search results matching tag: jet

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (822)     Sift Talk (7)     Blogs (80)     Comments (1000)   

F-18 Criticisms in the 80's mirror those of the F-35 today

Mordhaus says...

Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon say the F-35’s superiority over its rivals lies in its ability to remain undetected, giving it “first look, first shot, first kill.”

Hugh Harkins, a highly respected author on military combat aircraft, called that claim “a marketing and publicity gimmick” in his book on Russia’s Sukhoi Su-35S, a potential opponent of the F-35. He also wrote, “In real terms an aircraft in the class of the F-35 cannot compete with the Su-35S for out and out performance such as speed, climb, altitude, and maneuverability.”

Other critics have been even harsher. Pierre Sprey, a cofounding member of the so-called “fighter mafia” at the Pentagon and a co-designer of the F-16, calls the F-35 an “inherently a terrible airplane” that is the product of “an exceptionally dumb piece of Air Force PR spin.” He has said the F-35 would likely lose a close-in combat encounter to a well-flown MiG-21, a 1950s Soviet fighter design.

Robert Dorr, an Air Force veteran, career diplomat and military air combat historian, wrote in his book “Air Power Abandoned,” “The F-35 demonstrates repeatedly that it can’t live up to promises made for it. … It’s that bad.”

The development of the F-35 has been a mess by any measurement. There are numerous reasons, but they all come back to what F-35 critics would call the jet's original sin: the Pentagon's attempt to make a one-size-fits-all warplane, a Joint Strike Fighter.

History is littered with illustrations of multi-mission aircraft that never quite measured up. Take Germany's WWII Junkers Ju-88, or the 1970s Panavia Tornado, or even the original F/A-18. Today the Hornet is a mainstay of the American military, but when it debuted it lacked the range and payload of the A-7 Corsair and acceleration and climb performance of the F-4 Phantom it was meant to replace.

Yeah, the F/A-18 was trash when it first came out and it took YEARS and multiple changes/fixes to allow it to fully outperform the decades old aircraft it was designed to beat when it was released.

The F35 is not the best at anything it does, it is designed to fully be mediocre at all roles in order to allow it to be a single solution aircraft. That may change with more money, time, and data retrieved from hours spent in actual combat, but as it stands it is what it was designed to be. A jack of all trades and master of none, not something I would want to be flying in a role where I could encounter a master of that role.

As @ChaosEngine says, it is far beyond time that we move to a design where the pilot is not in the plane. There is no reason at this time that we cannot field a plane that could successfully perform it's role with the pilot in a secure location nearby. Such planes could be built cheaper, could perform in g-forces that humans cannot withstand, and would be expendable in a way that current planes are not. However, this would mean that our corporate welfare system for huge defense contractors would take a massive hit. We can't have that, can we?

F-18 Criticisms in the 80's mirror those of the F-35 today

ChaosEngine says...

The problem with the F35 is the squishy organic component in the cockpit.

The concept of a jet fighter is pointless these days and the idea of a "dogfight" doubly so.

F-18 Criticisms in the 80's mirror those of the F-35 today

KrazyKat42 says...

The F-35 was doomed from the start when different branches wanted different things. Vertical takeoff, stealth shielding, etc.

Recent dogfight tests have shown it loses to earlier jets. Too many compromises hurt it's ability to be a great fighter.

The New Politics (Dust)

SFOGuy says...

lol; that was funny...why does modern design always mean flat touch screens rather than voice, eye tracking, or---switchology? (the HOTAS throttle of a modern fighter jet)...

Far Cry New Dawn: Official World Premiere Gameplay Trailer

Payback says...

Bit of a spoiler for those of us only two lieutenants/sub-bosses into the game...
According to this, after we off his brothers and sister, Father survives and nukes it all anyway. Bit of a let down.

Bought FC5 on a Steam sale last week. The DLC makes it a bit easy. Starting out with free machine guns, free Barrett rifles and a free pseudo Augusta/Bell Jet Ranger gunship is a bit like cheating.

Off-Road Jet Boating

SFOGuy says...

Why doesn't this break the water intake on the jet boat? Because they pull it up as they hit the shallows? (Don't know much about jetboats)

newtboy (Member Profile)

siftbot says...

Your video, Off-Road Jet Boating, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 159 Badge!

Hypersonic Missile Nonproliferation

newtboy says...

Hmmm......the site i ended up on indicated much less progress, perhaps I misunderstood and they were only discussing
DFRJ tests.
I trust wiki has it right.
I can't find any real info on the gll holod, but I would expect it was also launched with a solid rocket/missile if it wasn't pure propaganda. Scram jets just don't work under mach 4-5.

scheherazade said:

Well, looks like they have been working on scramjets too.

Apparently they made the first flying example ever, in 1991.
Not sure how that squares with the earlier U.S. efforts, maybe because it flew on its own? I donno.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramjet_programs#Russia

-scheherazade

ant (Member Profile)

Hypersonic Missile Nonproliferation

newtboy says...

All you mention are a far cry from sustained hypersonic powered atmospheric flight, which is what we're talking about here.

You mentioned a ramjet, but scramjet engines are hardly an incremental improvement, they're an entirely different class of jet engine. Ramjet engines only do around mach 2.5- 5, scramjets 4-8+ theoretically. What's needed for a viable weapon imo is the next iteration of dual mode ramjets that can do both with one engine, that's a long way off. Public scramjet engine tests have only been successful in a few short 5 second+- burns so far, launched with conventional solid rockets.

scheherazade said:

We have conventional missiles that hit hypersonic speeds for short periods. Aim54 fired at altitude checks that mark, and that's a 60's/70's tech missile.

The X15 did it manned, and that first flew in the late 1950's.

Why would Russia not be able to come up with something similar in the last half-century?


Re-entry from orbit is 4x hypersonic. Russia has plenty of experience with the effects.

The Russian p-270 was made in the 80's, and used a ramjet.
This new missile is an incremental improvement over tech they already posses. A higher speed ramjet missile. Hardly a stretch.

It's not like they are spamming the internet with updates just so you can see how they are doing.

-scheherazade

"Don't Kill your Friends" 1943 Navy training film

Hawk127 Fighter Jet Flies Around Buildings & Beaches-Cockpit

Military Helicopters Flyby Under Brooklyn Bridge in NYC

Payback says...

Anyone who's seen a FOD check on an aircraft carrier realises how retarded one helicopter doing this is, let alone a squadron. Chunks of shit fall off those bridges every day just due to age. Not to mention idiot pedestrians actually TRYING to hit one with a beer bottle. One big enough piece of debris into the jet intake and you're in the river.

Dog is my co-pilot

b4rringt0n (Member Profile)



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon