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

To: ez2muz
I'm not privy to the fuel situation; is this a product of being overweight or poor engine performance?

The engine is a monster. Very powerful and efficient. Take a look at the airframe; notice that there is almost no room for gas. That big engine, while efficient as it gets, still sucks gas like all big turbofans, which is considerable.

What you have here is the Harrier fiasco all over again. Some jokers in the Pentagon fall in love with STOL, regardless of the fact that there is no tactical advantage to be gained. It just has a "cool factor", which does not hold up under combat conditions. The survivability rate for the Harrier (and I believe is also true of the JSF) is terrible, to the point where one could argue that you could bring down a Harrier with a well placed rock.

JSF is a nice air-show airplane. When you hang heavy ordinance on it and fill a couple of wing tanks, it becomes a single-engine slug, looking for a mission.

40 posted on 09/15/2004 3:59:08 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]


To: Pukin Dog
The survivability rate for the Harrier (and I believe is also true of the JSF) is terrible

50% and one of my mentors is a 50%er.

43 posted on 09/15/2004 4:03:51 PM PDT by Archangelsk (Plain, simple soldier. Nothing more, nothing less.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

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