Clark Griswold

The view from the other side, uniformed arguments against a LAAR: https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2017/03/06/air-force-light-fighter-concept-seems-a-bit-light-on-logic/2/#2ccc4a4d478b Posted only to show the if the AF is serious about this, making persuasive arguments that inform and dispel ideas like a LAAR is completely helpless against MANPADs / AAA and that it makes a whole lotta sense for fights in semi-governed shitholes, is going to be necessary.

F-16ski https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-33

Ditto on both points. When I saw it, I had to do super thorough research and Google it one more time to see if it was for reals. What struck me was the width of the contraption, 111' center of fuselage to center of fuselage, probably 140' from one outer truck to the other. Doubt it could even turn on the ground when loaded with the STS, whole kit or just the orbiter, but they probably imagined it being loaded on whatever runway the shuttle landed then flying either direct as it probably would hold shit load of gas, probably could be AR'd to keep heading back direct to Florida with no fuel stops. Lots of possibilities but lots of stuff to go wrong, KISS is usually the best COA.

Twin C=5 fuselage Space Shuttle carrier https://hushkit.net/2016/05/06/the-twin-fuselage-c-5-shuttle-transport/

Yup - there was an EasyJet (LCC in Europe) who proposed an advanced design a few years ago and wanted to shave a lot of weight off the design and coupled with open rotor engines https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2007/jun/14/theairlineindustry.business BWB is cool but I think the Hybrid wing-body design from NASA for their Cruise Efficient STOL airliner is more feasible, IMO. https://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2013-06/future-flight-new-designs-will-end-congestion

They're working on some new planes: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-airline-support-gathers-around-boeing-mom-434961/ and there's the Frigate EcoJet is a pretty big change in the paradigm. https://www.cnn.com/2016/02/09/aviation/frigate-ecojet-russia-aviation/

F-35 - YF-23 mash up:

Just seems like extending your jaw for a left hook of a contract award protest if Textron is awarded a contract. It's ready made for a company to protest and launch a media campaign against. With our infotainment oriented journalism these days how long before Textron is under the microscope / segment on name your cable commentary show with "Grinds my Gears" diatribe? An opportunistic Congressman who just happens to be from FL could royally f up a legitimate but outwardly suspicious acquisition decision and we end up with no toys and rotten egg (again) on our face.

Possibly (screwed themselves) but the sins of the mother don't follow the son. Scorpion is still the best of the lot. We're buying the jet not the company - even if Skeletor worked there, it would still be the right aircraft. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

4 engines are still cool - like this one: https://m.aviationweek.com/blog/a380-meets-tu-95-regional-widebody Surprised theres been no suggestion of civilian airliner using the A400's Europrops Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just meant the F-35XL Put the AC GE motor in an F-35XL, probably 1000 NM combat radius if the new wing could hold 20% + fuel Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

2 Developing that technology would be ideal but as you said, it may be better to just upgrade to the new hotness rather than wind up with a motley fleet and the cost / logistics of maintaining two engine types. If GE's numbers are realistic for AC engine then it would be worth at least testing IRL on a F-35 test aircraft. 35% increase in range (from GE site), cut in half to 17.5% for an increase in combat radius and that's another 130+ NM for the A model in an air to air config (760 NM to 893 NM just using LM's public numbers) - serious improvement. American needs to get back into the X-plane business and/or at least pushing the envelope again in aircraft performance with existing designs, this would be a good project to develop a 5th gen with extreme combat radius capability if only for investigation/demonstration.

Because... airplanes. Saw this concept... ...and wondered with the advantages of V-tails for speed/drag, why not in airliners (yet)?

Textron hires the former SECAF https://www.defensenews.com/articles/textron-appoints-former-secretary-of-the-air-force-to-board-of-directors Helps or hinders getting a Scorpion or AT-6B? Ready made conflict of interest problem if selected?

Something went terribly wrong in the lab...

Engine upgrade proposal: https://www.defensenews.com/articles/pratt-whitney-pitches-new-f-35-engine-upgrade

X-29 and Su-47 videos. We need a FSW fighter, because.... we need one. Anyway, enjoy:

Kung Fu master uses his penis to pull enormous HELICOPTER in latest bizarre world record Really? Couldn't you just use the Swedish pump?

Your welcome and good points. I don't agree with his idea of shortening SUPT as the pilots tracking to OA-X would (wrongly) be treated as second class aviators I suspect. I don't have a problem with maybe giving them a focused / slightly shorter Advanced Trainer phase if a slightly longer primary phase that is fused with some IQT / MQT for OA-X can be had. They need the same minimum hours / training everyone else gets, it is just they could possible get a bit more done in primary along with some work towards their OA-X Qual. This assumes (as I suspect the author of the article implied that OA-X if it happens is the AT-6B). The more interesting idea would be for studs to do primary in the T-6 and then do their advanced phase in Scorpion (in a trainer configuration) then go to a shorter MQT phase in Scorpion as they now have their wings and IQT in Scorpion also.

Another idea for OA-X https://warontherocks.com/2017/05/field-of-dreams Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe, but as the software develops and is updated, the 35 will get a bit sportier I suspect. The aircraft with the operational software load is not a pig according to the OT&E community, referencing the article from the Norwegian test pilot here. It's just different than a Viper/Hornet/Harrier and will need the TTPs developed to fight accordingly in the WVR arena. Probably not as maneuverable as a Viper with the GE engine but with LO, sensor fusion, good maneuverability and an HMD with high off foresight weapons, it's setup for success. Not that my rantings on BO.net add up to anything but I've come to accept the F-35 as a large part of the future of the USAF and likely the AFs of many of our Allies, hating on it reflexively is pointless, it is done. Embrace it and try to improve because we have bet the farm on it. Break - Break Might get another partner in the program: Germany asks U.S. for classified briefing on Lockheed's F-35 fighter

Yup - doubt it would be a BFM beast but with that extra gas it could probably keep up the speed to get out of a bad situation

But if you built the 35XL to meet the A-X requirement you get the economy of scale with the already existing F-35 program, while getting a 5th gen LO attack platform capable of self-escort / defense. There was a push for an FB-22 but as the 22 line has sunset and there is no realistic way to restart it without a metric shit ton of money, getting an FB-35XL is in the realm of the possible IMO. With the increased wing / fuel, you probably could get a 1000+ NM combat radius depending on mission profile on internal fuel alone, this is the capability 5th gen strike aircraft have been needing, particularly considering A2AD / Pacific operations.

Just vaporware but an interesting idea ala the never realized F-16XL, an F-35XL. Not sure if the A or C model would be easier for this mod (or any) but a new bigger wing to hold all the gas and give the 35 a new internal weapons bay. and another with the cranked wing Think in lieu of a clean sheet A-X, this XL variant would fill that role.