F-35, good or bad?

Argue about something versus the other.

F-35, good or bad?

Minnysota
6% Armaments Designer
Minnysota
6% Armaments Designer
Joined: 30 Jun 2010, 05:15

09 Jan 2011, 06:19 #1

Alright, well as the typical person who just reads NSG and sometimes participates, I got caught up in the whole idea that the F-35 was a total piece of shit. Well, then no Endorse came in and brought the pimp hand down on the people who said that, and it got me all confused. So, I thought I would ask people who are extremely intelligent on the topic. Is the F-35 good or bad at what it was intended to do? What are the good things about it? What are the bad things?
Reply
Like

no endorse
You have way too much time on your hands ...
no endorse
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Joined: 11 Apr 2007, 01:21

09 Jan 2011, 07:48 #2

Well, you already have seen my opinion, but here it is again:

The F-35 program has met or exceeded the vast majority of its design goals. The program has failed to contain costs or stay on timeline, but the end product will be worthy of purchase.



NOW, one concern is that the stealthiness of the F-35 is not all-aspect or ELO a la F-22. It is reduced signature to VLO, I'm not sure, and it varies based on the direction. It is a quantum leap above such humorous investments as Eurofighter Typhoon, however the criticism of the aircraft being "penny-wise and pound foolish" is somewhat valid. This thing won't be cheap, and it isn't in the same league as the F-22 in terms of stealthiness. It is cheaper than the F-22, but the cost effectiveness is somewhat interesting.

Silent Vipers and Silent Eagles are also very interesting investments, and the cost gradient suggests that Vipers, Hornets, and Eagles will be around for a long time yet. We can't afford to operate as many F-35s as the enemy can operate MiGs. (That's in no way to validate Spiz's KEKEKEKEKEKE strategy with aviation) And, as with any stealth aircraft, external stores fuck stealth to the point where you have some interesting tradeoffs going.

IRC wrote:[22:39]Spizania: A chain is a unit of length; it measures 66 feet or 22 yards or 4 rods or 100 links[1] (20.1168m). <<< This is why Britian ruled the world
[22:39]Spizania: we created a system of measurements noone else could understand
[17:57] matinsky theres only one thing that can save saxon england
[17:57] matinsky ...
[17:57] matinsky ...
[17:57] Rosdivan Frogs?
[17:57] matinsky a mark XXXIII bolo
Reply
Like

Falls
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Falls
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Joined: 06 Jun 2007, 01:13

09 Jan 2011, 08:12 #3


nigger fuck yo couch.


But seriously, I like the F-35 more then the F-22 as the F-22 just seems like real life wank as far as I am concerned.
Reply
Like

United States of PA
74% Armaments Designer
United States of PA
74% Armaments Designer
Joined: 10 Jul 2009, 16:47

09 Jan 2011, 08:34 #4

F-16XL is tha bomb.

Enough so i intend to design a plane based off of it here in the near future.


Seriously though, everyone seems to connotate the F-35s high cost and failure to meet its Cost Goals as evidence of a overall shitty plane.

F-35 is still a plane that tries to do too much on one airframe in my opinion, but is still very good at it however.
Ekraysia: I have to say, comparing your military equipment to that of the average NSer would be like comparing the T-34 to a hastily up-armoured elderly horse.
Too Lyras and Lamoni in the LY9/M22 Discussion thread

Sumer: But, as they say: When the pin is pulled, Mr.Grenade is not our friend.

USPA:Tenskwatawa is supposed to be crapped
USPA: wait
USPA: nvm
Lamoni: lol
Lamoni: That's the first time that i've heard of a sub coming out of THAT crack!
Reply
Like

Satirius
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Satirius
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Joined: 12 Mar 2010, 05:04

09 Jan 2011, 13:29 #5

Since when did an American weapon system ever stay in budget ololololololol
Reply
Like

United States of PA
74% Armaments Designer
United States of PA
74% Armaments Designer
Joined: 10 Jul 2009, 16:47

09 Jan 2011, 15:33 #6

Satirius @ Jan 9 2011, 02:29 PM wrote: Since when did an American weapon system ever stay in budget ololololololol
Fair point. Was about to say F-15, but i have no information on the program costs of that.
Ekraysia: I have to say, comparing your military equipment to that of the average NSer would be like comparing the T-34 to a hastily up-armoured elderly horse.
Too Lyras and Lamoni in the LY9/M22 Discussion thread

Sumer: But, as they say: When the pin is pulled, Mr.Grenade is not our friend.

USPA:Tenskwatawa is supposed to be crapped
USPA: wait
USPA: nvm
Lamoni: lol
Lamoni: That's the first time that i've heard of a sub coming out of THAT crack!
Reply
Like

Minnysota
6% Armaments Designer
Minnysota
6% Armaments Designer
Joined: 30 Jun 2010, 05:15

09 Jan 2011, 15:41 #7

Alright, so you guys have pretty much convinced me that it is not a bad aircraft (I feel safer trusting your opinions to this subject). However, does anyone think it will succeed in filling the role of the A-10 in CAS? I'm pretty sure I read on Wikipedia that it is to replace the A-10, but I will check better sources.
Reply
Like

Crookfur
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Crookfur
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Joined: 10 Apr 2007, 16:04

09 Jan 2011, 16:03 #8

No reason why it shouldn't, sure it wont do the job in exactly the same way but it will be at least equal to an F-16/Tornado Gr.4/Rafale or any of the other current strike fighters being used for CAS purposes and it will have a extra degree of survivability when used to carry out CAS in conflcits with operating enviroments that ar emuch less permissive than the current afghanistan turkey shoot.
Lt Col Colin Mitchell wrote:"I have no compunction in saying that if some chap starts throwing grenades or starts using pistols, we shall kill him."
Reply
Like

Falls
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Falls
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Joined: 06 Jun 2007, 01:13

09 Jan 2011, 16:53 #9

I agree with Crook. I mean, the F-35 is no Frogfoot, but itll get the job done.
Reply
Like

Praetonia
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Praetonia
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Joined: 21 Apr 2007, 16:43

09 Jan 2011, 16:59 #10

CAS is moving towards being done at stand-off with guided weapons. In those circumstances F35 has a strong advantage because of its superior avionics and low-observability.


<dtn> hopefully plae won't follow me into my dreams
Reply
Like

United States of PA
74% Armaments Designer
United States of PA
74% Armaments Designer
Joined: 10 Jul 2009, 16:47

09 Jan 2011, 17:10 #11

What the last three have said.


Wont do the job in the same fashion as A-10, but anymore CAS is done with Hellfires or Mavericks and Glide Bombs, not Strafing runs, unless you are a A-10.
Ekraysia: I have to say, comparing your military equipment to that of the average NSer would be like comparing the T-34 to a hastily up-armoured elderly horse.
Too Lyras and Lamoni in the LY9/M22 Discussion thread

Sumer: But, as they say: When the pin is pulled, Mr.Grenade is not our friend.

USPA:Tenskwatawa is supposed to be crapped
USPA: wait
USPA: nvm
Lamoni: lol
Lamoni: That's the first time that i've heard of a sub coming out of THAT crack!
Reply
Like

no endorse
You have way too much time on your hands ...
no endorse
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Joined: 11 Apr 2007, 01:21

09 Jan 2011, 18:06 #12

Minnysota @ Jan 9 2011, 11:41 AM wrote: Alright, so you guys have pretty much convinced me that it is not a bad aircraft (I feel safer trusting your opinions to this subject). However, does anyone think it will succeed in filling the role of the A-10 in CAS? I'm pretty sure I read on Wikipedia that it is to replace the A-10, but I will check better sources.
Is there any reason why they couldn't complement each other? (Cost I guess) Part of the reason CAS is changing is cost savings. When you consolidate on a few multirole aircraft, rather than using a dozen dedicated designs, you do save a fair piece.

You're looking at two different approaches for CAS.


Since when did an American weapon system ever stay in budget ololololololol
Back in the day (oh, say, 60s and earlier), budgets were handled differently, so they sort of all stayed in budget by definition. Since the advent of pseudo cost control and this sham-privatization thing, the teen series didn't do too poorly (aside from the debacle that was the F-18)

The biggest problem with modern programs is that they take so long that requirement creep is insaaaaane.

IRC wrote:[22:39]Spizania: A chain is a unit of length; it measures 66 feet or 22 yards or 4 rods or 100 links[1] (20.1168m). <<< This is why Britian ruled the world
[22:39]Spizania: we created a system of measurements noone else could understand
[17:57] matinsky theres only one thing that can save saxon england
[17:57] matinsky ...
[17:57] matinsky ...
[17:57] Rosdivan Frogs?
[17:57] matinsky a mark XXXIII bolo
Reply
Like

Andorianus\Dystopianus
79% Armaments Designer
Andorianus\Dystopianus
79% Armaments Designer
Joined: 25 Jun 2010, 16:16

09 Jan 2011, 19:46 #13

Worst thing of all is, the requirements for the F-35 were for a cheap, versatile, yet stealthy multirole. They changed it into a flying radar van with missiles and everything on it you ever heard of and that may be vagely useful (maybe some NS designers helped working on it?), and now all the other NATO countries who do NOT have huge budgets need to purchase it too. Believe me, from a political point of view, that really sucks.

But from an NSD designer point of view, F-35 in NS isn't that bad. Even though it doesn't quite complement my ideas and tactics.
I'm pretty sure I read on Wikipedia that it is to replace the A-10, but I will check better sources.
True. By 2018 they hope to replace it. I say it is a bad choice of course, but as munchie said, two different types of CAS... F-35 takes a more "precision bomber" approach, the A-10 is more of a "gunship".

In NS both would be the most effective. If the A10 was more stealthy they would complement eachother fairly well IMHO, with the F-35's hitting the main targets and the A-10's mopping up the rest.
A&D
Reply
Like

Praetonia
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Praetonia
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Joined: 21 Apr 2007, 16:43

09 Jan 2011, 20:08 #14

F35 was never going to have a last gen radar or be as cheap as legacy planes. That is the huge advantage.


<dtn> hopefully plae won't follow me into my dreams
Reply
Like

Kyiv
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Kyiv
You have way too much time on your hands ...
Joined: 03 Jun 2008, 01:51

09 Jan 2011, 20:09 #15

F-35 seems k.

As a Mig-27 for the modern battlefield it's as good as they come.

If the A-10 is going to be made survivable these days it will need to be cocooned in state of the art radar/infrared countermeasures along with the associated RWR/ESM/LWR/MAW situational awareness systems. To extend it's capability beyond clear weather conditions it will need a modern multi-mode radar.

You can do it and arguments can be made for an ordnance laden low speed CAS aircraft. But you won't save any money compared with using a fast jet. RL militaries of course don't have infinite money and massively overhauling the A-10 likely isn't seen as worth the money.
i think it is you that is the fool.My education was brought with money, not from wikipedia!
Rich and Corporations @ Apr 16 2012, 10:06 PM wrote:Oh my god, everyone is either wrong or fucking stupid.
Reply
Like