Comments on: When Will the F-35 Return to Flight?

By: JT Strong

JT Strong — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 03:59:22 +0000

Some background: When the F-22/F-23 program began, the mantra was “not a pound for air-to-ground.” The program was headed by a Air Force senior officer, with his deputy being a Naval senior officer. When the air-to-mud issue became an absolute for the Air Force, the Navy withdrew from the program, including withdrawing it’s senior Navy program deputy. Obviously, the Navy was looking for a stealthy air-to-mud airframe. The Navy then chose to upgrade the F/A-18, including a number of steath-fixes, to fill the void until what became the JSF/F-35 became available. Because the Navy has not in the past bought single-engine aircraft is not so much a decision based on descression, but one based on technology. Those of use in the business recall that the pacific wasn’t a two-engine pond until recently with the introduction of high performance twin-jet platforms. Now that is common place. Well, the single-engine fighter blower has also come of age, finally. SWome of us are also long enough in the teeth to recall the numerous cases in the past when geniuses (specifically someone whose initials are RM) tried to make multi-role aircraft the only way to go. It was a nice idea at the time, but the technology hadn’t yet arrived to make the idea work, and we got the F-111 and the F-4. With the arrival of the F-15/16/18 series, the concept started to work. Now we are developing the next generation of aircraft which are sophisticating that capability. However, we have not quite reached the air-breathing ultimate: The full-scale UAV fighter/bomber that can, because of not having a human aboard, can absolutely dazzel the competition with capabilities like 20-g (more ?)instantaneous turns. When air-to-air missiles can make 36-g turns, and they do now, the trick is to either hide from the launcher — read stealth — or be able to out turn the S.O.B., or both. Granteed that two of lessons learned from Star Wars was that fighters will always have pilots, and there will always be a GIB to feed the monkey, but the handwriting is well and truly on the wall: Electrons have already replaced the GIB (read and weep F-15 GIBs); and the F-22/F-35 airframes are very possibly the end of manned fighter-flight. Maybe the greatest insult to fighter pilots has yet to come: it appears that Nuke-capable bombers will have a man aboard for a long time to come. The question hefre is whether or not that man will be a pilot or a mission manager. Say, what?

By: SrA Sabo

SrA Sabo — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 15:04:54 +0000

I think they should be focused on UAVs because they are already beginning to make some manned missions obsolete, and it won’t be long at all before the technology is improved and closes the gap completely.
Sadly, I think that both the F-22 and F-35 are going to go the way of the B-47 and F-100.

By: DC2 Jennings

DC2 Jennings — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:51:51 +0000

Easy there Matt, don’t forget to take your meds.
Wayne I agree with you except for one comment. The F-35 is not the leading edge technology, the F-22 is. The F-35 is a strike aircraft cut in the mold of the A-7, F-16, etc.
We do not need the F-35 as much as we need more F-22s. I will continue to say that on this blog until the my breath leaves me.
And for those that think the Navy needs this plane, you might want to conisder how the Navy loathes single engined aircraft. I guarantee you they would rather have the F-18E/F over the F-35.
This plane will cost just less than the F-22 does now once all of this is said and done. And I don’t know if the carrier version (F-35C) will ever meet requirements.
DC2

By: matt hood

matt hood — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:14:43 +0000

The war in Iraq is not worth 3 trillion dollars to make a point for Bush in history. His father would have invaded Iraq if he had received a second term as President. Clinton got impeached because he refused to remove Saddam on his watch; while the Bush right wing, who were hiding out in their fascist tax exempt foundation to slander Bill Clinton . Privatizing the Middle East and Iraq has been, since the cold war, the goal of the Wall Street CIA and the Rockefeller family since oil was found in the middle east. It was has a means to avoid paying taxes on American soil. The CIA program Operation Mocking Bird is in full swing to deceive this nation.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 03:25:49 +0000

Now trying for Dec 7.

By: Wayne

Wayne — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 02:50:40 +0000

I guess no one here remembers how many problems the F-14 had early in its career, how the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, etc, etc, etc, all had problems early in their programs too. The F-35 is the leading edge of technology, so it will have stutters as those technologies are fielded. The next bomber will too, as will the next generation of fighters once the F-22 and F-35 mature and begin to be eclipsed by new technology.
And the real source of that sucking sound is the empty cranium of those who let politics and their own bias trump truth and historical information.

By: Nicholas

Nicholas — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 22:14:35 +0000

I hope fixing the problems dont take as long as fixing the problems on the Osprey! NOW THAT WAS A WASTE OF TAX MONEY!!!

By: f35future

f35future — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 17:50:51 +0000

“That sucking sound you hear is millions of tax dollars going down the toilet.“
… going down to New Orleans?

By: whatmeworry

whatmeworry — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 17:42:55 +0000

I do remember a few years ago when everyone’s pinup , the F-22, was having its testing problems and budget woes. Look at her now! She’s all grown up and giving everyone the come hither look.
The F-35 will be fine. Of course it might cost alot more to get her fine.…

By: Grandjester

Grandjester — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 15:49:37 +0000

That sucking sound you hear is millions of tax dollars going down the toilet.