Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

F-35 Cancelled, then what ?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 8th Aug 2014, 11:25
  #5021 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 45
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can't be as bad as your Phantom though?!
dat581 is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2014, 11:33
  #5022 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Southern Europe
Posts: 5,335
Received 17 Likes on 6 Posts
No, that wasn't so good, Dat.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2014, 15:59
  #5023 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Great Midwest
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Of course the Phantom had special sensors (another pair of eyes) to help with the visibility.
Bevo is offline  
Old 8th Aug 2014, 17:22
  #5024 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Southern Europe
Posts: 5,335
Received 17 Likes on 6 Posts
In some cases they were very high resolution sensors too! Oh, and the best radar of its day.

But none of this excuses the appalling rearward vis from the F-35. I know, it's all to do with the lift fan. Let's hope STORVL is worth it. With all the other compromises it could seem like a compromise too far. Too late for all that now, just get the engine fixed.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2014, 11:47
  #5025 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South Central UK
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
External Cockpit Visibility

The Canberra B(I)8 had the best Pilot's external visibility capability by far across the relevant types I have flown. PR9 was probably very similar.

lm
lightningmate is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2014, 13:49
  #5026 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes, accept that Dave, but in 40 years of operations it has dropped more bombs at low level than most other types in service today.
Except that its only been operational for 34 years
Vendee is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2014, 14:17
  #5027 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Southern Europe
Posts: 5,335
Received 17 Likes on 6 Posts
True, but that just makes the point that Mel made even more impressive.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2014, 18:02
  #5028 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Courtney Mil
True, but that just makes the point that Mel made even more impressive.
... And once more underwrites the theory that it is fairly straightforward making a good air support/bomber out of a good air dominance fighter (like the MIII, M2000, F14, F15, F18, etc... ) but much harder to do it succesfully the other way around (F111, Tornado, F4 even some might say).
kbrockman is offline  
Old 9th Aug 2014, 21:17
  #5029 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by kbrockman
...F4 even some might say
Really? Who? The F-4 wasn't designed as a bomber which was then turned into a fighter, not by any stretch of the imagination!

-RP
Rhino power is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 05:57
  #5030 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Actually -
The design of what was eventually to emerge as the McDonnell F-4 Phantom began in August of 1953. The McDonnell design team was headed by Herman Barkley. Initially, the goal of the team was to extend the production life of the F3H Demon single-seat carrier-based fighter by boosting its performance and improving its versatility. Tis series of in-house designs were also known as the Model 98 series by the company) .....
On September 19, 1953, McDonnell submitted its Model 98B project to the Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer) in the form of an unsolicited proposal.
.....

Although the Navy was favorably impressed by the Model 98B proposal, the Grumman XF9F-9 Tiger and the Vought XF8U-1 Crusader which had been ordered respectively in April and June of 1953 appeared to satisfy all the Navy's immediate requirements for supersonic fighters. Nevertheless, the Navy encouraged McDonnell to rework its design into a single-seat, twin-engined all-weather attack aircraft to compete against designs being worked on by Grumman and North American.



McDonnell submitted a formal development proposal for the F3H-G/H to the Navy in August of 1954. The Navy responded in October of 1954 by issuing a letter of intent for two prototypes and a static test aircraft. The Navy assigned the designation AH-1 to the project, reflecting its intended ground attack mission. The AH-1 was to have no less then eleven weapons pylons. Armament was to consist of four 20-mm cannon.



On December 14, 1954, the multirole mission of the aircraft was formally abandoned by the Navy, and McDonnell was requested to rework the proposal as an all-weather interceptor. McDonnell was instructed to remove the cannon and all hardpoints except for a centerline pylon for a 600-US gallon fuel tank. In addition, troughs were to be added for four Raytheon Sparrow semi-active radar homing air-to-air missiles. A Raytheon-designed APQ-50 radar was added, this installation being essentially that installed in the F3H-2 Demon. A second seat was added to accommodate a radar operator.


Yes - the first USN interest in, and specification for, what eventually became the F-4 Phantom II was as a competitor to the Grumman A2F (A-6) Intruder and A3J (A-5) Vigilante!


FGH-3 mockup:






Last edited by GreenKnight121; 10th Aug 2014 at 06:08.
GreenKnight121 is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 10:05
  #5031 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GK121, semantics... I stand by my comment, the 'F-4 wasn't designed as a bomber...'

-RP

Last edited by Rhino power; 10th Aug 2014 at 23:21.
Rhino power is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 12:18
  #5032 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,580
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
It's interesting, however, that the fighter that set standards for a generation emerged from such a screwed-up development process - single-seat fighter to single-seat bomber, back to two-seat all-missile interceptor with a big radar, and then to air-superiority with slats, a smaller radar and a gun. And then the last big mod program was the Israeli Kurnass 2000, which was (drum roll) a dedicated precision strike aircraft.

Of course, if you look at the history of the 737...
LowObservable is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 13:40
  #5033 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
LO, not forgetting the Japanese 'Kai', the German 'KWS/ICE', the Hellenic 'PI2000/AUP' and the Turkish '2020 Terminator' and 'ETM' mods, which were all significant in themselves...

-RP
Rhino power is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 13:57
  #5034 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,580
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
There were a few new-gen fighter radars, that's true... K2000 was pretty huge, though, with Popeye integration and a purpose-developed radar.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 14:34
  #5035 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And the Kurnass 2000 could've been an even more significant upgrade, if the PW1120's had been included!

-RP
Rhino power is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 15:59
  #5036 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,580
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Of all sad words of tongue and pen, the saddest are these, "It might have been". The PW1120 Kurnass would have been a beast. Plus, even today, most fighter radars can't do GMTI and SAR interleaved, which was the Ku-band APG-76's party trick. Not to mention Popeye...
LowObservable is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 19:42
  #5037 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Southern Europe
Posts: 5,335
Received 17 Likes on 6 Posts
Kbrock,

Apart from anything else, I do agree about fighter to bomber, bomber to fighter. F-15 is probably a better example.
Courtney Mil is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 21:34
  #5038 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rhino power
Really? Who? The F-4 wasn't designed as a bomber which was then turned into a fighter, not by any stretch of the imagination!

-RP
That's why I said "even some might say", the F4 was at best a compromised fighter in its beginnings, the all-round aspect as initially envisioned by the NAVY/MARINES, certainly created its own set of unique problems down the line of its operational life when used as an air dominance fighter (WVR+dogfight distances).

Courtney, I agree with the F15 (and all the others I quoted).
kbrockman is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 21:57
  #5039 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
LO, Turkey have the Popeye integrated on their 2020's but, I digress, this thread is about the F-35. Apologies to all for the break in coverage!

-RP
Rhino power is offline  
Old 10th Aug 2014, 23:13
  #5040 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Actually, all this F-4 discussion is very pertinent to the F-35!

Remember this?

Is the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter the New F-4?
How the controversial Joint Strike Fighter resembles the classic Cold War jet
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/is-...4-75aee4a354bc



I always thought comparing the F-35 to the F-4 was a complement - mainstay of a dozen nations' air power for decades, an extremely successful aircraft from carriers as well as land bases, rugged and dependable, easily upgradable through several decades, world-beating for its era, and listed by almost everyone as an all-time classic!
GreenKnight121 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.