The Little “Fighter” That Couldn’t: Moral Hazard and the F-35

a reply to: Aliensun

Can you tell us the operational capabilities of said triangles?

Which forums are they best suited to and what are their advantages ?

originally posted by: Timely
a reply to: Aliensun

Can you tell us the operational capabilities of said triangles?

Which forums are they best suited to and what are their advantages ?

No one who dont have cleareance can say,but we can speculate.

Ocean to atmosphere in one go is one so called ability. Ability to travel very fast and stop on a dime without killing the pilot is another. Near non existent wind resistance,and extreme manuverability. Able to emit EMP pulses in a directed manner or in area of effect. Hypersonic defenses that can cripple a person or disable them too.

Cloaking and non existent RCS. In other words they are so advanced that the pak fa might as well be a wright flyer.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
This is the one time I wish to hell they'd leak the classified stuff this aircraft can do.

I think this is one of the big problems selling the aircraft to the public. The other problem being they know so little about future air combat that their opinions really aren't worth toilet paper.

The costs of the F35 program are enormous, but they are worth it. Why? Because air superiority has determined the winner of every major war since well before I was born. It's that simple. You can build amazing tanks, huge ships, train tons of special forces...if you don't rule the sky you fail.

a reply to: Aliensun

It is possible that there are 'triangles' with some kind of advanced technology, and yet be entirely unsuitable for this kind of combat.

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: Zaphod58

To suggest or believe that the F-35 will be good for 50 years is far more of a laughing matter than for me to continually chide you airfoil buffs that the triangles are here and now and are entirely operational.

The only people fooled by the lack of acknowledgement about the existence of the triangles are the people that are paying for them, the American public. Certainly, the Russians and Chinese are aware of them. Why the experts on this forum always avoid the issue is not exactly a mystery anymore, not that I take them as fools you understand.

I'll tell you the reason i dont believe they exist. We, as a nation and in fact the world, are still trying to develop the technology to do most of the things that the so called triangles are rumored to be able to accomplish. One in particular is going from the ground into orbit via SSTO. We just announced that were going to be launching microsats using an F-15 to get them into orbit. If we have a triangle that can already do this, then why are we trying to develop this capability? And the usual "well its a diversion" or "we need to keep the people in the public off the trail" doesnt fly. As much as we are in debt in this country, and with sequestrian going on, theres no way we would spend money on something we can already do. Another is hypersonic flight. We barely can get a uav to go hypersonic for one flight, yet supposedly we have these triangles that can fly hypersonic and then stop on a dime? without killing the pilots? doubtful.

This is the one time I wish to hell they'd leak the classified stuff this aircraft can do.[/quote]

Zaphod nailed it on the head here. Everyone involved with this program, be it pilots, maintainers, even countries signed on to buy it absolutely love this aircraft. I mean think about it this way. All of those countries that were skeptical about buying the F-35 going into the classified briefing about its capabilities, all came out of the briefing having made a promise to buy the aircraft. What on earth did they hear about the jet that the public doesnt know that made them purchase it on the spot?

originally posted by: noeltrotsky


I think this is one of the big problems selling the aircraft to the public. The other problem being they know so little about future air combat that their opinions really aren't worth toilet paper.

The costs of the F35 program are enormous, but they are worth it. Why? Because air superiority has determined the winner of every major war since well before I was born. It's that simple. You can build amazing tanks, huge ships, train tons of special forces...if you don't rule the sky you fail.

The cost is definitely worth it. If we werent spending this money on the F-35 we would be spending it on a different fighter or fighters anyway. Why not have a jet that is known to all our allies? Drives down costs alot. Bottom line is that the cost of fighter jets has been going up every single generation. Its just economics. period. And for those people that think that we should just wait for the sixth generation fighter to come around and buy that, well I can guarantee you that it will cost probably double the cost of the F-35. Especially if its going to be two engines, which is what it is projected to have.

Was this a simple PR problem? When the time came to show our best to the world we did it with gusto while keeping the classified bits classified.

The F-35 is a big joint program that was already sold after a certain point. All they portrayed to the general public was an image of a newer version Harrier. This program is being tasked to do alot of different things for a lot of different folks. As far as I know there isn't a base to compare it to, we need to wait and see.

a reply to: Arpad

Exactly. The things they're doing with this aircraft are utterly ground breaking and jaw dropping. But they won't tell anyone.

As in the Reach for the Sky segment stated,Concurrency is the biggest problem.All aircraft have a testing phase before production but for such a huge leap in tech with the F35 it has had its struggles.As Zaphod stated the bugs and cost overruns are slowly getting better and will eventually be eliminated..

The technologies being developed and refined with the F-35 Lightning II will no doubt save money in the long run when developing future and current aircrafts. She is a beautiful aircraft on the carrier or ramp and every bit as dangerous once the fangs are allowed to come out. If the pilots and ground crews are happy with it then who the hell cares what anyone else thinks? They aren`t putting their lives on the line.

a reply to: Blackfinger

Speaking of bugs, they're testing a patch now that improves connectivity between aircraft. They're testing up to four aircraft sharing data between each other, with the new patch.

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: Zaphod58

I am for a strong military and I just can't imagine that there isn't a better way to go than man-on-board systems.

I remember when Darkstar came out in the 90s and thought that was it, how could we be pursuing an airframe like this?

We would have to make it exceed human capacity (thus squishing our pilots) or hamper its operational capability severely.

I agree here.

The F-22 already pushes the pilots to their limits.

Human flight in combat is at it end.

Tomorrow belongs to the drones.

Next generation craft, we aren't quite there yet. If we can solve lag time having a human pilot from afar would be ideal.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Arpad

Exactly. The things they're doing with this aircraft are utterly ground breaking and jaw dropping. But they won't tell anyone.

Don't care to jump into the mix but, but, but, if these things are so ground breaking and jaw dropping, but they won't tell anyone, how do you know just how groundbreaking and jaw dropping they are? Maybe there aren't any groundbreaking and jaw dropping things to tell.

a reply to: boomer135

Boomer remember the plasma emitters i posted before? They are in the patent office on guess what looks like a black triangle. ALso a few people here have seen them up close. Their capabilities might be off but they do exist. They arent anti gravity though. As i understood it its just lighter than air when powered suppossedly.

a reply to: CharlesT

People have talked to me. You can also get an idea if you know where to look. There's a lot that's ground breaking about the F-35.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Oh come on Zap, give us a hint where to look. Really, I don't know where to look! Post a few links.

originally posted by: CharlesT
a reply to: Zaphod58

Oh come on Zap, give us a hint where to look. Really, I don't know where to look! Post a few links.

F-35 info

Start here.

a reply to: yuppa

Thanks for the link. I'll look it over.

One should look into its electronic warfare capabilities.

a reply to: yuppa

Lots of pretty pictures and graphs but I'll start with my first pick, "EOTS"

Newest U.S. Stealth Fighter ‘10 Years Behind’ Older Jets
America’s $400 billion, top-of-the-line aircraft can’t see the battlefield all that well. Which means it’s actually worse than its predecessors at fighting today’s wars.

When the Pentagon’s nearly $400 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter finally enters service next year after nearly two decades in development, it won’t be able to support troops on the ground the way older planes can today. Its sensors won’t be able to see the battlefield as well; and what video the F-35 does capture, it won’t be able to transmit to infantrymen in real time.

www.thedailybeast.com...

Does that render the (EO DAS) to be less effective as designers had hoped? I don't know.

Description: The Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System (EO DAS), being developed in parallel with the EOTS (Electro-Optical Targeting System), is a lightweight, affordable, high performance, multi-functional sensor array providing revolutionary situational awareness to airborne platforms. Northrop-Grumman Electronic Systems and Lockheed-Martin Missiles and Fire Control are developing the EO DAS and the EOTS for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).

www.deagel.com...

Well, this is all an effort in futility. I'm sure it has more advanced and better capabilities than it's predecessor but is it really worth the cost? After all, it's predecessor could fly faster and maneuver beyond it's human operators capacity to endure. Besides, it's predecessor is capable of out maneuvering anything and everything a potential enemy could currently put against it. That's just my opinion. I'm just tired of all of this outrageous military spending to fight potential enemies that our aggressive posture around the world creates for no more reason than to support the military industrial industry and the greedy industrial oligarchs.

a reply to: CharlesT

Of course it won't be able to. Neither could any other aircraft. That's why it's called Initial Operating Capability. All aircraft go through the same process. At IOC they can carry basic weapons and have limited sensors. Then their envelope is expanded and weapons and sensors are added until they reach Full Operating Capability.

The F-35 predecessor was the F-15E. It's a totally different aircraft than the F-22. The F-22 is an air superiority fighter, the F-35 is a tactical bomber. You can't compare the two to each other.