Marine Corps F-35 Caught Fire During Training Flight

Military aircraft accidents/mishaps.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 547
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post10 Nov 2016, 12:16

rkap wrote:Yes! I agree. Journalists should compare the F-35 to other aircraft at similar periods in there development.
F15 - Dec 1969 Selected and Funded - operational 1976 - 7years - 384 built and operational by 1979.
F35 - October 2001 Selected and Funded - how many partly operational 2016 ???? - 15years.
Face the facts. No matter how effective the F35 ends up in 20?? its development has been a disaster.



Yeah sure compare development of three separate 5th gen aircraft to a single mission single service branch one that didn't even have a fraction of requirements JSF had. Why don't you compare F-22A to F-15A? Stupid Raptor took 20 years to develop and it's production run was limited because of crazy high price! Good thing this joke of a project was canned. Never mind the bloody thing decimates F-15Cs and other previous gen fighters in training... good riddance. USAF is better off without replacement for 40 y/o airframes!

If you ever bothered to look at the tendencies you'd see that every other next-gen fighter is 1) more capable 2) more expensive 3) longer to develop 4) has longer operational life than the previous gen fighter it's replacing; JSF fits in quite nicely into this row with the exception it is actually cheaper than most 4th/4.5th/4++/4+++++++ gen boutique fighters.

Let's make a fairer comparison: Harrier took 9 to 12 years to develop depending on what you consider programs starting point. Neither the original Harrier, nor it's latest iterations after decades of improvements get even close to the level of F-35B which IOCd 14 years after X-plane fly off. Soviet Yak STOVL planes were basically one continuous prototyping project that crumbled along with the Union. No other STOVL planes were ever marginally mass produced, many not even leaving the paper. F-16 was accepted into service on a very short notice, but also suffered many incidents and accidents (including fatal ones) including severe engine problems and mission system problems. Same for Hornet. Disaster.

F-35# is the second ever operational 5th gen fighter, it is right now and will be the most numerous 5th gen fighter, it is also the first and right now the only exported 5th gen fighter, first ever successful 5th gen fighter that can be operated from sea. It is the fighters that all other market participants are years behind in R&D, design and manufacture. That is a lot achievements for 15 years of disastrous development. Within those 15 years of disastrous development JSF yielded: state of the art 5th gen multirole fighter for all three services plus allied nations; significant improvement in capabilities compared to legacy aircraft at comparable price; advanced technological know how to levels never before achieved by any aerospace engineering; and most importantly landed me a sweet job shilling for LM.


rkap wrote:Airforces all around the world waiting and hoping and adopting interim replacements and upgrades.
Now finally facing reality we have the US Airforce and Navy in desperation buying or wanting to buy new 4th Gen or upgrade 4th Gen aircraft to fil the gap until 20??


Tell me right effing now what 4th gen fighter is US Air Force desperately trying to buy to "fill the gap"? Navy is not buying additional Super Hornets to "fill the gap", they buy planes to replace the ones their aviators crash land on a constant basis and airframes that were driven into the ground by 15 years of constant operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

rkap wrote:The US also considering two new CAS aircraft


IF they move past "considering" phase and actually do procure some sort of air vehicle to specifically do CAS, it will either be:
1) Super Tucano or some similar, half-assed COIN turboprop;
2) Weoponized T-X derivative with some APKWS and Hellfires, aka half-assed turbofan COIN plane;
3) Clean-sheet Super Warthog Thunderbolt III that has a 57mm Gatling and Abrams-level composite armor meant to go low and slow and eat up AAAin the face;
4) A new drone or an upgraded MQ-9 or nothing at all;

Let's make a deal: scenarios 1 and 2 are a draw because CAS =/= COIN. Scenario 3 yields you a PayPal transfer equal to the price of average international brand lager six-pack from me to you as well as proclamation of my wrongness written in bold; scenario 4 will mean you have to admit you were wrong publically somewhere on this forum. Bet valid until 00:00 GMT January 1st 2022.

rkap wrote:and upgrading and considering how to extend the life of the A10.


Because they made an unfortunate decision not to scrap A-10A when they should have back in 91'. And now they are stuck with the plane that is redundant and has no spares.

rkap wrote:Come 2040/50 and there still will be upgraded and new 4th Gen flying all around the world.


There are still some 3rd gen planes flying in combat operations too, you know.

rkap wrote:Since when was that the plan. The F35 was to replace them all.
So much for the predictions of the "Penthouse Dwellers."


JSF was supposed to 1) replace first and foremost USAF's F-16, also A-10 because it is redundant; partner nation's multirole fighters 2) replace F/A-18C/D in the US Navy. Never intended as immediate E/F and Growler replacement 3) replace F/A-18A/B and AV-8B Harrier II in USMC and add STOVL capability to partner nations who so desire. It is doing so, and hopefully will continue doing so. It was the plan since forever.

Lmao, people, are you plain simple dumbasses or do you get some kick out if pretending to be dumbasses? :doh:
Last edited by hythelday on 10 Nov 2016, 15:59, edited 3 times in total.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7699
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post10 Nov 2016, 13:15

hythelday wrote:
rkap wrote:Come 2040/50 and there still will be upgraded and new 4th Gen flying all around the world.


There are still some 3rd gen planes flying in combat operations too, you know.
[/quote]


Yes, and those 4Gen a/c in 2040/50 are going to be even less useful and effective than 3Gen jets in operation today.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5380
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post10 Nov 2016, 13:30

rkap wrote:
sferrin wrote:"The F-35 program has suffered several setbacks due to aircraft catching fire, though previous incidents involved the Air Force's F-35A conventional take-off and landing variant."

:roll: These "journalists" should really compare the F-35 to other aircraft at this point in their development. They would be surprised.


Yes! I agree. Journalists should compare the F-35 to other aircraft at similar periods in there development.
F15 - Dec 1969 Selected and Funded - operational 1976 - 7years - 384 built and operational by 1979.
F35 - October 2001 Selected and Funded - how many partly operational 2016 ???? - 15years. "


The P-80 went from contract award to first flight in 180 days. I guess the F-15 was a disaster. :roll: :doh:
"There I was. . ."
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4434
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post10 Nov 2016, 14:02

sferrin wrote:
rkap wrote:
sferrin wrote:"The F-35 program has suffered several setbacks due to aircraft catching fire, though previous incidents involved the Air Force's F-35A conventional take-off and landing variant."

:roll: These "journalists" should really compare the F-35 to other aircraft at this point in their development. They would be surprised.


Yes! I agree. Journalists should compare the F-35 to other aircraft at similar periods in there development.
F15 - Dec 1969 Selected and Funded - operational 1976 - 7years - 384 built and operational by 1979.
F35 - October 2001 Selected and Funded - how many partly operational 2016 ???? - 15years. "


The P-80 went from contract award to first flight in 180 days. I guess the F-15 was a disaster. :roll: :doh:

P-51, 44 days from bare floor to out the door.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2792
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post10 Nov 2016, 14:09

SpudmanWP wrote:Move advanced fighters take longer to develop, especially in the middle of an economic downturn, than they did in the 1970s. Computers & advanced integrated avionics are a big chunk of that. Add that to the increased scrutiny & attention to detail that today's development entails and you begin to understand why it take this long.

Compare the F-35 to the F-22, Rafale, or Eurofighter and they all took just as long.


Exactly. How about Sukhoi Su-27? Development began in 1969 and it got officially operational in 1990, only after almost 21 years of development.... End result was a single-role fighter capable of only air-to-air combat. Talk about development disaster... PAK FA has not been developed at fast pace either by any means.
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2885
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post11 Nov 2016, 17:40

[quote="hornetfinn..... Talk about development disaster... PAK FA has not been developed at fast pace either by any means.[/quote] :twisted:
Attachments
Pakfa.jpg
Previous

Return to Mishaps

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest