May 26, 201114 yr Author Now in my mind: perhaps it will be better for market issues to name the F-35 as "Little Raptor" or "Baby Raptor". I expect they'd rather not drag down the F-22 too much, even if they can't sell any more of them.
May 30, 201114 yr Author From Defense Aerospace [excerpt] Pentagon F-35 Review Postponed Until Mid-June (excerpt)(Source: Reuters; published May 27, 2011) WASHINGTON --- A high-level Pentagon review of the Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter program has been postponed from this week until June 14, three sources familiar with the scheduled meeting said on Friday.
June 2, 201114 yr Author From Flight Global [excerpt] DATE: 02/06/11SOURCE: Flight International Lockheed F-35C emerges as candidate for future US Navy contract By Stephen Trimble The Lockheed Martin F-35 has emerged for the first time as a candidate to replace a fleet of 556 Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets as a carrier-based air dominance fighter for the US Navy after 2025.
June 3, 201114 yr Is it just me, or does "F-35 Air Dominance Fighter" sound suspiciously like "Pig Wearing Lipstick"? It's a STRIKE AIRCRAFT, fer crissakes! One with decent air-to-air potential, to be sure, but a striker just the same.
June 3, 201114 yr Is it just me, or does "F-35 Air Dominance Fighter" sound suspiciously like "Pig Wearing Lipstick"? <_ it a strike aircraft fer crissakes one with decent air-to-air potential to be sure but striker just the same. src="%7B___base_url___%7D/uploads/emoticons/default_mad.gif" alt=":angry:"> It isn't just you. Would I rather have a bunch of F-35 in place of a bunch of F-16, yes. Would I rather have a bunch of F-35 in place of a bunch of F-22, no. The F-35 is in large part the high/low mix gone very bad (like high/nose up stalling). I'm sure it is a great plane for many situations but as these arguments have indicated, not an air superiority fighter vs other fifth generation combatants and maybe not even against 4+ generation opponents.
June 3, 201114 yr Author The F-35 ... not an air superiority fighter vs other fifth generation combatants and maybe not even against 4+ generation opponents. Sobering thought when the NGAD is supposed to be a sixth generation fighter.
June 6, 201114 yr Author From Flight Global [excerpt] DATE: 06/06/11SOURCE: Flight International F-35 strikes trillion-dollar mark for maintenance bills By Stephen Trimble Perhaps the most alarming figure yet associated with the Lockheed Martin F-35 programme is in the last line of a 53-page cost estimate prepared in late 2010 by the US Department of Defense.
June 7, 201114 yr Author From DefenseNews [excerpt] F-35 Engine Maker to Slowly Lower CostBy MARCUS WEISGERBER Published: 6 Jun 2011 17:27 Engine maker Pratt & Whitney says it is incrementally lowering the price of its F-35 power plant and could possibly drop the cost even more as the Pentagon begins negotiating for the latest batch of fighter jets.
June 21, 201114 yr Very extense digest of reports about the doubts of the F-35 air-to-air capabilities: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/The-F-...troversy-05089/ Some of these criticisms were echoed in the left-wing American Center for Defense Information’s Sept 8/08 briefing “Joint Strike Fighter: The Latest Hotspot in the U.S. Defense Meltdown.” This analysis by Pierre M. Spey, a key member of the F-16 and A-10 design teams, cast sharp doubt on the F-35’s capabilities: “Even without new problems, the F-35 is a ‘dog.’ If one accepts every performance promise the DoD currently makes for the aircraft, the F-35 will be: “Overweight and underpowered: at 49,500 lb (22,450kg) air-to-air take-off weight with an engine rated at 42,000 lb of thrust, it will be a significant step backward in thrust-to-weight ratio for a new fighter…. [F-35A and F-35B variants] will have a ‘wing-loading’ of 108 lb per square foot…. less manoeuvrable than the appallingly vulnerable F-105 ‘Lead Sled’ that got wiped out over North Vietnam…. payload of only two 2,000 lb bombs in its bomb bay…. With more bombs carried under its wings, the F-35 instantly becomes ‘non-stealthy’ and the DoD does not plan to seriously test it in this configuration for years. As a ‘close air support’... too fast to see the tactical targets it is shooting at; too delicate and flammable to withstand ground fire; and it lacks the payload and especially the endurance to loiter usefully over US forces for sustained periods…. What the USAF will not tell you is that ‘stealthy’ aircraft are quite detectable by radar; it is simply a question of the type of radar and its angle relative to the aircraft…. As for the highly complex electronics to attack targets in the air, the F-35, like the F-22 before it, has mortgaged its success on a hypothetical vision of ultra-long range, radar-based air-to-air combat that has fallen on its face many times in real air war. The F-35’s air-to-ground electronics promise little more than slicker command and control for the use of existing munitions.”
June 22, 201114 yr Author From Aviation Week [excerpt] Senate Panel Barely Turns Back JSF ThreatJun 21, 2011 By Jen DiMascio The U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) nearly endorsed a move that could end Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter — and the effort may continue.
June 24, 201114 yr Author From DefenseNews [excerpt] Is the JSF Faster Than We Thought?Posted by Bradley ***ton | June 23rd, 2011 | Paris Air Show 2011 By DAVE MAJUMDAR • PARIS — The F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) might be faster than previously reported. In a briefing at the Paris Air Show on June 21, U.S. Air Force Maj. Gen. C.D. Moore, deputy program executive officer for the F-35 program, said that the aircraft could fly at 750 knots and Mach 1.6. That would mean that at certain altitudes, the aircraft has a top speed that is considerably higher than previously known, although the Mach limit would remain the same.
July 5, 201114 yr Author $19.8m for a single JSF engine From Defense Aerospace [excerpt] Pentagon Contract Announcement(Source: U.S Department of Defense; issued July 1, 2011) United Technologies Corp., Pratt & Whitney, Military Engines, East Hartford, Conn., is being awarded a $19,811,545 modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-incentive-fee/cost-plus-incentive-fee contract (N00019-09-C-0015) for the procurement of one Low Rate Initial Production 4 (LRIP 4) Conventional Take-Off and Landing propulsion systems for the Royal Netherlands Air Force.
July 11, 201114 yr Author From Aviation Week's Ares blog [excerpt] Slide The Dutchies To The Right Hand SidePosted by Bill Sweetman at 7/11/2011 9:29 AM CDT The Netherlands has decided to delay and stretch out its acquisition of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. In a July 1 letter to parliament, defense minister Hans Hillen says that a revised plan, reflecting the most recent schedule changes "starts the flow of production aircraft in 2019, and lasts until 2027".
Create an account or sign in to comment