F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

[Fonck83]

Is it the announcement of a revolution in the USAF. These declarations and this new model sign the end of the f-35 as the work horse of the USAF.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/200-ngad-fighters-1000-advanced-drones-in-usafs-future-plans

Franck Kendall AIR FORCE SECRETARY :
Air Force leadership has "recently given our planners a nominal quantity of collaborative combat aircraft to assume for planning purposes. The planning assumption is 1,000 CCAs," Kendall continued. "This figure was derived from an assumed two CCAs for [each of] 200 NGAD platforms, and an additional two for each of 300 F-35s, for a total of 1,000."

Kendall continued by saying that the Air Force would become "unaffordable" if it continued to only buy current generation aircraft like the F-35A and F-15EX, as well as future NGAD combat jets, and that CCAs will offer additional "affordable mass." He added that "if we ask for too much [of the CCAs] we're gonna get bogged down trying to get what we need" and that the drones didn't need to be "gold-plated" to provide important additional operational advantages.

 

[DumbPilot]

This is just a thought:

What if the resolution of the AESA radar emplyed in the F-35 is good enough to find out whether missiles are incoming towards the plane?

If that is so, then that also means that idle T/R modules can focus onto that missile - which means it may be able to actually fry the electronics of an incoming missile, I think the F-35's radar definitely has enough power in it to do that.

 

[MonaLazy]

 

[Super Flanker]

Spoiler

 

[DumbPilot]

View attachment 196709View attachment 196710

Spoiler

View attachment 196712

 

[Super Flanker]

That time when F-35s from the Norwegian Airforce intercepted Russian MiG-31s.

 

[Super Flanker]

Got some news regarding F-35's flight hour's from twitter. The F-35 has officially completed more than 378,000+ sorties worldwide, and accumulated more than 634,000+ flight hours!

1. An F-35 assigned to the 63rd Fighter Squadron at Luke Airforce base in Arizona.

2. A U.S. Air Force Airman takes a photo of an F-35 Lightning II assigned to the 56th Fighter Wing at Luke Airforce base in Arizona.

3. A pilot climbing into an F-35 using the F-35's built in telescopic steps.

And they call the F-35 the fat army, but I think it's a beautiful plane.

 

[Super Flanker]

Incase you all want an F-35 pic as wallpaper for your mobile then here are some suggestions from my side.

Incase you want one to use as your PC's desktop background then here is another one.

 

[jai jaganath]

Incase you all want an F-35 pic as wallpaper for your mobile then here are some suggestions from my side.
View attachment 197134View attachment 197135

Incase you want one to use as your PC's desktop background then here is another one.View attachment 197136

What's the 3rd fighter from top

 

[Super Flanker]

What's the 3rd fighter from top

That is not a real plane, it's a fictional plane from AC-7, Ace Combat games have a ton of cool looking fictional futuristic planes. I will let you know which plane it is later on, will have to do some browsing.

 

[Super Flanker]

 

[BON PLAN]

That time when F-35s from the Norwegian Airforce intercepted Russian MiG-31s. View attachment 196812View attachment 196813

mode laugh on :
The russian pilot was friendly enough to let the F35, in full AB, coming near.... 10 seconds after the F35 was out of fuel and Mig in first reheat crank only a point on the horizon....

But after all, was it a joke ? may be not.

 

[Super Flanker]

mode laugh on :
The russian pilot was friendly enough to let the F35, in full AB, coming near.... 10 seconds after the F35 was out of fuel and Mig in first reheat crank only a point on the horizon....

But after all, was it a joke ? may be not.

Was this post of yours meant to be a JOKE? cause I have seen your posts on this thread and it seems to me that you love to troll my Fat Amy aka F-35.

You do realise that it was the F-35s from the Norwegian side that intercepted those Russian MiG-31s and not the other way around? On the part about F-35's afterburner max duration then with full fuel and afterburners on, the F-35 will definitely be able to last for more than five to ten minutes (likely even more).

 

[Blademaster]

Was this post of yours meant to be a JOKE? cause I have seen your posts on this thread and it seems to me that you love to troll my Fat Amy aka F-35.

You do realise that it was the F-35s from the Norwegian side that intercepted those Russian MiG-31s and not the other way around? On the part about F-35's afterburner max duration then with full fuel and afterburners on, the F-35 will definitely be able to last for more than five to ten minutes (likely even more).

No it won't. F-35s have been capped from flying supersonically for more than short periods of time (total time allowed is 1 min) to avoid damaging their sensitive skin.

Five problems with America's F-35s (now that Canada is buying its own)

Its mission capability rating sat at 69 per cent early in 2021, falling short of the 80 per cent benchmark set by the the U.S. military

nationalpost.com

 

[StealthFlanker]

No it won't. F-35s have been capped from flying supersonically for more than short periods of time (total time allowed is 1 min) to avoid damaging their sensitive skin.

Five problems with America's F-35s (now that Canada is buying its own)

Its mission capability rating sat at 69 per cent early in 2021, falling short of the 80 per cent benchmark set by the the U.S. military

nationalpost.com

As usual, that is wrong.
Norwegian Air Force use F-35A which have no time limit on supersonic time.
The time limit is on F-35B and F-35C

The F-35C can fly at a top speed of Mach 1.3 for 50 cumulative seconds, while the F-35B is limited to 40 seconds at Mach 1.3. The version of the F-35 used by the U.S. Air Force, the F-35A, can fly without restriction on speed.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a32701605/f-35-supersonic-flight-speed-limit/.

That may sound horrendous until you realized that F-35 is not the only aircraft with such low placard speed limit
For example: F-15E with any missile on CFT station get their top speed limited to Mach 1.4

The Flanker family with just 6 R-73 or even just 2 R-27 on inner station get its top speed limited to 1300 km/h, any additional missile reduced its top speed to 1200 km/h

 

[BON PLAN]

On the part about F-35's afterburner max duration then with full fuel and afterburners on, the F-35 will definitely be able to last for more than five to ten minutes (likely even more).

Sure not.
1) F35 max speed was reduced because some part of the rear frame took off at high speed.
2) The fuel consumption for 10 minutes of full AB will empty the internal tanks (as for every fighter except SR71 and maybe Foxbat).

Try all you want : F35 was made for F16 CAS and A10 replacement and they studied a fighter derivative just for export (with a huge success, but I see a F104 widowmaker end of story). See how it is shape and you will understand why it will never be a good fighter.

 

[StealthFlanker]

Sure not.
F35 max speed was reduced because some part of the rear frame took off at high speed.

no, the rear frame was not taken off
The limitation on the time in AB above 1.3M to prevent possible overheating of the horizontal tails coating, which was seen one time in flight test and never repeated.
On the B, the -600 engine has a shorter divergent nozzle section for ground clearance during vertical lift, so the exhaust is under expanded and the AB plume is wider. On the C, the horizontal tails are bigger and closer to the AB plume. Nevertheless, Lockheed has implemented a coating on the horizontal tail that can sustain higher temperature

 

[Super Flanker]

Sure not.
1) F35 max speed was reduced because some part of the rear frame took off at high speed.

Absolutely false, unless you can provide me a source and quote from the source where it says that some part of the F-35's rear broke off from the fuselage, I will take this claim as false. Sounds like you conjugate lot of fantasies about the F-35, don't you?

2) The fuel consumption for 10 minutes of full AB will empty the internal tanks (as for every fighter except SR71 and maybe Foxbat).

OK so? Anyways all fuel consumption matters only when aircrafts can maintain top speeds for longer durations, one example of such a plane is SR-71. The SR-71 could travel supersonic speeds for more than an hour. Any normal fighter such as F-35, Rafale, Eurofighter on full AB would quickly consume all their fuel in few minutes.

Try all you want : F35 was made for F16 CAS and A10 replacement and they studied a fighter derivative just for export (with a huge success, but I see a F104 widowmaker end of story). See how it is shape and you will understand why it will never be a good fighter.

The F-35 is a multirole aircraft, do you know what is the meaning of multirole? "Multirole" in simple terms means an aircraft that is capable of doing different roles in combat. Examples of multirole aircrafts are Rafale, Su-30, F-16, F-22 etc. F-35 can never be a true replacement for A-10 in my opinion because A-10 is optimised completely for CAS type operations. The only aircraft which is similar to A-10 is Su-25 which itself is an ground attack craft like the A-10.

On the part about F-16 replacement : F-16 will not just outrightly be replaced like that, the thing is that production rate of F-35 is slow and that is why US military buys other planes to compliment F-16 and not simply replace all F-16 with F-35. You cannot just simply replace everything with 5th generation, the maintenance cost will be a nightmare, you need to have a mix of fourth generation and fifth generation.

Ah now I understand! You hate the F-35, don't you? Don't understand why you are holding a grudge against my fat Amy.

 

[Super Flanker]

No it won't. F-35s have been capped from flying supersonically for more than short periods of time (total time allowed is 1 min) to avoid damaging their sensitive skin.

Five problems with America's F-35s (now that Canada is buying its own)

Its mission capability rating sat at 69 per cent early in 2021, falling short of the 80 per cent benchmark set by the the U.S. military

nationalpost.com

Wrong. That time limit that does not allow F-35 to fly at supersonic speeds for long durations is only applicable for the B and C versions. F-35C can fly at max speed of mach 1.3 for 50 seconds, F-35B can fly at supersonic speeds for 40 seconds. But the F-35A has restriction on supersonic flight time.

If I recall correctly, Lockheed Martin has developed a new coating to be used on the horizontal tail, which can sustain/tolerate higher temperatures than before, meaning it will help in supersonic flights when high temperature causes damage to F-35's RAM.

 

[BON PLAN]

You hate the F-35, don't you? Don't understand why you are holding a grudge against my fat Amy.

Why do you want me to hate a thing ?
I just see how LM failed to study and fine tune this bird. Where F16 was a technical success, built on a long road map of improvements, F35 goals were far too high from the beginning.
When they solve one software problem another one occurs !
And the frame is all but not amazing.