Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 10149557)
Which reminds me of the rumour that that that the range of the Tornado GR1 was designed to prevent the GAF being able to reach Moscow on a one way trip...... Why post this rubbish? OAP |
People's opinion of the F-35 notwithstanding, this is some nice footage of a Dutch F-35A wazzing about, I mean it even banks as if to turn! :8
-RP |
Last time I saw something like that in the highlands it was a harrier!
Oh yeah..................:ok: the worlds most expensive harrier :D :rolleyes: PS Nice weather :\ |
Someone just stepped on his own Woody Johnson...
Less NHS, more F-35s. Holy ****, dude. Comments already being enthusiastically re-reported by RT and Sputnik. |
Originally Posted by George K Lee
(Post 10151592)
Someone just stepped on his own Woody Johnson...
Less NHS, more F-35s. Holy ****, dude. Comments already being enthusiastically re-reported by RT and Sputnik. "Mr Johnson also described the F-35 Lightning programme, which Britain has a 25 per cent stake in, as "very, very interesting". That is correct. |
Originally Posted by George K Lee
(Post 10151592)
Someone just stepped on his own Woody Johnson...
Less NHS, more F-35s. Holy ****, dude. Comments already being enthusiastically re-reported by RT and Sputnik. Not sure that that is what he said. |
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 10149697)
As others have noted, it depends on how you define 'contested', but I can attest to the KC-46 being designed to be able to withstand some battle damage. For example, those wire separation requirements that tripped up Boeing so badly were related to ballistic penetration - holes of a certain diameter were not allowed to take out redundant systems.
The https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:M...le_Impact.webm |
|
Originally Posted by glad rag
(Post 10152016)
The
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:M...le_Impact.webm Thought the Russians disputed responsibility for that one.... |
Usual caveats apply :
"The F-35 just made its combat debut" https://www.defensenews.com/breaking...1Dy1gI.twitter |
Originally Posted by glad rag
(Post 10151901)
"Mr Johnson also described the F-35 Lightning programme, which Britain has a 25 per cent stake in, as "very, very interesting".
That is correct. |
Buster15,
Seeing as in addition to the manufacturing bit we have a large number of design folk on the project spread around airframe, engine and systems, 25% overall seems a about right. |
https://www.stripes.com/news/us/navy...tance-1.528359 HASC: F-35C lacks the range to strike enemy targets WASHINGTON (Tribune News Service) — The Navy’s newest fighter jet, the stealthy F-35C, may not have the range it needs to strike enemy targets, the House Armed Services Committee said in a new report, raising troubling questions about whether the multibillion-dollar program is already outpaced by threats. And critics say the Navy fighter — part of the Joint Strike Fighter initiative, the most expensive weapons program in history — may actually have been out of date years ago. The committee’s conclusion, buried in the 606-page report on the fiscal 2019 defense authorization bill, is confirmation from lawmakers who support the jet program that the aircraft carrier-based version of the F-35 may not have enough effective range without refueling to function well in likely future wars. “While the introduction of the F-35C will significantly expand stealth capabilities, the F-35C could require increased range to address necessary targets,” the report states. The reason, experts say, is that the aircraft carriers from which the F-35Cs would operate may be required to sail too far away from enemies to avoid their increasingly long-range missiles. The committee does not want to stop buying F-35Cs, but instead wants to start also buying new sorts of warplanes. “After billions of dollars have been spent on the F-35C, but before the first aircraft are ready to deploy, lawmakers are already looking at the next carrier-based aircraft,” said Bryan Clark, a former Navy strategist now at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Dan Grazier, of the Project on Government Oversight, said the House directive “highlights just how poorly conceived the Joint Strike Fighter program has been from the very beginning.” “The issue of anti-ship cruise missiles is not a new one,” he said. “The complexity of the F-35 program has dragged out the design process to nearly 20 years, which means we are not keeping pace with emerging threats.”....... The fact that the F-35C’s limited radius may reduce its operational utility has received little public attention. Radius is less of an issue for the Air Force because the service has long-range bombers and can reserve F-35As for shorter-range missions, Clark said. For the Marine Corps, the F-35B is a significant upgrade over the AV-8B Harriers now in the fleet. The committee’s report directs the Navy secretary to brief the Armed Services panels by January 2019 on options, including manned and unmanned aircraft that would “expand the strike range of a carrier air wing in a contested environment.” That could include “developing a stealth tanker capability, improved engine technology or to develop and procure a strike capability that is purposely built to strike at increased range.”........ |
Originally Posted by Rhino power
(Post 10150927)
People's opinion of the F-35 notwithstanding, this is some nice footage of a Dutch F-35A wazzing about, I mean it even banks as if to turn! :8
www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW9_e-Uxo9g&feature=share -RP A stealth fighter in reheat now that makes sense..... |
Originally Posted by Buster15
(Post 10154522)
Of course it looks impressive until you notice that in almost every pass it was in reheat. I have watched many similar video of Typhoon or Tornado and they are similarly impressive while in dry power.
A stealth fighter in reheat now that makes sense..... -RP |
may not have enough effective range without refueling to function well in likely future wars. |
Funding for a stealthy follow on to the MQ-25 Stingray (which LM is already pushing) and for development funding for the F/A-XX. |
Originally Posted by Rhino power
(Post 10154832)
What an odd comment!
-RP |
-RP |
Originally Posted by 2805662
(Post 10153541)
Thought the Russians disputed responsibility for that one.... |
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:17. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.