Woops! Lockheed forgot the Tailhook on the F-35C

[Aesthetica]

Originally Posted by Catfish

I take it the F-35"B" does not need a hook:

Yeah F-35-A is the standard land based version, the B is the STOVL version with a back end designed by BAE, lower payload, shorter range, but it can take off from old RN style ski-ramp short carriers, and land vertically on same, makes it ideal for the Gator Navy, like a stealthed 5th generation super Harrier (that was the theory behind us ordering 80 of them). The C is the CATOBAR version for use on the US's super carriers, it has a beefier airframe, and larger wing area, to withstand the shock of a tailhook arrested landing, and lower it's stall speeds etc.

Problems however, reports about cracks in the airframe's structural components, not enough to ground it, but enough to shorten the life span of each craft, and push up maintenance costs, the tail hook scandal, etc.

Worst thing about the whole concept... As was mentioned in an earlier post, you can only upgrade an airframe so much before it becomes obsolete, 20-30 yrs tops, but the F-35 program is claimed to have a 50 yr upgradability program, despite the fact that technological progress is accelerating.

They are justifying the massive cost of this program by claiming that they will still be in service (albeit later varients, F-35-M's etc.) in 2070!

It's become less about making something that works right, and more about corporate fingers in the cash pie. They even talked about changing the engines used, at a very late date, that was canceled saving $3 billion, but they are not done messing yet it seems. I get a feeling that either these things will arrive in 2020 with a whole host of defects, or they will be put back to 2025-2030.

Meanwhile it's struggle on with desperate late model rebuilds of existing airframes like the F-15, 16 and 18.

I'm dreading the howls of laughter from "Crab Air" when they finally see what WAFU are getting for their new flattops.

SNAFU...

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Aesthetica

Meanwhile it's struggle on with desperate late model rebuilds of existing airframes like the F-14, 16 and 18.

Rebuilds of F-14s? I though all the F-14s in the Free World were taken to the desert and chopped in to little pieces.

[magicstix]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Rebuilds of F-14s? I though all the F-14s in the Free World were taken to the desert and chopped in to little pieces.

Some are in reserve. He probably meant F-15.

[Gargamel]

The b-52 has been in service for that long. Produced 1955-1962.

And the c130 was introduced in 1957, also still in service.

C5, 1970.

[magicstix]

Originally Posted by Gargamel

The b-52 has been in service for that long. Produced 1955-1962.

B-52 comes from a more golden time, a time of the A-10, the F-14, the F-18, the F-4, and the F-15, when aerospace contractors weren't gigantic and bloated, with pictures of Senators doing unmentionable things to goats... Those days are long gone.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by magicstix

B-52 comes from a more golden time, a time of the A-10, the F-14, the F-18, the F-4, and the F-15, when aerospace contractors weren't gigantic and bloated, with pictures of Senators doing unmentionable things to goats... Those days are long gone.

The F-14 might be a bad example. Grumman was huge for its day. It was the Lockheed of its time. Just look at what they built:
F4F Wildcat
F6F Hellcat
F7F
F8F
TBF Avenger
AF Guardian
F9F Panther
F9 Cougar
F-11 Tiger
F-111B
F-14
E-1 Tracer/E-2 Hawkeye
C-1 Trader/C-2 Grayhound
S-2 Tracker
A-6 Intruder
Gulfstream I/II
X-29
OV-1 Mohawk
The Apollo Lander!
A submarine!
They designed and built THIS:

and this:

and this:

these:

FCOL These Too:


Gumman made the canoe from Deliverance!!

Gumman put the wings on the Space Shuttle... they wanted to build the who thing!

[Gargamel]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Gumman made the canoe from Deliverance!!

Gumman put the wings on the Space Shuttle... they wanted to build the who thing!

*grumman

:p

But seriously, great canoe. I wrapped one around a tree once, hammered it back out, little duct tape, finished our trip. Had it welded back later.

[PeriscopeDepth]

I can't tell if it's incompetence, corruption, or both.

I've been railing against the F-35 on interweb forums for a few years now when the opportunity presents itself.

Does anyone here think F-35C will go to sea operationally? I think if so, it will be in very small numbers. I say buy more Super (Slow) Hornets to get us by (the F-18Cs and below are TIRED) as a stop gap until UCAV-N can take over.

PD

[PeriscopeDepth]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

FCOL These Too:


Gumman made the canoe from Deliverance!!

Gumman put the wings on the Space Shuttle... they wanted to build the who thing!

Hey, I ride one of those every week day!

PD

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Gargamel

*grumman

:p

Yea I wrote that at like midnight. I really need to stop posting so late.

[gimpy117]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-carriers.html


Seriously people? How long have planes been landing on carriers? 100 Years? And STILL you get something that simple wrong!?

It gets better:

What you expect us to let you use your own missiles on those planes? Got to buy the AMRAAMs! Fund American jobs!!


F-16.net has a great write up with graphics and everything:

http://f-16.net/news_article4494.html

well, it's called be a high enough level contractor with the US government and you can do whatever you want. yay fascism!

[Gargamel]

But honestly, IMO, we won't know the answer for another 30 years. Well just have to wait and see if it turns into one of those great success stories, or another dod flop.