Author Topic: White Elephant?  (Read 6288 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Wallacey

  • Sergeant at Arms
  • *
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #25 on: June 26, 2015, 02:45:35 PM »
Interesting comments- thanks for keeping the thread up to date :)




 :-*
Whatever

Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #26 on: June 26, 2015, 03:43:14 PM »
:)

The next few months are going to be critical I think, first live squadron, multi-national training workups, and tight defense budgets everywhere.

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #27 on: June 27, 2015, 04:04:18 PM »
Knew this article was around somewhere, in general interesting but read the last paragraph :)

http://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/truth-about-mig-29-180952403/?page=3

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #28 on: June 28, 2015, 01:34:15 PM »
And related to the above this turned up:



It may be Russian but this is an aircraft that the RAAF could actually defend Australia with :)

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)





Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #30 on: July 01, 2015, 07:52:41 PM »
Yeah,

I'm really not very surprised by that, the F-16 still owns the knife-fight-in a-phone-box.

The argument of course is that it will never come down to a merge, that brilliant missiles will do all shoot downs - been hearing that since the 60s, still don't believe it.

The comment about the helmet is interesting, it's SUPPOSED to give BETTER all-round situational awareness...

I wonder if they are brave enough to play some DACT with true competition in the modern fighter world, like the Typhoon II ?

However just how any opinion from Abbott can have any credence is beyond me, I'd never volunteer to take that idiot for a test-flight, you'd never get the stink out of the cockpit...

Cheers



Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #31 on: July 02, 2015, 01:05:47 PM »
The follow on article:

http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/pentagon-lockheed-martin-defend-f-35-lightning-iis-lack-of-dogfighting-performance/story-fnpjxnlk-1227424702476

The list of things this aircraft can't do is getting longer than what it can....

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #32 on: August 04, 2015, 04:19:43 PM »
Hmm,

This is long but worth it, an experienced Marine pilot explaining why the F-35 is really better than it seems:



I can accept the network centric nature of the -35, doesn't really deal with the engineering issues and other more fundamental concerns though...

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #33 on: August 10, 2015, 02:09:59 PM »
The latest on the T-50 - video is a bit glitchy.

http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/video-shows-russias-next-generation-warplane-the-t-50-being-put-through-its-paces/story-fnpjxnlk-1227477206789

The argument about the F-35 changing the face of dogfighting really is getting laughable, as Shaw's classic "Fighter Combat" the bible of the craft and what the vast majority of fighter pilots learn from teaches the dogfight is controlled by the tactics of advantage and won by the better pilot but the quality of the aircraft does have a bearing.

The T-50 is not so clear however, Russia as the article notes have cut the order to a mere dozen and India as a partner and potential client don't seem too impressed.

The report of the IAF roundly defeating Typhoon IIs is more than a beat up though, the particular exercise was set up that way and even the IAF agree.

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #34 on: October 06, 2015, 04:42:04 PM »
Hmm,

The F-35C, bigger wing non-VSTOL naval version for the USN is undergoing sea-trials right now on the Eisenhower, seems to be doing ok and in less than millpond weather.

Not much has really been said about that variant, it carries more fuel has a beefed up tail to handle the hook and so far has sort of slipped under the radar. It actually looks like it will be pretty much ok for the Navy except that the same bugs the USAF is having to grapple with in the -A version, mostly code and cockpit are right there.

It still has an at the moment useless void behind the cockpit where the -B airframe demands space for the fan though, Navy are apparently saying get it to us that way and we'll stick some fuel in there...

Still one clusterfuck of a programme...

Cheers

Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #35 on: October 24, 2015, 06:40:37 PM »
This is going to hurt but the new leader in Canada is absolutely correct:

http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/f-35-stealth-fighter-under-intense-attack/story-fnpjxnlk-1227579827067

The reality is the defense needs of Canada are not really much different to ours.

This programme is going to be in huge trouble soon, the problem is that Lockheed cannot be allowed to go under, too many in -service airframes to support and too much other perfectly good stuff running. Besides, who wants Boeing to be the only manufacturer in the US ? :)

It's a little ironic though that currently Russia and China have as much team diversity as the US....

Cheers

Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Richo

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 2956
  • Fast, Cheap, Light...pick any two
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #36 on: October 26, 2015, 02:11:34 PM »
And now they're going to cost us an extra 1 million per plane....

Canada woke up and pulled out of the multi nation buying consortium.
Work Hard, Play Hard, Stay Hard

 

 
Meet my little Baby

Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #37 on: October 26, 2015, 04:02:08 PM »
Hmm,


The new Government of Canada is not sworn in until 4/11, a lot can happen in politics in that time but if their new PM is anything like his dad he'll stick to his guns.

It's not so much the extra money though, over life of programme that could go either way, it's that Canada is breaking ranks for all the right reasons, it is not a suitable aircraft for their role which is purely air defense. We should probably look at it that way ourselves.

It's notable as well that Canada has never not bought American in the Jet Age - they may still do with Super Hornets or F-15s but it is to be an open competition and Saab, Eurofighter and Dassault will most likely all bid.

I'd love to see Sukhoi make an offer - actually I'd love to be in Washington if they did ;)

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #38 on: January 22, 2016, 02:04:49 PM »
Going to put this here.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/how-to-win-in-a-dogfight-stories-from-a-pilot-who-flew-1682723379

It's a rather long interview with a retired USAF fighter pilot whom I have a lot of time for, very interesting in its own right but towards the end see what he has to say about the F-35...

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline LordDread

  • Sergeant at Arms
  • *
  • Posts: 4066
  • Eat da-shiang bao-tza shr duh lah doo-tze,dong ma?
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #39 on: January 22, 2016, 02:30:13 PM »
i say we need to remake a modern f-111, lets get an old one and marry it to a warthog ... now that would be something special, and very scary :p

Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #40 on: January 22, 2016, 02:57:10 PM »
:)

Swing wings are not in vogue at all, but Sukhoi (as usual) have an option:

http://allaboutkits.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Sukhoi-Su-47-wallpaper.jpg

The -47 has not thus far gone past experimental and details of its performance are veiled in secrecy but FSW designs have extraordinary flight capabilities including low and slow with plenty of weaponry so could perform both air-to-air and CAS rather well.

Need to remember though that the A-10 was not just damned effective and highly survivable it was also cheap which a multi-role would not be :)

Fantasyland would be a swing wing that could swing forward as well as back :)

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #41 on: February 02, 2016, 02:23:26 PM »
Hmm,

The bad press doesn't get any better:

http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/pentagon-official-declares-f35-joint-strike-fighter-not-capable-of-unsupported-combat/news-story/d4c120babe07e2549dd5fe159d1b57c0?sv=3797550962c0828362efa5646312a997

Does seem to be very much focusing in on the B though, which only a minority of customers want, RN and US Marines in the end.

Cheers

Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #42 on: June 23, 2016, 12:00:34 PM »
I wondered when this would happen:

http://www.news.com.au/technology/zombie-combat-jets-pressed-into-service/news-story/17ad6847d31bff1554adca5b71ed5329

The Marine -18s in particular have been being hammered of late.

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #43 on: August 03, 2016, 11:24:23 AM »
It is just becoming more and more of a farce:

http://www.news.com.au/technology/gadgets/the-f35-strike-fighter-has-been-declared-combat-capable-but-is-it/news-story/7556110762b1aec3f73b49949651507b

So essentially all of these partner nations, us included, have put in funding for a project that has gone way over time and budget and now it is being delivered crippled and with reduced fighting capability?

What a joke...

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Wallacey

  • Sergeant at Arms
  • *
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #44 on: August 03, 2016, 05:19:06 PM »
Agreed.

Maybe the next generation...

Whatever

Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #45 on: August 03, 2016, 06:56:16 PM »
Maybe,

Some friends at the Pentagon have told me it's just a temporary thing, the code is not well secured, whatever that means.

Ordinarily I'm sort of chomping at the bit to get to fly a new jet, not that I always get the opportunity, but this one I think I'll pass on for now. The first couple are supposed to arrive at Pearce airbase just a few miles from me before end of year, I'll probably go take a look but it's pretty bloody underwhelming for all the time and money - most unusual for a Lockheed project.

Cheers
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #46 on: December 12, 2016, 10:19:24 AM »
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Wallacey

  • Sergeant at Arms
  • *
  • Posts: 886
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #47 on: December 12, 2016, 03:26:25 PM »
Still a prototype with lots of bugs, after 10 years and lots of money  ;zn
Whatever

Offline Hardman

  • Big Kahuna
  • *
  • Posts: 11882
  • Single Malt Effect
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #48 on: December 12, 2016, 06:03:18 PM »
 :)

You know myself and a couple of friends figured out the other day that  including full R&D we created the full Harrier dev units for less than the cost of one these pieces of shit - in real dollar terms....

Cheers
« Last Edit: December 13, 2016, 01:12:33 PM by Hardman »
Politically incorrect?  You betcha!!!  :-)




Offline Rybags

  • Sergeant at Arms
  • *
  • Posts: 2227
  • Dudeworld
    • View Profile
Re: White Elephant?
« Reply #49 on: December 12, 2016, 06:24:58 PM »
10 years?  Try closer to 25.

1993 - initial studies and submissions by 4 manufacturers.
1995 - UK first overseas partner, Canada joins in 1997.
1996 - development contracts awarded to Boeing and Lockheed-Martin (the "real" work starts to begin)
2001 - flyoff between Boeing and Lockheed, system development and demonstration contract awarded to L-M.
2008 - first weight optimised F-35A produced
2010 - production started.

Fair enough, it's a drawn out program to not concentrate the budget black hole in a few years and the F-16 and Super Hornet were still fairly relevant and competitive well into the 2000s but it's getting ridiculous.