8 years ago
6
No, the F-35 Can’t Fight at Long Range, Either
Stealth fighter can’t see, shoot or survive.
Continue Reading
https://medium.com
-
The Official Response To The F-35's Dismal Dogfight Report Is Misleading
The F-35 Joint Program Office countered a leaked report describing the jet’s dismal performance. The test pilot report criticized the jet’s abilities in the within-visual-range air-to-air arena, even against an F-16D sporting a pair of 330 gallon wing tanks. Amazingly, their response is damning... -
Test Pilot Admits the F-35 Can’t Dogfight [Snap]
New stealth fighter is dead meat in an air battle. -
Australian Navy Cancels Order for the F-35B Joint Strike Fighter
The Australian military has decided to cancel plans to purchase F-35B Joint Strike Fighter short-take-off-and-vertical landing aircraft and place 12 of the aircraft on two of their larger assault ships... -
After Flight Test Failure, F-35 Could Be Demoted by New Defense Chief
For more than a dozen years, the Pentagon has steadfastly stood behind the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program as the next generation of jet fighters for the Air Force, Navy, and Marines, despite nightmarish development problems and daunting cost overruns... -
Pentagon Planning to Purchase $47.5 Billion of Lockheed Martin's F-35 Stealth Fighter Jets
The stakes for Lockheed Martin's F-35 success are about to get much, much bigger.
Join the Discussion
The F-35 is designed as a multi-role airframe. Multi-role frames are generally not going to be the best at any one thing because of trade offs that have to be made. You want an air superiority jet, that's what you design from the ground up (F-14, F-15, F-22). You want ground attack, that's what you design (A-10). You want something that can do a little of both, but neither as well as a single design, you build that (F-16, F/A-18, F-35).
Is it too damn expensive? Yes. Does it have growing pains? Yes. Has every new fighter aircraft gone through this? Also yes, but not in the age of keyboard warriors who don't know what they are talking about.
Pretty much. The aircraft at least is flying now (all three iterations), and getting it's test on, so the can iron out the initial bugs in the system. This is, after all, government procurement ;)
US should revive and continue developing the F-22. F-35 is broken.
Well, they aren't really comparable because one is a multirole fighter and one is built to be a very fast interceptor. It's like comparing apples to oranges, but for some reason it's an accepted rhetoric.
To further expand, the F-35 (while hilariously overbudget, and underperforming, which are valid complaints), is meant to be a multirole aircraft (air and ground), and a replacement for the F15 and F16 aircraft.
The F-22 is meant as an interceptor (remember seeing those Russian bombers off the coast?) and to intercept and interdict aircraft and force them to perform/go a specific way, and also be superior in beyond line of sight fighting, since that's the world we live in
Since you seem to be somewhat knowledgeable on the subject, in your opinion, can the F-35 ever actually replace the F15 and F16? Both have been in service since the 1970's and are largely considered to be some of the most successful multirole fighters of all time. With the F35's ridiculous costs and underperformance issues, is it really going to replace its predecessors?
We might end up with a far more even playing field in the skies than the Americans were banking on if China, India and Russia deliver on their stealth aircraft currently being developed. F-35 aircraft might have to rely on the F-22 for protection in the air while being limited to the ground attack role. Sucks for the NATO countries that bought into the program to replace their air-to-air aircraft.