Comments on: And Here’s Some BF-1 Video

By: j-7 warplane

j-7 warplane — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 08:13:15 +0000

variants of j-7 warplane : http://i.imagehost.org/0489/variants_of_j-7_warpl...

By: Rhyno327/lrsd

Rhyno327/lrsd — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 15:15:54 +0000

I have to question past sales of US warplanes to questionable regimes, such as the one in Pakistan, who are laughing all the way to the bank with the $10 BILLION we gave them to fight the T-ban/AQ. Now its Block 50 F-16’s. When will our leaders stop giving away the store? Sure, the P-stani’s would sell thier mothers out for a couple hundred million, and thats where the Chinese get our “secrets”…as for the F-35, I would advise giving ANY to Turkey, or any other moslem country, including the Saudi’s, who are the bank that funds islamic fundamentalism. Some of these countries we sold advanced warplanes to, we could be at war with in the next few years. i.e PAKISTAN

By: TB

TB — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:18:52 +0000

Coolhand,
Yes I know about the history of the harrier. I was referring to the thrust vectoring of the F-22 that makes it more manueverable, not the SVTOL of the Harrier and F-35 (or at least that’s what I thought Power2 was asking about). The rotating SVTOL thrust of the Harrier is 1970s tech, and the F-22’s thrust vectoring is within the last decade.
Looking at the video again, I just realized how much the F-35 engine can rotate. Does it do that in flight like the F-22 or is just for takeoff/landing?

By: coolhand77

coolhand77 — Fri, 30 May 2008 11:41:50 +0000

Okay TB, gotta correct you. Yes the US fields one of the more popular VSTOL aircraft, the AV-8 Harrier series. You are wrong though that we are the only ones. First of all, the AV-8 was developed by the UK initially, and they still use it. Second, the one we use is actually the later, uprated model with greater lift, carrying capacity, etc. Third, there is a Yak-36, fielded by Russia as their answer to the western Harrier. The F-35 will be the first SUPERSONIC VSTOL aircraft to reach a military inventory, but the US was in no way the first or only VSTOL operating country in the world. Also, its not a mater of physics that limits us to 2D thrust vectoring at the moment...I think at this point its a matter of cost/mechanical simplicity as well as possibly physiology. 3D thrust vectoring (as seen on some russian aircraft) has been developed and tested over here, but not deployed. Yes, it allows you to pull some amazing manuvers (manuvers that could similarly be done with 2D thrust vectoring on two engines, and proper employment of conventional manuvering surfaces) however if you push too much, you might "outfly" your pilot. The pilot himself is the limiting factor of how fast you can turn, or how tight. Many of the amazing manuvers seen at airshows, done with 3D vectoring are done at no where near actual combat speeds. Sure they look cool, but will your pilot pass out if he tries them in a "knife fight"? 2D allows you to stay in the accelleration plain that modern G-suits can help compensate the best for, in other words up and down...you need a hard "vectored" turn? Just roll so that "up" to you is the direction you want to go. Mechanically 3D vectoring is complicated. The old "three panel" system that was used on the X-31 is nice and simple compared to the "All moving nozzel/turkey feathers" that the russian vecoring system uses. By comparison the F-22 vectoring is just a couple of heat resistant plates and the servos/hydrolics to move them. Much fewer moving parts to break/get battle damage/fail at the wrong time. The F-35, mechanically, in my opinion, should at least have 2D thrust vectoring paddles like the F-22, however, due to the cost and already complex nature of the fighter, I doubt it will ever have more than VSTOL vectoring capability.

By: faceless_statistic

faceless_statistic — Thu, 29 May 2008 23:02:04 +0000

Bashing Israel will sound shallow and stupid until we (USA) stop pressuring them (Israel) to put up with rocketfire we wouldn’t tolerate.
As for China getting F16 secrets, they’ve got many avenues of gathering info:
1: Pakistan, India, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, and about 15 other countries that bought F-16’s from us.
2: Chinese spies in USA, Russian spies in USA, free-lance spies that sell to whoever (Jonathan Pollard), Chinese spies (and spies from various countries) in whatever country bought F-16’s
How fast will China get the F-35 secrets? Just elect another , and he’ll sell them.

By: power2

power2 — Thu, 29 May 2008 03:25:52 +0000

Also, the Air Force seems to putting a lot of emphasis on the stealth capabilities of the F-22 and F-35. But aren’t the stealth capabilities of these planes are in a sense fixed while enemy radar and air defenses can improve? Does the AF even account for this or do they really expect others not to come up with a solution to combat this? It seems to me that relying on the stealth aspect is way too risky with China, Iran and others rapidly modernizing their air defenses.

By: power2

power2 — Thu, 29 May 2008 03:16:45 +0000

Some questions I have that I’m sure can be answered here to some degree as I realize everyone has a different opinion. And I apologize in advance if these questions are quite naive.
From what I’ve read, the F-35 will not have thrust vectoring for maneuvering and yet it is already a heavy aircraft so it seems this ability might come in handy. Any thoughts on this?
Is the F-22, with only two-axis thrust vectoring, at a disadvantage to fighters with a three-axis ability?

By: maxtrue

maxtrue — Thu, 29 May 2008 01:52:33 +0000

Smith, what a crock. So I guess Hitler didn’t kill millions of Jews. They were just the phony ones. Any more brilliant ideas? No, you are not alone. That is the scary part. Maybe Jews should have keep all their knowledge from the US and sold it to other nations. Germany would have loved the bomb. And we took their scientists. We leak like a door screen and that is hardly a Jewish conspiracy.

By: Brad

Brad — Thu, 29 May 2008 01:25:46 +0000

Yep. Cindy’s right. Maybe we should just stop making stuff, to keep it out of China’s hands and the grassy knoll conspiracist’s CIA-enhanced dental fillings.

By: Cindy Fishbaugh

Cindy Fishbaugh — Thu, 29 May 2008 01:13:34 +0000

I DON’T CARE WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE TO SAY I SAY IT’S GREAT TO HAVE THIS IN THE GOOD OLD US OF A…