F-35 Lightning info

[Danny Noonin]

Why do you think I said rhetorical question and left it at that? Dude, relax a bit

I have no idea why you said "rhetorical question" and I'm quite relaxed, thank you. I just have a problem with you accusing everyone else of scoffing the F-35 based on "the news, op ed pieces, the Air Force Crimes, WOMs heard at the bar, etc?", then implying that you have some great inside info to contradict that stuff, when it's quite clear that you do not have good info.

If you are in fact publicly defending the complete list of F-35 capes listed in your example above (range, payload, acceleration, maneuverability & current sensor maturity/effectiveness) then you are in the street. Some of that stuff sucks. Big time.

Someday, with enough money and cost overruns against this too-big-to-fail program, LM will solve most of the code problems and the sensors/avionics will work okay. But the airframe issues and limitations mean this will never be a particularly awesome jet.

Edited March 30, 2012 by Danny Noonin

[Guest]

Holy shit. How much do YOU know about the aircraft? You know any of the pilots? You know any of the guys working the program? Do you know anything beyond a Secret *proposed* capes brief, built by the blue kool aid brigade or Lockheed?

If you knew anything real about this airplane, the program, the problems with it, etc, you would be shutting the fuck up right now.

2

[brabus]

I just have a problem with you accusing everyone else of scoffing the F-35 based on "the news, op ed pieces, the Air Force Crimes, WOMs heard at the bar, etc?", then implying that you have some great inside info to contradict that stuff, when it's quite clear that you do not have good info.

You inferred incorrectly...I absolutely was not accusing anyone (except for the author of that article) of scoffing the program based on XYZ. It was an honest question to falling. I never said I have some great know-all info about the intricacies of the program, but I (along with many other people) know a little more than whatever some people are reading out there.

Some of that stuff sucks. Big time.

Someday, with enough money and cost overruns against this too-big-to-fail program, LM will solve most of the code problems and the sensors/avionics will work okay.

There's some HUGE problems in this bastardized DT/OT phase. There's some super fucked up stuff that isn't even close to what it should be. I think we're on the same page, the difference is you are arguing from the standpoint of what the program currently is and I'm arguing from the standpoint of what it should (will???) be in a few years. I admit I may be way overly optimistic and I'll call a spade a spade if we get a half-assed shit pie 5 years down the road. The reason I think there's a chance of the "promised capes" working is because of what you said: the DoD has created a too-big-to-fail program and LM will most likely solve the majority of the issues.

This sidebar as reached its max limit on the internets...

Edited March 31, 2012 by brabus

[Guest]

There's some HUGE problems in this bastardized DT/OT phase.

Aren't you still a wingman? Now you're an expert on DT/OT?

This sidebar as reached its max limit on the internets...

Nice dismount...taking a shot while rocking your wings.

"US@6? Impossible. Must've been an early cart. Oh well, let's move on."

[di1630]

The F-35 is a turd. looks good on PPT compared to legacy when the scenario is opposed AI with double digit SAMs. Will be a step back in CAS capes and any non BVR A/A engagement (They still do not have a way to carry Aim-9 without giving up stealth from what I hear since it must be mounted externally). Wait til a bird down the engine takes out the first $145M JSF. Another example of leadership failure on many levels from the politicians to the generals.

[Bobby]

"US@6? Impossible. Must've been an early cart. Oh well, let's move on."

Aaaah, the dreaded early cart...I hate when that happens!

[Danny Noonin]

You inferred incorrectly...I absolutely was not accusing anyone (except for the author of that article) of scoffing the program based on XYZ.

So you were accusing only the author--a civilian--of gathering all of his mis-information from among other things in the "AF crimes" and..."WOMs in the bar"??? You weren't accusing anyone else? Really? Do you know a lot of authors that hang around fighter bars asking questions about airplanes that are still in test?

Care to revise your bullshit story?

[brabus]

Aren't you still a wingman? Now you're an expert on DT/OT?

Nope, but thanks for asking. Right, I said I was an expert on DT/OT. Care to put any more words in my mouth?

Nice dismount...taking a shot while rocking your wings.

Noted...I've got nothing left to argue on the internet and I'm done. Think what you want, I don't care.

So you were accusing only the author--a civilian--of gathering all of his mis-information from among other things in the "AF crimes" and..."WOMs in the bar"??? You weren't accusing anyone else? Really? Do you know a lot of authors that hang around fighter bars asking questions about airplanes that are still in test?

Copy, you know what I'm thinking, but I don't. Sure, that makes sense. That author is not the only dude, but since you seem to be fixated on my one honest question to Falling...no, I absolutely was not accusing him of anything.

[FallingOsh]

It was an honest question to falling.

An honest RHETORICAL question, mitch.

Actually mine was an honest question to you. I didn't intend to start a flaming of you or the -35. I just wonder what you see in her that none of us do. Like that chick who might turn out ok after a diet and a gym membership, but that's a lot of maybes and wishful thinking while she continues to shove footlong chili dogs down her gullet two at a time.

Maybe she's pretty on the inside. Auto piddle packs, Rip It holder, Shiatsu massage chair. Could be neat.

[Bullet]

An honest RHETORICAL question, mitch.

Actually mine was an honest question to you. I didn't intend to start a flaming of you or the -35. I just wonder what you see in her that none of us do. Like that chick who might turn out ok after a diet and a gym membership, but that's a lot of maybes and wishful thinking while she continues to shove footlong chili dogs down her gullet two at a time.

Maybe she's pretty on the inside. Auto piddle packs, Rip It holder, Shiatsu massage chair. Could be neat.

As someone heavily involved in this program (and actually fits the criteria Danny Noonin asked, and beyond), let me provide my $0.02. Take it for what it is worth...

Will the F-35 become the awesome combat aircraft that is promised in Lockheed's "glossy brochure"? Well, if it delivers with all the promised capabilities, quite frankly the answer is a unequivical "Yes". But (as has been rightly pointed out, multiple times) that is a really, really, REALLY big "if". The development of this aircraft has had tremendous growing pains, for mulitple reasons, and to talk about the problems it has faced and still will face would probably get us 1) to classification levels we ain't gonna touch here, and 2) to get a message that states: "you have reached the end of the internet".

Will the F-35 be the end-all-to-be-all when complete and operational? Frankly, no. It does some of the missions it is designed for SUPERBLY, and someof the missions we will ask it to do (like CAS) "adequately". All part of the decison process of folks from MANY years ago, with numerous factors like cost to build multiple fleets of different, specialized aircraft addressed. A compromise in its design in order to satisy mulitple customers. Will it be better than the A-10 at CAS? Mostly no, but it depends on the scenario. Is the decision to make it our ultimate replacement for the F-16 AND the A-10 debatable? Certainly, and I've been a part of it, here and in other places that actually have some decision making authority on the program.

And you want my honest opinion (Again, take it or leave it, I really don't care)? The assessment of some here that it will eventually deliver, perhaps with only most of the "toys and wish-list items" because it is too-big-to-fail so LM will get it it mostly right, is pretty accurate. I would add the factor of "because we put all our eggs in one basket for now, and we now have no other choice" as another major reason. Also a cause for debate? Yes again. Are there better options? Yep. Is cancelling the program one of those options? Nope.

So, why don't we see the reasons it is so important that are based on the plane's capabilities being used here as part of the debate? Well, a LOT of that story is beyond the classification level of this site and the "bar talk" discussions. Just ask yourself, without being cynical about it, why those who do have that insight fight so hard for the program. There ARE foolish decisions and some really buffonish activities going on, but someone way above our paygrades, with a little more insight into the whole picture, thinks it's still worth it.

And yes, the Shaitsu massage chair is very nice.

[Guest]

LOL

[Bullet]

LOL

Whole post, or just the last sentence?

[Guest]

But (as has been rightly pointed out, multiple times) that is a really, really, REALLY big "if".

classification levels we ain't gonna touch here

Will the F-35 be the end-all-to-be-all when complete and operational? Frankly, no.

A compromise in its design in order to satisy mulitple customers.

I would add the factor of "because we put all our eggs in one basket for now, and we now have no other choice" as another major reason. Also a cause for debate? Yes again. Are there better options? Yep.

Is cancelling the program one of those options? Nope.

story is beyond the classification level

Just ask yourself, without being cynical about it, why those who do have that insight fight so hard for the program.

There ARE foolish decisions and some really buffonish activities going on, but someone way above our paygrades, with a little more insight into the whole picture, thinks it's still worth it.

And yes, the Shaitsu massage chair is very nice.

[Bullet]

Copy.

[Guest]

Copy.

Don't get me wrong. I'm glad there are people like you interested and engaged to make this thing work. I have several friends, AD and retired (working for the Devil) who are part of this program.

As a taxpayer, I'm furious.

As someone who has made the transition to one of the defended, I hope we figure something out.

[Guest]

Might be an interesting read for some of the young guys. Ronald Reagan and a Cold War mindset and we were building our way to 40 full up three squadron 24 PAA fighter wings. Interesting perspective.

Twenty five years ago this month and the only mention of the Hog was about how it was going to be phased out.

The more things change them more they stay the same.

Don't sweat the small stuff and be good at what you do today.

[Bullet]

Don't get me wrong. I'm glad there are people like you interested and engaged to make this thing work. I have several friends, AD and retired (working for the Devil) who are part of this program.

As a taxpayer, I'm furious.

As someone who has made the transition to one of the defended, I hope we figure something out.

Thanks, and much appreciated. Kept my reply simple for the simple reason that I wasn't sure where you were taking this, and I was hesitant to get it a flame war I felt wasn't worth it.

Trust me, as someone working the AF oversight of this boon-doogle, and as a Taxpayer myself, there are times where my cranium feels like exploding as well over the latest WTF moment that is this program's tendency. My intent was to simply respond to FallinOsh's question: "Are its' capabilities worth the cost?" I get it that those are HUGE costs we're talking about, but I KNOW that we need what it brings to the fight -- there is no simply no other answer that meets ALL the requirements as well.

We're working to figure it out, and it's something that keeps me awake at night, because I know that someday one of my former bro's, or even one of the young-uns here on this forum, will be putting his pink butt on the line in one of these, trusting we did get it right.

THAT keeps me motivated to get it right.

[HU&W]

F-35 training base identified to be Luke AFB.

https://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2012/07/31/20120731glendale-luke-air-force-base-f-35-announcement.html

[tac airlifter]

Sweet deal for them, AZ is beautiful & I wish I could be stationed there.

[tac airlifter]

Heard today from the guys at Eglin Range that the F-35 isn't certified to fly in IMC. That can't be true, right?

[ThreeHoler]

The F-22 wasn't certified for IMC for quite a while. It is part of the test/eval process.

[scoobs]

On another forum they said the F-35's would never make it to Luke, that they would close before, any thoughts?

[Guest]

Scoobs, shhh.

[Crosswind]

Isn't the 33d FW at Eglin suppose to be a "training base" as well? They've already re-built hangers and squadron buildings down there.

[SocialD]

They've already re-built hangers and squadron buildings down there.

Doesn't mean shit. We've poured tons of money into bases, then subsequently shut them down.

Edited August 10, 2012 by SocialD