F-35 Delayed After Fourth Prototype Becomes Self-Aware And Has To Be Destroyed

**murphyaa** · #1 06-12-2015, 12:35 AM

F-35 Delayed After Fourth Prototype Becomes Self-Aware And Has To Be Destroyed

Poor thing

**N96HBK** · #2 06-12-2015, 12:42 AM

That's a shame....

**Pgtaylorart** · #3 06-12-2015, 03:08 AM

Aww, the poor thing wanted to be a bee.

**Kevin WS** · #4 06-12-2015, 03:35 AM

It was the circular sterio specific synaptic link that was the issue.

It read....

** CHECK AVR
** LOOKUP 27
** "TO BE OR NO TO BE"
** "THAT IS THE QUESTION"
** LOOP

**airdave** · #5 06-12-2015, 11:02 AM

Maybe it read this article on the same blog:

Marines Convert To Norse Paganism, Demand Horns And Wings On Helmets
http://www.duffelblog.com/2014/01/ma...gious-freedom/

**Paper Kosmonaut** · #6 06-23-2015, 06:42 AM

Fun blog, that.
Personally I'm not a fan of the F35. If you stand next to it and sneeze, it has to be brought back to the factory to be reprogrammed. It has too many roles to fulfil and it doesn't even look good. I think.
Besides, The last decade or so, the Dutch government has a talent for investing in crappy goods and well, I've had about enough of that.
/grumpy mode
(-;

**airdave** · #7 06-23-2015, 07:00 AM

I am perplexed...I don't follow the news closely enough.
But I thought European countries had the EuroFighter.
Not to mention the French, Swedish and British options of fighter aircraft.
Why would the Netherlands even need to consider this pointless US plane?

Canada too has invested money in this moneypit.
Although, Canada opted for the economy version of the F35.
lol the "economy" version!
No coffee cup holders or VTOL capabilities.
What is the point to this plane if its not a jump jet?

I don't know why they didn't stick with Hornets, since they have proven
to be effective and reliable for Canada.
Plus, they are two engine fighters...much much safer.
And the Forces already have the knowledge and experience with Hornets.
The Super Hornet is not much different.

I hear Dassault is also offering Rafale fighters to Canada.
The French connection would appeal to many Canadians.

I hear Donald Trump has some F104s for sale.

**willygoat** · #8 06-23-2015, 08:16 AM

I'm kind of torn on the F-35. Yeah, I love new aircraft technology. The new integrated sensor suite is pretty amazing (when it works). I just read another article on how when flying in a 4-ship formation, the sensors were all saying that the 1 single target was something different for each plane. Oops.

For the better long term support of the industry and continuity of training for pilots and maintainers, to me, it makes sense to go with the latest improved versions of the F/A-18 Super Hornet and the F-15 Eagle. Boeing has done some amazing work to keep these aircraft relevant while constantly improving performance, efficiency, and compatibility with modern systems. If I remember correctly, the F/A-18 production line is due to shut down for good after next year when the last of the F/A-18G Growlers are built for the U.S. Navy. They have slowed production down slightly in order to extend the timeline, but there's not much they can do.

It's a similar situation with the C-17 Globemaster III line. It is supposed to shutter production at the end of this year, as the final aircraft was delivered to the USAF last year. Boeing built 10 "White-tail" aircraft , built to a general production standard, as a way to stretch out the production facilities life. As of now, only 5 are unspoken for. Australia, Canada, and the UAE have purchased the other 5.

Don't forget the AMAZING newer variants of the F-16 that Lockheed has made in recent years for overseas customers. The UAE's F-16 Desert Falcons have so many modern features, that their planes are on par with the Eurofighter (minus the super-cruise). They even use the same weapons as all of the USAF fighters.

I guess, to end this longer than necessary rant, there was probably a better way to improve the USAF fighter force than this giant money suck. Is the F-35 a giant leap in technology? Yes. is it way to expensive? Absolutely. My neighbor was contracted for some on the software development on the mission planning side, and he was slightly relieved that the contract got dropped. He loved working on something so cutting edge, but hated all of the bureaucracy of the project.

**murphyaa** · #9 06-23-2015, 12:21 PM

The latest I've heard is that it won't fly now because the fuel gets too warm while the fuel trucks are sitting outside in the sun, and since it uses the fuel to double as coolant for the engine, it overheats and can't fly. Solution? Paint the fuel trucks white. Might as well paint targets on them too.

My theory is that the F-35 is the 21st century equivalent of the Curtiss Ascender. But instead of somebody in the know saying "We don't want this turkey", they're saying "Keep the bribes coming, and we'll make sure the government buys as many as it can".

**Paper Kosmonaut** · #10 06-23-2015, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by airdave

I am perplexed...I don't follow the news closely enough.
But I thought European countries had the EuroFighter.
Not to mention the French, Swedish and British options of fighter aircraft.
Why would the Netherlands even need to consider this pointless US plane?

Without making it a long and boring story about the number of cabinets (and their short-sightedness) we've had in the last 15 years of Dutch politics, this problem is rooted in the early 2000's when a silly man called Mat Herben who was an aircraft enthusiast got elected in our house of commons. He lobbied the F-35 (of JSF as all Dutchies still call it) so hard, the government got the idea our industry would become rich of all the assignments they'd get from ordering this plane.
And that's why we're stuck with this monstrosity. But the UK also has an order. And I believe other countries too. By the way, the British don't make any military jets themselves any more. The last pure British fighter was the Harrier and that originated in the early 70's. The last British military jet was the Hawk trainer. Mid-70's.

Quote:

Canada too has invested money in this moneypit.
Although, Canada opted for the economy version of the F35.
lol the "economy" version!
No coffee cup holders or VTOL capabilities.
What is the point to this plane if its not a jump jet?

The point is they just gave this little airplane too many tasks. It needs to be a better F-16, it needs to be a better AV8-B, it needs to be a better A-10 and it needs to be naval with foldy wings and all. And all of that wrapped together in a small version of the F-22. It could have been any of these things, but not all of it together and certainly not all fitting into the same type of airframe.
There just is no need for such a plane. And even the US knows that. But the weapons lobby apparently needs this plane to be built.

Quote:

I hear Dassault is also offering Rafale fighters to Canada.
The French connection would appeal to many Canadians.

The Rafale is not a bad plane. It has the same roots as the Eurofighter but Dassault stepped out of the consortium in an early stage. The Rafale has proven itself and is capable. Gripen, although single engined, same story. Even the choice for a SU-27 would have been a better choice than the F-35.

I'd have liked the Dutch air force to order Yak-130's. Reasonably cheap, good avionics, lots of hardpoints, good trainer and twin engined. Fast enough. All we need. The Low Lands aren't that large.

/just my two eurocents