-10’s for backup..
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.