Pentagon's Top Weapons Tester: F-35 Still Challenged

Discuss this Blog Entry 113

on Nov 18, 2016

As AW knows, from day one I have been a critic of the F-35. Simply put, it is just another target for the F-22. From day one, I have recommended that the F-35 be sold to foreign governments; but the PTB insist on throwing more more money at it. Too bad for us taxpayers.

on Nov 18, 2016

I'd like a refund

on Nov 18, 2016

All that discussion about what the F-35 can do is great but if the balloon goes up tomorrow what will it do?

on Nov 18, 2016

"don't ask me why Russia chooses to normalize such metrics to 90,000 feet - I have no clue"

Russia uses the metric system. We persist with the irrational English system of measurements.

Each foot = .3048 meters. Thus 90,000 feet = 27,432 meters.

I would bet someone guestimated when they translated 30,000 meters off some Russian brochure or web site.

on Nov 18, 2016

"Likewise a F-35 is only detectable by a S-400 battery at around 3 km at 90,000 feet."

From what aspect? The F-35 has drastically different RCSs depending upon whether it is painted from the front, sides, and rear.

This could make a big difference when bi-static radar or long baseline interferometry are used.

The latter could make a big difference at radar frequencies where the aircraft's size alone causes Rayleigh scattering. The sky is blue, you can't make it utterly transparent when the sun shines. The long baseline creates the resolution of a antenna the same size.

The Israelis think the F-35s stealth advantage will only last 5-10 years. That is why they insisted upon fitting their own electronic countermeasures.

on Mar 4, 2017

The stealth coating+geometry system only work efficiently over X-band and over 60% of S-band.
You need other means more serious than the WW2 german trick to reduce RCS

on Nov 19, 2016

Enough with the "negative waves". But when you absolutely, positively have to destroy it overnight, "Tomahawk it". Woof, woof!

on Nov 19, 2016

Could someone explain to me how a round of ammo could cost $8000 is it made of kryptonite

on Nov 19, 2016

So when can we taxpayers sue Lockheed Martin for Breach of Contract? Are big corporations even liable for fraud anymore?

So long as these politicians are getting their kickbacks they'll never have a critical word to say about the whole scam program, and Lockheed Martin will continue to get richer by stealing money from the pockets of taxpayers, Fraudulently.

on Nov 22, 2016

What good are aircraft that are too costly to risk in a fight?? we the people can spend billions and billions on these fantastical flying wonders but what good do they do if the military won't use them in combat. Training with them all day long is all well and good but let's get real. Until they face a real enemy in combat they are just overly expensive toys that may or may not actually do a damn bit of good in a real fight.

on Nov 23, 2016

It is a shame people (Generals, Engineers, Programmers), who are sucked into the "We gotta put all this stuff in an integrated program to do everything airplane" forget that the guy in the cockpit is ... IS the integrator!

The pilot has to fly the thing. The thing can only do one mission at a time, all the rest is auxiliary. That is why the F4 had a back-seater. That's why there are wingmen, that is why there is a team.

To do otherwise is 200% over cost, and 500% Late. OR an F-35.

It is time to put Managers into these programs to limit the effects of miss though wishes.

Oh and you usually can't expect to have the company in this case Lockheed to say, "Wait a minute... If you stop now in 2003 and we produce the 2003 you can have your 500 aircraft, by 2016 and mod them along the way with the tech improvements." They get paid the big bucks either way, and it is 2016 and we have no F-35.

Think about it.

Captn Tommy

on Mar 4, 2017

Well, the last trick is to make believe that if purchasing by bulks, buyers will pay only $85M, maybe $80M per F-35A but there's simply no way hoping falling under $125-130M IF it ends to work well as the flaws are outstanding and affect the very structure.

"The pilot has to fly the thing. The thing can only do one mission at a time, all the rest is auxiliary."
=> Well, Rafale proved doing great at being the very first omnirole aircraft and ends to be stealthier than some so-called 5th generation aircraft...

on Mar 27, 2017

Useless arguments all. Will the F-35 be able to perform its role in a war that starts on 1 april or not. Can the F-35 drop bombs on anyone it runs up against? Can it dogfight its way out of a scrap with a enemy fighter? If not what can it do to be an effective deterrent to an enemy. I'm not sure all the rhetoric proves anything to anyone except to extend the arguments for arguments sake. Facts are scarce as hens teeth and its mildly entertaining to read the banter every day. Aim HIgh.

Please or Register to post comments.

What's Ares?

Aviation Week editors blog their personal views on the defense industry.

Blog Archive
Penton Corporate

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×