F-35: wise spending of our dollars?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: adelaide australia
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kind of reminds me of American attitudes with the cannon-less F-4 phantoms going into the Vietnam war citing only missiles were needed in modern day dogfighting. Of course they had to subsequently fit F-4s with cannons after realizing inferior MiG-17s were putting up a good fight(of course there were other factors too).
Anyway for the sake our tax-dollars I really hope I'm wrong.
Anyway for the sake our tax-dollars I really hope I'm wrong.
The F-4E was credited with 21 MiG kills during the war. 10 of these were brought down by Sparrows, five with gunfire, four with Sidewinders, one with a combination of Sidewinder and gunfire, and one while maneuvering (no weapons being fired). However, most combat missions flown in Vietnam by the F-4E were ground-attack missions.
FYI.
from joe.baugher.com:
The F-4E was credited with 21 MiG kills during the war. 10 of these were brought down by Sparrows, five with gunfire, four with Sidewinders, one with a combination of Sidewinder and gunfire, and one while maneuvering (no weapons being fired). However, most combat missions flown in Vietnam by the F-4E were ground-attack missions.
FYI.
The F-4E was credited with 21 MiG kills during the war. 10 of these were brought down by Sparrows, five with gunfire, four with Sidewinders, one with a combination of Sidewinder and gunfire, and one while maneuvering (no weapons being fired). However, most combat missions flown in Vietnam by the F-4E were ground-attack missions.
FYI.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: KGRB, but on the road about 1/2 the time.
Age: 61
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The cost of the F-35 is crap. I flew with a guy...his Brother in Law works for Martin Marietta, where they make SOME of the F-35. He said if they made the WHOLE AIRCRAFT in their factory, it would only cost about 25% of what the US is paying per copy.
Pure corruption.
I really hate it when taxpayer money is wasted!!!
Pure corruption.
I really hate it when taxpayer money is wasted!!!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’m inclined to agree, however the evolving requirements of the US Defense department as it progressed through development (before the design freeze) added cost upon cost, and the fact the standard version is subsidizing the STOVL version and its protracted development, and the fact that the initial batches have to cover the enormous development and design costs, which is exacerbated by some buyers reducing their order sizes...all factors into the unit cost being far in excess of the actual value of the materials
I flew with a guy...his Brother in Law works for Martin Marietta, where they make SOME of the F-35. He said if they made the WHOLE AIRCRAFT in their factory, it would only cost about 25% of what the US is paying per copy.
(PS. I don't disagree that these things are hideously expensive.)
Report that today an RAAF fast jet had an engine failure on approach to land at Darwin, with the pilot jettisoning the aircraft external fuel tank whilst in flight. If this was one of our new F-35's it would have been a case of the pilot jettisoning himself and not the fuel tank.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Report that today an RAAF fast jet had an engine failure on approach to land at Darwin, with the pilot jettisoning the aircraft external fuel tank whilst in flight. If this was one of our new F-35's it would have been a case of the pilot jettisoning himself and not the fuel tank.
Report that today an RAAF fast jet had an engine failure on approach to land at Darwin, with the pilot jettisoning the aircraft external fuel tank whilst in flight. If this was one of our new F-35's it would have been a case of the pilot jettisoning himself and not the fuel tank.
Nice try.
http://archive-server.liveatc.net/yp...2018-0200Z.mp3
Enjoy.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Here and there
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Report that today an RAAF fast jet had an engine failure on approach to land at Darwin, with the pilot jettisoning the aircraft external fuel tank whilst in flight. If this was one of our new F-35's it would have been a case of the pilot jettisoning himself and not the fuel tank.
Well, if it's "serious questions" we're posing, I'll chuck my "serious question" in also - what other fighter aircraft have a "defence / capability" "against bird ingestion or FOD?"
(Apart from the Mig 29)
Serious question!
(Not really...)
(Apart from the Mig 29)
Serious question!
(Not really...)
If the loss rate of the F35 due to having one engine is considered OK by the powers that be then that's that.
Clearly the "powers that be" do consider it "OK".
How many Hawk 127s have the RAAF lost due to FOD/Bird Ingestion - leading to engine failure?
How many Macchis did they lose due to such events?
You're making it hard to play the ball, as I can't see past the goose running around on the footy field flapping his arms.
I'll add this - I have only a basic knowledge of the F35 programme, and I have my doubts that the F35 represents good value given the HORRENDOUS cost blowouts and the HUGE delays - but my doubts have nothing to do with the fact it only has one donk...
Last edited by josephfeatherweight; 31st Jul 2018 at 12:45. Reason: Added thoughts on F35
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Aussie defense forces have operated A4 Skyhawks and Mirage IIIs before..there is a single engine precedent (also Vampires and Sabres..etc etc)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think someone on the F-35 thread in MILITARY on here said the US armed forces determined they couldn't afford to develop a new twin and buy enough of them to make it worth while....... especially when you factored in stealth . It woul d have cost more than an F-22
The F35, due to its stealth characteristics, won't have to operate close to the ground very often and thus won't be exposed to birdstrikes to the same degree as non steath fighter/attack aircraft. This significantly reduces the risk associated with operating a single engine fighter.
On the tanker issue, there is no doubt that the tankers will be targeted so, it would not surprise me if the RAAF follows the development of stealthy UAV tankers currently being designed to operate from US Navy carriers. These UAV tankers could eventually refuel from the larger, manned tankers and then sent into higher risk areas in support of F35 missions.
On the tanker issue, there is no doubt that the tankers will be targeted so, it would not surprise me if the RAAF follows the development of stealthy UAV tankers currently being designed to operate from US Navy carriers. These UAV tankers could eventually refuel from the larger, manned tankers and then sent into higher risk areas in support of F35 missions.
Last edited by Going Boeing; 4th Aug 2018 at 01:48.