The F-35 Lightning II Pax River Integrated Test Force (ITF) completed its second F-35C developmental test (DT-II) phase Oct. 10, 2015. The testing was completed six days ahead of schedule. Learn more: www.f35.com/ne....
Fuck yes!!! The navy has pretty much become a mobile airforce that can go around the world. With the support of the f18 super hornets, you've got air tankers, growlers( adv electronic warfare), and strikers/ bombers. U.S navy is in a league of its own!!
+Vladimir Stanislavovich PURE BULLSHIT, just plain crap and you know it. "it is said" is just to get anyone to think that the bullshit just might be real.
+Vladimir Stanislavovich It's not a dog fighting aircraft tho. It can shoot rockets fowards which will then redirect backwards into following aircraft.
+Adolf Batman I wonder how F35 will hide for example T 50 which OLS sees much further 100 km, in addition to OLS and the main AESA radar N036 already are tested side AESA, as well as radars installed in the slats and the tail of the aircraft. AESA in slats mounted on su35S ... mine to rely stealth is not an option ... + RF is working on a new type of photoradar stealth then finally lose meaning ...
Please terminate this plane! You ask the best Naval Aviators in the world and there are not sure if this plane is the best plane for the Navy! This whole project was based on the B model for the Marines cancel it!
plumbit111 That's pretty much how it always goes, we haven't been wrong much before. If the programs reorganization back in 2010 hadn't gone as well as it has I would be saying the same thing a lot of people say today, but it has gone well, even better then the were demanded too. Also the basline design is the F-35A, the B is based off the A, the C is based off the A as well but has a larger wing and tail surface.
What I was trying to say and it came from Pierre Sprey no plane should be design for 3 services and that was the thinking from day one to make it work. Sprey has said that the Marines vertical lift design would make the overall airframe of the planes to wide and fat to perform as a dogfighter. Designer will say that's ok we can add more fuel and internal weapon capability but the weight keeps rising and the wings and control surfaces are too small to turn.If PW or GE can't increase their thrust by say 10,000Ibs. this plane in general will be a turkey!
plumbit111 The 3 services getting lumped into 1 air frame was the only way all 3 services were going to get a jet. The JSF was started in the 1990's during Clinton's military budget cuts and the decline after the cold war. Even in the early 2000s it would have been a hard sale to get all 3 services a unique jet. They tried a couple other things, like using similar equipment but having 3 separate designs and 3 separate contracts still. The joint project was the only way they had a high chance of getting it passed in congress. It was going to be a single engine design from the get go, only people not super happy with that was the navy since they have been flying twin engines for the past 30 years. The USAF and Pratt and Whitney stepped in to show how modern engines were performing worldwide in single engine aircraft. Was the F-35 built with dog fighting in mind, yes, but 3rd or 4th down the list, not first like the F-16, which also had nothing else on the list. Luckily for us the F-16 was able to adapt into a great multi-role fighter but that's not how it was designed. Dog fights will happen but pretty much everyone tries to avoid them, turning engagements are pretty much a gamble even in super maneuverable aircraft, you have Helmet mounted cueing , HOBS missiles and everyone is in the same ballpark maneuverability wise. The F-35 was destined to be fat from the get go, all 5th gens are. They have to house all there weapons inside(with the F-35 having a focus on larger A2G weapons), and on the F-35 A and C a crap load of fuel is also carried eliminating the need for EFT's on every mission like how 4th gens fly. You end up with a worse air show performer but a better war fighter. The F-35A can go 9g, -3g and still cleared for top speed with 2 x 2000lb bombs and 2 amramms, still has its targeting pod (EOTS is built in) and ECM system (also built in), and 18,500lbs of fuel. A F-16 is limited in every kinematic category when carrying that loud out, and so is the F-18, Eurofighter, Rafale , all 4th gens in the F-35's size range can't pull 9g with that loud out. Control surface wise the F-35C shown in the video has freakin HUGE control surfaces on the wing almost 60% larger than the F-35A,B and has a enlarged tailplane over the F-35A,B. The F-35A has the same wingspan and similar wing loading(when at half fuel) as a F-16 (both have similar range in this configuration as well) but has a significantly larger tailplane than the Blk 52 viper. The engine thrust is fine atm, on the bench the F135 has done 50,000lbs of thrust but in it's current configuration it would be to hot for the F-35 at that power rating. The F135 will have a blk 1 upgrade by around 2018-19 this is focusing on fuel burn rate(increasing range), the blk 2 upgrade slated for early 2020's will have a 10% increase in thrust goal. If you wanna see a t/w comparison do a F-35A at loaded weight vs a F-16 with 2 x 330 gallon fuel tanks, the F-16 would have to have those tanks to fly anywhere near as far as the F-35 and that's without any weapons or sensors still, you find T/W and wing loading similar on the 2 aircraft. The F-35 doesn't always have to fly with a full internal fuel load for every mission like all the 4th gens (western) do.
Abel Trevino The designers will use what will be needed. If the F-35s needed canards it would have them and the F-35B and F-22 is vectored thrust. You need to study aircraft designs if you want to know about fighter designs.
