F-35 status (in BMS) request
-
Sprey is a hack. He inserts himself into technical evaluations that he lacks knowledge of and has built a following of internet fans that think he has been instrumental in the development and testing of things that he has not. His diatribes on the F-35 & F-15 are mostly B.S. He lacks the understanding of A/C tech since the F-16 was envisioned. He has fooled many people into believing he and Boyd had something to do with its development when all they provided was the theory behind a lightweight single engine inexpensive fighter. I don’t know if he is just ignorant or intentionally trying to get our advanced weapons programs canceled. Seeing his ridiculous attempt to have us halt the F-22 program by claiming it ignores the realities of aerial combat shows he either is a fool or has an agenda. He has said similar things for the worlds most effective A/C. He is very predictable. Every time we begin to develop a new generation fighter he goes into action and spreads B.S. and tries to get it canceled. It has been difficult for me to see all the people spread nonsense about the F-35 but people have a hard time understanding who knows and who doesn’t. The people working on it, testing it and flying it don’t waste their time trying to convince the public and much of it is classified.
I was supposed to go to China Lake and help develop the F-35 but I got out for other reasons. Many of the people I served with did and one of our pilots was the CO of the testing squadron for the F-35B. The difference between what Sprey and the general public claims, and what the people I know say is ridiculous. It’s when I realized that Sprey was either a fool or intentionally lying. For the most part I have stopped responding to people on the internet because they usually think they are always right and know everything even if it is classified. I usually just get a good laugh about it and follow along for the occasional entertainment of it.
-
yes and no on that last sentence. I can’t help but notice aesa and the massive overarching network of support those systems need to be accurate in the stealth role, using the fusion from other battlefield sensors not actually in the plane physically. Like you said, maybe it makes everything better.
I see a bloated Multi nation program proliferating stealth to the greater international community, and the feasibility of all this had massive debit in the decision to stop production (publicly) on the f-22a, I was born at night but not yesterday so I don’t take Public info too seriously, what they tell us in other words. But here is the tick, and just keep in mind, I’m not a tech genius, But I know how to swing a budget, and when to invest in new equipment that allows you to continue your trade…the raptor has the stealthiest radar ever made , and it is self contained…also the chipset is old…it’s also incredibly reliable and hardened against EM and was developed with the nuclear threat in mind…
The pig is a ground attack standoff highly automated soon to be flanked by drone swarms tech suite, pretending it’s an aeroplane. It’s good and bad, but whose to say what they’ve got in the dark…I think if we sell it there is something we don’t. But thats just me.
-
Sprey is a hack. He inserts himself into technical evaluations that he lacks knowledge of and has built a following of internet fans that think he has been instrumental in the development and testing of things that he has not. His diatribes on the F-35 & F-15 are mostly B.S. He lacks the understanding of A/C tech since the F-16 was envisioned. He has fooled many people into believing he and Boyd had something to do with its development when all they provided was the theory behind a lightweight single engine inexpensive fighter. I don’t know if he is just ignorant or intentionally trying to get our advanced weapons programs canceled. Seeing his ridiculous attempt to have us halt the F-22 program by claiming it ignores the realities of aerial combat shows he either is a fool or has an agenda. He has said similar things for the worlds most effective A/C. He is very predictable. Every time we begin to develop a new generation fighter he goes into action and spreads B.S. and tries to get it canceled. It has been difficult for me to see all the people spread nonsense about the F-35 but people have a hard time understanding who knows and who doesn’t. The people working on it, testing it and flying it don’t waste their time trying to convince the public and much of it is classified.
I was supposed to go to China Lake and help develop the F-35 but I got out for other reasons. Many of the people I served with did and one of our pilots was the CO of the testing squadron for the F-35B. The difference between what Sprey and the general public claims, and what the people I know say is ridiculous. It’s when I realized that Sprey was either a fool or intentionally lying. For the most part I have stopped responding to people on the internet because they usually think they are always right and know everything even if it is classified. I usually just get a good laugh about it and follow along for the occasional entertainment of it.
it’s definitely not lost on me that in the mid 90’s he basically led the push to proliferate the arab world with fifth gen tech, I think he for a time worked for dassault or BAE in some ancillary role. I really feel like that man is essentially operational security, a plant, a rabble rouser. He certainly makes me very patriotic…I think he loves his country…Riccioni on the other hand was a real work horse, more on the “IF YOU DON"T DO THIS YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE” kind of team but he really had tons to do with getting that viper made by the airforce if you listen to the airforce…
I personally, and this is just me, don’t but into a lot of that psychological malingering. I think it has something to do with braggadocio, and somewhat of the “fish keeps getting bigger” as far as Sprey is concerned, but maybe they just let him go wild as far as boyd, well he seems more of a pilots pilot, the guy that says " great idea it will never work leave it to a pilot" I think the HUD of the f-16 is amazing, especially as a sort of “moment in time” if you will, and not for us, but in 1975, wow. I know just from what I read about lockheed and the “secret” firms, boyd was kind of consulted along the way into his twilight on ideas, but didn’t really have his ruler and drafting table out much, if at all.
-
Sprey is a hack…
I also just wanted to add, didn’t they say the same thing about the tomcat, the hornet, the viper, the stealth fighter, the b2, and basically everything…?
I mean the media disseminates a very anti fighter pilot message in general. all out hit pieces,meanwhile they blast STEM for females like there aren’t dozens of females trapping on a boat everyday. Pretty anti american and if you follow the defense news, well they’ve been trying to declassify and sell everything from RAM to uranium ore to our foreign development competition basically for a dog’s age. it’s pretty sick. i was adopted and I’m an old timer, both of my parents were Korean veterans not fliers but still. Lots of the mud and the smoke and the mirrors is basically lost on the average north american nowadays. Like you, I mostly ignore it, and swing my hammer on the roof, get home and post about how I cant CCRP lob on here heh.
-
Difficult to give Sprey any respect because nearly everything he has publically stated has been wrong. Even Corams Boyd that is supposed to show him in a goodlight portrays him as Boyds pet monkey being used to further agendas.
The requirements for the A-X might be the one thing he may have got right, but even here the concept of jet powered a/c with next to no avionics was really up for question, by the gulf war application of technology in the AGM-65D was its saviour.
-
Sprey is a hack. He inserts himself into technical evaluations that he lacks knowledge of and has built a following of internet fans that think he has been instrumental in the development and testing of things that he has not. His diatribes on the F-35 & F-15 are mostly B.S. He lacks the understanding of A/C tech since the F-16 was envisioned. He has fooled many people into believing he and Boyd had something to do with its development when all they provided was the theory behind a lightweight single engine inexpensive fighter. I don’t know if he is just ignorant or intentionally trying to get our advanced weapons programs canceled. Seeing his ridiculous attempt to have us halt the F-22 program by claiming it ignores the realities of aerial combat shows he either is a fool or has an agenda. He has said similar things for the worlds most effective A/C. He is very predictable. Every time we begin to develop a new generation fighter he goes into action and spreads B.S. and tries to get it canceled. It has been difficult for me to see all the people spread nonsense about the F-35 but people have a hard time understanding who knows and who doesn’t. The people working on it, testing it and flying it don’t waste their time trying to convince the public and much of it is classified.
I was supposed to go to China Lake and help develop the F-35 but I got out for other reasons. Many of the people I served with did and one of our pilots was the CO of the testing squadron for the F-35B. The difference between what Sprey and the general public claims, and what the people I know say is ridiculous. It’s when I realized that Sprey was either a fool or intentionally lying. For the most part I have stopped responding to people on the internet because they usually think they are always right and know everything even if it is classified. I usually just get a good laugh about it and follow along for the occasional entertainment of it.
P.S. = bullshit. Many time he is simply lying and denies the laws of physics either… His fans very likely does not understand even high school physics and never have seen or undersand any PE pr PFM chart or diagram…
And simply blind to see the performance at least on airshow what F-16 and what F-35A can do. -
" if it were up to pierre, it would of had max 4500 lbs of fuel, no wing bags, and only infrared missiles, he even wanted to take the radar out at one point…the radar."
paraphrase from mind of war -
" if it were up to pierre, it would of had max 4500 lbs of fuel, no wing bags, and only infrared missiles, he even wanted to take the radar out at one point…the radar."
paraphrase from mind of warYep, pretty much… so no AIM-120, no AGM-88, no JDAM, no LGB, no HTS/ LANTIRN / SNIPER. So for missions, that leaves out CAPs, all-weather strike and penetration mission, SEAD/DEAD, CAS, BAI, SCAR…
Let’s see what’s left, Air Policing ? F4 & BMS would be a lot less interesting if he had his way
-
To me, what that reveals about his psychology is that he has taken an extreme position to counter another extreme position. Fortunately, they ended up meeting in the middle for the F-16.
-
a day fighter, with at most, an advanced IRST, that’s all he wanted. sustained 9g turns with a variable seat ( good idea) and dampening technology, that as far as I know, never got made.
pilots can’t sustain 9gs, I don’t care how fancy your seat is. Nasa thinks about doing it with fluids, but that’s like, generation 70….IN THEY YEAR 5000 IN THE YEAR 5000
-
my brother in law and I wear kinda talking about what I think viking stopped on, his father in law is a fighter pilot turned commercial and we are both jet geeks , but I think when uninformed people talk about it they think “its not as good as the F- _____” when if you in fact know what’s important and how to think about it all you think is “DEAD MIGS DEAD BAD GUYS SAFE GOOD GUYS”
thought that was worth saying.
-
-
-
-
Thanks a lot for sharing, querido hermano Toro.
Please don’t hate me for this, but I don’t like that thing, as good as it could be in doing its job (and we’re still to have it demonstrated, let it be clear ).
Without any offense to anyone, and best regards to all.
-
To me, the F-35 is like the F-111. Tries to do everything, and therefore starts out doing everything terribly. But, with enough time and exorbitant capital investments, you eventually end up with a good weapons system.
…With both of those aircraft, you could have certainly made simpler aircraft at lower costs that would have done the same missions. But people are addicted to their own versions of reality, so there you go…
-
To me, the F-35 is like the F-111. Tries to do everything, and therefore starts out doing everything terribly. But, with enough time and exorbitant capital investments, you eventually end up with a good weapons system.
…With both of those aircraft, you could have certainly made simpler aircraft at lower costs that would have done the same missions. But people are addicted to their own versions of reality, so there you go…
Agree on yours above, Thaeris. On 199 per cent.
According to that little I can saw and talked with some RL pilots of any specialization in years, I have learned that having an “all-purposes” aircraft is not only impossible, but simply useless.
That because having a specialized one is unavoidable, due to the fact that the manifacturers, and their engineering and technical staff behind them, can’t compromise their choices more than a certain point, once reached it anyone will have to decide if that plane will be apted to fly, i.e., naval or ground and air-to-air or air to ground missions, satisfying those respective tasks accordingly in full and with tolerances no more than this.
The reasons of state budgetary economics have nothing to do here, to me… indeed, in my opinion, that choice would turn out to be a resounding failure, in conclusion. And here the examples are not lacking, I’m just afraid.
Just my own cent, nothing more.
With best regards to all.
-
To me, the F-35 is like the F-111. Tries to do everything, and therefore starts out doing everything terribly. But, with enough time and exorbitant capital investments, you eventually end up with a good weapons system.
…With both of those aircraft, you could have certainly made simpler aircraft at lower costs that would have done the same missions. But people are addicted to their own versions of reality, so there you go…
I do not get how can be posted such funny comments.
The F-35A was designed from 0 as a multirole fighter with main role as strike. Why nobody ever labelled the F-16 with “ries to do everything, and therefore starts out doing everything terribly”…? Because the F-16 was designed to LWF mainly as a fighter with secondary AG capability. Regardless of original design the Viper spent most of her career with strike duties with pods and heavy payload. This resulted the weight gain and more and more stronger engine to compensate the drag and weight of stores. (And cracks in the airframe.) Even of her chief designer Harry J. Hillaker stated he would had designed differently the Viper if he knew how is used in conflicts the light jet.
F-35A got integrated from all of the EQ with much less drag what F-16 carries externally and also benefits in stealth the 0 extra drag by stores. In demo config F-35A has the same absolute performance as F-16C which means the relative weight and drag increase is meaningless comparing to F-16C which always carry 2x370 gal drop tanks and at least two pods, ECM + TGP but HTS is also possible. Even this config is unarmed but barely can fly supersonic the Viper…
Your funny statement simply deny the laws of physics and 30+ year of technological advancement since F-16 and 60+ year the design of the F-111.
Yes, if the commonality req. would not exist F-35A and C could be even better but this does not mean it it doing everything terribly.
BTW where are the fans of F-14? Why is not fit on the Big Cat the “Tries to do everything, and therefore starts out doing everything terribly.”
Or what about F-15E family…?I simply cannot understand such comments about F-35A which simply deny ANY logic of fact…
-
Wow, thread derailment achieved!
…Next, you’re great, Molni, and I truly mean that.
However, we are both students of history. You cannot look back on programs like the afore-mentioned F-111 and F-35 and tell me that they were great, efficient, and without major developmental problems. Both of those aircraft, along with other wonder-do-alls like the F-105, eventually turned out to be good, if not very good, aircraft. It’s not a very smooth or fiscally-responsible road, however. The F-111, upon its debut in Vietnam, was so terrible it had to be removed from the theater. When it was eventually permanently retired from the US and Australia, it left a capability gap that has still not been completely filled. I love the F-111, but it started out as a boondoggle. The F-111B is an uncomfortable reminder of how inefficient the concept of “streamlining” the inventories of various air arms can be. This is not to say that streamlining cannot be done: the F-4 and the A-7 were both fantastic airframes in that mold. The sauce that made them successful in that area was a little bit different from the F-111, however. Note that drastic airframe changes were not required to make them functional for the purposes of the different services (and no, I would not count the addition of the M61 on the F-4E as a drastic change), namely because both of those aircraft started out as naval fighters.
So, concerning the F-35: I have never said that it was a bad aeroplane, and have generally contended that it would ultimately end up as a very good aeroplane (just like the F-111). But, it is a case of history rhyming rather than repeating itself. This time, it seems that a single airframe, which is more like three rather different ones (unlike the F-4 and A-7 examples from earlier), will suit the needs of the various services well. But, did that “streamlining” really yield any results in terms of cost-effectiveness or efficiency? Those were the primary selling points, after all…
Therefore, when I come at this subject from the lens of history, I don’t see any lack of logic. I’d say that the physics tangent sounds to be a bit of a red herring from my perspective. But then, for better or worse, people are addicted to their own versions of reality, so there you go…
-
Wow, thread derailment achieved!
…Next, you’re great, Molni, and I truly mean that.
However, we are both students of history. You cannot look back on programs like the afore-mentioned F-111 and F-35 and tell me that they were great, efficient, and without major developmental problems. Both of those aircraft, along with other wonder-do-alls like the F-105, eventually turned out to be good, if not very good, aircraft. It’s not a very smooth or fiscally-responsible road, however. The F-111, upon its debut in Vietnam, was so terrible it had to be removed from the theater. When it was eventually permanently retired from the US and Australia, it left a capability gap that has still not been completely filled. I love the F-111, but it started out as a boondoggle. The F-111B is an uncomfortable reminder of how inefficient the concept of “streamlining” the inventories of various air arms can be. This is not to say that streamlining cannot be done: the F-4 and the A-7 were both fantastic airframes in that mold. The sauce that made them successful in that area was a little bit different from the F-111, however. Note that drastic airframe changes were not required to make them functional for the purposes of the different services (and no, I would not count the addition of the M61 on the F-4E as a drastic change), namely because both of those aircraft started out as naval fighters.
The F-111 was crippled even from the beginning. Simply was not available such engine which is enough powerful with good consumption to achieve the demanded CAP time at distance. Also was totally funny and not justifiable the M2.4 top speed - because it could be achieved only by internal stores and this leaded to crew capsule which was also unnecessary it existed only because of the idiotic and techno optimist specifications.
The concept of F-14 dropped the most idiotic and unrealistic and UNNECESARY requests* set less top speed and less CAP time which made possible barely make a good fighter. Because of fear of the new engine it got the TF-30 which was such for a dogfigther.
The F-111B could be good BARCAP and strike plane but as a real ASF it was doomed. Even today would not be possible such fuel qty. a good fighter.- Even for the most beloved 4th gen aircraft the demanded top speed had not use, at all. They could reach only with gun or 2xAIM-9…
For F-14.
Lowered the BARCAP time.
Lowered the top speed.
Lowered the ejection speed.This made unnecessary the wide airframe and the traditional front/backseat was possible.
Erased the internal bay. This made lighter the airframe combined with the lack of crew capsule.
The carrier AIM-54 was restricted to 4 because it could bring back to deck only 4. Yes, in theory was capable to 6 but it could be utilized only from land unless you wish to drop to sea 2 before landing in case enemy do not show up…
The carried 4 missiles had to be carried externally. So the less airframe weight was converted into extra drag… But all missiles could be carried fix HP and not rotating pivots on F-111. —> Even more lighter airframe.But in case you used only AIM-7 in ASF the airframe had much better Ps values even just the poor TF-30 and would be much better with the originally planned but later cancelled engine. The F-14 reached its planned flight performance with GE F110.
So if the original specification had been better it could be built in first attempt an F-14 like fighter. You can call it F-4 Phantom II…
So, concerning the F-35: I have never said that it was a bad aeroplane, and have generally contended that it would ultimately end up as a very good aeroplane (just like the F-111). But, it is a case of history rhyming rather than repeating itself. This time, it seems that a single airframe, which is more like three rather different ones (unlike the F-4 and A-7 examples from earlier), will suit the needs of the various services well. But, did that “streamlining” really yield any results in terms of cost-effectiveness or efficiency? Those were the primary selling points, after all…
Sorry, I cannot help you…
You simply deny the reality. F-16 and F-15E, the F-18 and Super Hornet the (I have no idea why) F-14D is loved and admired as a good multirole jets. But a much more advanced jet with 30+ year later technology cannot reach the level of these?WHY?
Sorry, I cannot stand such…
I rather do not use some words because of fear of ban…