Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
You get that from any source critical of the F35. The navy hates the short legs it has, needing to bring carrier groups closer to enemya sdhores and within reach for the enemy, or needing to hang fuel tanks under the wings, compromising the stealth factor, or needing signficantly more aerial refuelling, limitng and complicating tactical agility on operational level. Plus the plane has small payload only when not hanging ammo under the wings. The airforce does not like the agility that leaves to be desired, and again the short legs and slow acceleration, plus again the ammo problem. The Marines pay much for a vertical liftoff capability that in many people's opinion is not being needed and adds tremendously to the mechanical and technical complexity and is a potential source of problems.
See the articles I linked earlier, for examples.
|
a couple of issues here. First, the US never releases the true performance figures. However based on various sources:
1. the F-35 will have a longer range than either the F-16 or F/A-18;
2. the F-35 will have better performance, acceleration or maneuverability than the F-15/F-16/F/A-18.
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...hornet-382078/
currently, only the F-22 can out perform it, but the F-22 is a dedicated air superiority fighter while the F35 is a "jack of all trades".
3. yes in "stealth" mode, its payload is limited, but in non-stealth mode, it can carry a bigger payload than the F16 or F/A-18. Stealth gives you more options, in a high threat environment, the F-35 can be in and out without being detected, while in a low threat area, it can carry all the bombs you want.
lots of critics out there with an axe to grind, but looked at objectively, the F-35 is a great airplane.