Comments on: First F-35 Squadron Plans Detailed

By: pfcem

pfcem — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:17:21 +0000

firebrand,
Only someone as ignorant as you could make such a ridiculus statement.
We NEED the F-35A to replace the F-16 & the F-35C to replace the F/A-18 — just as we NEED the F-22 to replace the F-15. One size (fighter) does NOT fit all!

By: E-Breaux50

E-Breaux50 — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:03:51 +0000

I have to agree with “firebrand” on this one. A military unit or air power unit can be considered to be like a football team. you can have great linemen, halfbacks,tightends, WR’s, and etc. But, you need a strong back bone, hence a great quarter back. The F-22 is our great quarter back. Something we can always depend on. Now the statement to outright cancel the aircraft variants a and c maybe a little strong or over zealous, but it is agreed a diversion of money to the F-22 program would be a better option. My two cents.
– E-Breaux50

By: firebrand

firebrand — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 02:14:26 +0000

For the love of God, someone needs to have the balls to outright cancel F-35A and F-35C, and take that funding and divert it towards the purchase of more F-22s. We need that fighter a hell of a lot more than F-35A/C.

By: SMSgt Mac

SMSgt Mac — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 19:06:22 +0000

F-35 noise footprint is only an 'airport noise' issue. If one looks down the long line of aircraft that have operated out of Eglin over the years, you find the F-35 is still a lot quieter than anything preceding the F100/F101 engined airplanes of today OR the F-22. I'd say overall the real sound difference between a F-16 and F-35 is the frequency: the F-35 engine has a bigger resonant cavity. In any case, Mo'power comes from moving Mo' air and, if you can, Mo' air faster. This is a issue for the F-35 at Eglin only because of local politics. There is a very noisey 'activist' in particular who was latching onto the F-35's noise footprint from the first day that base realignment plans called for taking out test squadrons and inserting operational ones at Eglin, so it is a dB and number of flight ops issue for the local cranks. Almost makes one wonder what is the incentive for making quieter engines if it becomes a way to bar more powerful ones down the pipe. Airfield encroachment is a problem everywhere that is easily solved: If you don't like jet noise, don't live by an airbase. Anecdote: Del Webb used to bus Seniors into Phoenix's Sun City near Luke AFB on the weekends in the early 70's. Folks would buy into the 'quiet' golf resort sales pitch and then on their first Monday morning, reality would slap them as most of a fleet of 200+ F-4Cs and Ds and most of a fleet of 100+ German F-104s would start heading out on training sorties at the crack of dawn. Now THAT is jet noise. At Dusk, night training sorties would begin. Luke at the time was the busiest single runway airbase in the Air Force, maybe the world. Oh how they screamed (and probably still are today).

By: TB

TB — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 22:46:09 +0000

Re: all 3 services getting their birds.
I imagine if each service stands up JSF units at the same time, it’ll be more difficult to cancel them.

By: ohwilleke

ohwilleke — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:44:23 +0000

I’m surprised that they anticipate all three versions being available that soon.
I would have expected that there were be more F-35As built, before the F-35B was produced in those numbers, and similarly that there would be more F-35As and F-35Bs produced, before the F-35C was in production.
The decision to base initial squadrons of all three types at the same base (presumably for maintenance and expertise sharing purposes) does seem to necessitate a coastal location — I don’t imagine it would be very workable to practice carrier landings and takeoffs in Arizona.
There is also some irony in the fact that the F-35A which was sold as a stealth replacement for the F-16, is louder than the plane it replaces. Admittedly, radar stealth was the primary concern, but given the importance of ground to air operations in its mission, one might have expected something a bit quieter than an F-16.
Does anyone know if there are any decent non-classified estimtes about how effective the JSF will be in a cruise missile defense role?

By: Allan Hall

Allan Hall — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:21:04 +0000

If Eglin has been selected as the site of the first three F-35 squadrons, does this mean that Luke AFB in Arizona has been ruled out as a training base? The extended article mentions more than a hundred possible bases for F-35 training, but I can’t imagine more than a handful of these locations would make any sense. You have to have access to reliably good weather, bombing ranges and unpopulated areas where low level manuevers can be conducted.

By: daniel Hinder

daniel Hinder — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:19:33 +0000

If noise is such a huge concern, then why not station the aircraft somewhere more remote? Or is studying the towny reaction the point of deploying the aircraft to this particular base?

By: Wes

Wes — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:59:53 +0000

Hey Christian– you forgot to insert a Title for this article!