F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 2019'

Discussion of anything you like. Sport, stamps, politics, religion, weather, world disasters, news articles - whatever. Things generally NOT stamp related belong in here. Please keep it CIVIL and polite though! We encourage lively discussion on all things.

Moderators: gmoney, Volunteer Moderator Team

User avatar
bazza4338
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
Posts: 119680
Joined: 12 Dec 2009 16:50
Location: Korumburra Vic. Australia

F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 2019'

Post by bazza4338 »

F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire its guns until 2019'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1 ... -2019.html

Amercia's much-vaunted new F-35 stealth jet has reportedly suffered the latest in a series of problems with the discovery of a software glitch which prevents the use of its on-board cannon.

The jump jets – 14 of which have been ordered by Britain – are costing US taxpayers nearly $400 billion (£257 billion) and are due to enter service next year.

But the Pentagon has been forced to deny reports in America that it will take a further four years before they will be able to shoot their guns.

The news will cause further embarrassment for the programme, which has been dogged by delays, soaring costs and glitches since its inception in 2006.

Billed as the world’s most advanced — and expensive — fighter jet, the cost per plane has doubled to $161.1 million and it will be six years late in entering full production.

The F-35 has been the Pentagon’s flagship programme, with 2,443 jets due to be deployed across all three services.

However, according to the Daily Beast website, the F-35 still does not have the software it needs to operate the four-barrelled rotary cannon.

This would be a particular problem when the aircraft is being used to support ground troops as a gun is more precise than dropping a small bomb — with the latter more likely to cause friendly-fire casualties.

There has been increasing criticism of the programme in the United States, even from within the administration.

In January, the Pentagon’s testing office described the F-35’s performance as “immature” and two months later the administration’s own accountability office highlighted delays in software delivery and its effectiveness.

Other critics, including William Hartung, of the Centre for International Policy, have even questioned whether the basic design is fit for purpose.

He warned that the plane would be too small to function as a bomber, too cumbersome in dogfights and too vulnerable to support ground troops.

Earlier this year, the F-35 was supposed to be the star attraction at the Farnborough Air Show in Hampshire, but it failed to appear after the entire fleet was grounded following a fire at a Florida airbase in June.

Other reported problems for the fighter, which is being manufactured by Lockheed Martin, have included a discovery that the engine can shut down when the fuel gets too hot to work as a coolant, although this too was disputed by the Pentagon.

The Ministry of Defence has ordered 14 F-35s, of which a handful are already being tested in the United States.

A contract for the first four was signed a few months ago and the first stealth jets are due to operate from RAF Marham in Norfolk from 2018.

However a spokesman for the Pentagon denied that there was a software problem which would delay the plane being fully effective when it enters service.

He said a Congressional report into the software earlier this year admitted that there had been delays but this would not “preclude the programme office from meeting any initial operational capability.”

and...

The Trillion Dollar F-35 Won't Even Be Able to Shoot Its Gun Until 2019

http://news360.com/article/272537890#

At this point, it's not even funny how much the Pentagon has screwed up the development of its new stealth fighter jet, the F-35. But the latest report that the jet's 25mm cannon won't be operational until 2019 at the earliest is just laughable. Even more laughable is that it probably doesn't even need the gun to begin with.

Unnamed Air Force officials revealed the bad news in a Daily Beast story about the F-35. Apparently the software that will power the four-barreled rotary cannon on the Air Force version of the jet, the F-35A, won't be ready for at least four more years. The Navy and Marine Corps version use a different cannon, but it'll also be years before the software's ready for those guns.

The real kicker here is that the gun is probably just dead weight (read: a waste of taxpayer dollars) anyways. The F-35A's cannon can fire 3,300 rounds per minute but can only hold 180 rounds. (It can only operate for 3.27 seconds at 55 rounds per second!)

"I would be lying if I said there exists any plausible tactical air-to-air scenario where the F-35 will need to employ the gun," one senior Air Force official told the Daily Beast. "Personally, I just don't see it ever happening and think they should have saved the weight [by getting rid of the gun altogether]."

The jet, which is also known as the Joint Strike Fighter, is already the most expensive weapon in American history. It's expected to cost the Pentagon well over $1 trillion over the next 50 years. And little hiccups like this only add more taxpayer dollars to that price tag. [Daily Beast]

User avatar
Global Administrator
The Sheriff
The Sheriff
Posts: 64927
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 22:57
Location: Tombstone
Contact:

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Global Administrator »

Is this the dud our dopey Government signed up for?

A decent chunk of our high-end Military purchases seem to be lemons. :roll:

User avatar
bazza4338
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
Posts: 119680
Joined: 12 Dec 2009 16:50
Location: Korumburra Vic. Australia

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by bazza4338 »

Appears so...

airforce.gov.au >> Technology >> Future Acquisitions
F-35A Lightning


http://www.airforce.gov.au/Technology/Future-Acquisitions/F- ... T1rt+Ym4K3

The F-35A provides Australia with a fifth generation aircraft capability to enable air superiority into the future.

Australia has committed to 72 F-35A aircraft – comprised of three operational squadrons - two at RAAF Base Williamtown and one at RAAF Base Tindal. In addition, a training squadron will be based at RAAF Base Williamtown.

The first F-35 aircraft will arrive in Australia in 2018 and the first squadron, Number 3 Squadron, will be operational in 2021. All 72 aircraft are expected to be fully operational by 2023.

The total capital cost of $12.4 billion for this acquisition includes the cost of associated facilities, weapons and training.

Around $1.6 billion in new facilities and infrastructure will be constructed, including at RAAF Base Williamtown in New South Wales and RAAF Base Tindal in the Northern Territory.

In the future, a fourth operational squadron will be considered for RAAF Base Amberley, for a total of about 100 F-35A's.

The F-35A (commonly known as the Joint Strike Fighter) is the most suitable aircraft for Australia’s future air combat and strike needs, to replace the aging F/A-18A/B Hornets.

Fifth generation aircraft provide a networked force-multiplier effect in terms of situational awareness and combat effectiveness. The F-35A’s combination of stealth, advanced sensors, networking and data fusion capabilities, when integrated with other defence systems, will enable the RAAF to maintain an air combat edge.

Defence is currently undertaking an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process for the flying operations of the F-35A. A website has been created http://www.f35evolution.com.au where you can learn more about the EIS process, subscribe to receive updates, and provide feedback.

The F-35A is being purchased by Defence Materiel Organisation under project AIR 6000

User avatar
Global Administrator
The Sheriff
The Sheriff
Posts: 64927
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 22:57
Location: Tombstone
Contact:

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Global Administrator »

What sort of idiots here sign up to spend countless billions on planes that cannot shoot bullets?

Maybe they will issue the pilots with pistols or slingshots to fire at the bad guys through the windows?

And doubtless agreed in $US that are worth 20% more than when they signed up.

User avatar
60022Mallard
BLUE Shooting Star Posting GURU!!
BLUE Shooting Star Posting GURU!!
Posts: 884
Joined: 08 Jul 2011 03:04
Location: Norwich, England

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by 60022Mallard »

Global Administrator wrote:What sort of idiots here sign up to spend countless billions on planes that cannot shoot bullets?
The vast majority of air superiority fighter aircraft rely on a selection of various range length missiles to down opposing aircraft at somewhat greater range than in the war comics many will have been of an age to have read.

Actually lugging a heavy and all but useless gun around probably actually degrades the performance of the aircraft in dog fights.

However with budgetary restraints the temptation is to try to buy multi purpose aircraft that are jacks of all trades but often master of none, but even ground attack aircraft nowadays usually use missiles or guided bombs to positively avoid getting too close to or staying in the defended airspace longer than is absolutely necessary because of the cost of the kit andtraining the jockeys plus the limited numbers generally purchased.

The last true loitering ground attack aircraft I can think of is the U.S. A-10 which is quite slow, has the engines mounted away from the most likely threat, the pilot sits in an armoured bath tub and does have a multi barrelled gun with a reasonable amount of ammunition and is designed to still fly with lumps of it missing.

So to answer Global Administrators question, most sensible governments in the first world

User avatar
patg
RED Shooting Star Posting LEGEND!
RED Shooting Star Posting LEGEND!
Posts: 1909
Joined: 22 Jan 2012 10:44
Location: Upper California, USA

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by patg »

Don't know the reason Australia opted for the "A" version ( only version with the canon) maybe saw more ground support needs.

I'd drop the cannon and take more precision guided bombs and air to air options. Hopefully stealth and speed would be of more help.

If interested, this may have a more complete view:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightnin ... ion_issues

patg
:D "I don't have a lot - But I like what I got" :D

User avatar
maszki
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
Posts: 4301
Joined: 06 Dec 2011 07:57
Location: Maszki, Poland

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by maszki »

This seems like the usual defence inadequate assessment of our defence posture and the likely threat. If you want the technical details of the plane go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

The plane has a combat radius of about 600 miles and can maximum range of about 1200 miles as a one-way trip, Top speed is 1.6 mach or about 1200 mph.

Stealth is a misnomer as you will see if you read the link

Apart from all the other problems, here is an extended list from the link

The helmet-mounted display system does not work properly.
The fuel dump subsystem poses a fire hazard.
The Integrated Power Package is unreliable and difficult to service.
The F-35C's arresting hook does not work.
Classified "survivability issues", which have been speculated to be about stealth.[170]
The wing buffet is worse than previously reported.
The airframe is unlikely to last through the required lifespan.
The flight test program has yet to explore the most challenging areas.
The software development is behind schedule.
The aircraft is in danger of going overweight or, for the F-35B, not properly balanced for VTOL operations.
There are multiple thermal management problems. The air conditioner fails to keep the pilot and controls cool enough, the roll posts on the F-35B overheat, and using the afterburner damages the aircraft.
The automated logistics information system is partially developed.
The lightning protection on the F-35 is uncertified, with areas of concern.

PLUS

Current aircraft software is inadequate for even basic pilot training.
Ejection seat may fail, causing pilot fatality.
Several pilot-vehicle interface issues, including lack of feedback on touch screen controls.
The radar performs poorly, or not at all.
Engine replacement takes an average of 52 hours, instead of the two hours specified.
Maintenance tools do not work.[187]

The JPO responded that more experienced pilots would be able to safely operate the aircraft and that procedures would improve over time.[188]

Even in the final "3F" software version, the F-35 will lack ROVER, in spite of having close air support as one of its primary missions.[189]

A 2013 Pentagon report found these additional problems:
Overall fleet availability for the year averaged only 37%.
The Inertial navigation system does not provide reliable data.
There is a bug with the AMRAAM's ability to provide track/guidance data.
DAS confuses the aircraft's own flare launches with incoming missiles.
Fragment-induced damage can lead to catastrophic STOVL lift system failure.
The aircraft is particularly vulnerable to fires caused by fuel leaks.[190][191][192]

..and as a final note....

In November 2014 China unveiled the portable JY-26 Skywatch-U UHF 3-D long-range surveillance radar system, specifically designed to defeat stealth aircraft like the F-35.[193]

User avatar
Global Administrator
The Sheriff
The Sheriff
Posts: 64927
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 22:57
Location: Tombstone
Contact:

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Global Administrator »

Sounds exactly like the sort of robust and deadly plane our boneheads in Canberra have signed away a large chunk of our defence budget for the next Generation upon. :roll:

Let's just PRAY no-one in the region decides to attack or threaten us - we might be able to fool them by gluing a cardboard popgun on the fuselage. :roll:

If every bad Military Purchasing decision was removed directly from the juicy pensions of all these high ranking boffins walking around, all with 100 clanking medals, who glowingly endorsed them at the onset, we'd suddenly end up owning stuff that WORKS, was fit for purpose and was cost effective. :idea:

Our entire submarine "fleet" is often one sub I understand at any time, as all the others do not work, or are being repaired etc, as again they simply are not fit for purpose or are 1000s miles away from where they need to be. If I know this, everyone else in the region does too - see below.

This stuff below reads like a BAD Monty Python script .. yet it occurred only a month or so back - Putin flexing his muscles on our doorstep, while we write even more bureaucrat 'Military White Papers' on our Defence Mess.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/rus ... 7131204511

November 22, 2014

AUSTRALIA was unable to send a submarine to monitor a fleet of Russian warships in the Coral Sea during the recent G20 meeting because all of its available boats were on the other side of the country.

The predicament robbed the navy of a chance to gather valuable intelligence against the Russian flotilla and will increase pressure on the federal government to consider a new submarine base on the east coast in the forthcoming defence white paper.

It also meant the navy could not ascertain for certain whether a Russian nuclear submarine was accompanying the four Russian ships as they sailed off northern Australia in a show of force designed to coincide with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to Brisbane for the G20 meeting.

'The Weekend Australian' understands that the navy wanted to send a Collins-class submarine to accompany frigates HMAS Parramatta and HMAS Stuart as they monitored the Russian ­flotilla in the Coral Sea.

A submarine could have provided intelligence about the capabilities and practices of the Russian warships, as well as the suspected presence of a Russian nuclear submarine. However, the three available Collins-class submarines were too far away to be able to reach the Russian fleet in time.

The submarine HMAS Rankin was in transit from Albany in Western Australia to Hobart, where it arrived this week, while the navy’s two other operational submarines were conducting work-up trials in the waters off Perth, thousands of kilometres from the Russian flotilla.

The remaining three submarines in the fleet were in various stages of maintenance in Adelaide and Perth. US warships also monitored the Russian flotilla near Japan as it headed south towards Australia.

Sources say an Australian submarine could have been sent to monitor the Russians if there had been a submarine base on the east coast — an option which has been examined by navy but not adopted by the government.

The 2012 Force Posture Review written by former defence secretaries Ric Smith and Allan Hawke said the navy was studying options for an east coast submarine base to supplement Fleet Base West near Fremantle in Western Australia where all six Collins-class submarines are now based.

The navy’s initial assessments identified Sydney (at either FleetBase West or HMAS Waterhen), Jervis Bay or Newcastle in NSW, Brisbane, or Westernport Bay in Victoria as potentially locations for an additional submarine base.

During the federal election campaign, the then Labor prime minister Kevin Rudd proposed a new naval base for surface ships in Brisbane, but this was rejected by the Coalition on cost grounds.

Some defence experts believe a submarine base on the east coast would allow submarines to respond more quickly to events and would help recruitment and retention of crews. The issue is likely to be considered by defence planners who are currently putting together the ­defence white paper, due for ­release next year.

User avatar
stallzer
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
Posts: 5463
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 00:46
Location: Newport, MN USA

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by stallzer »

Pretty funny since these are the same people that decided to retire our best fighter jet and probably the finest fighter aircraft that has ever taken to the skies, it simply was not as technically advanced as our military would like to see.

The F-14 Tomcat.

Image
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did–in his sleep. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car."

User avatar
aethelwulf
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
Posts: 15834
Joined: 13 Jun 2009 01:17
Location: Fragrant Harbour, Hong Kong

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by aethelwulf »

Canada's armed forces are a shambles...

- Signed up for the F-35
- Paid millions for ship blueprints that were just off-the-shelf existing ones
- Bought used subs that constantly breakdown and see little sea time
Collecting Mongolia; Thailand; Indo-China; Mourning Covers; OHMS.

User avatar
maszki
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
Posts: 4301
Joined: 06 Dec 2011 07:57
Location: Maszki, Poland

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by maszki »

What surprises me (well, actually it doesn't as I worked at Defence Headquarters for the last 8 years of my military career and saw first hand the level of strategic thinking of which they are capable) is that the investigation into the most suitable aircraft replacement did not include Russian or Chinese fighters.

The 5th generation Russian fighter, the Sukhoi/HAL/FGFA is faster, has a longer range and is cheaper than the F35; and the latest chinese aircraft, the J31 (which uses Russian engines) may have the same advantages over the F35 (although there is speculation- by the US of course- that the J31 is clumsy and unstable; although they also admit that it is based on plans and specification hacked from an American company involved in the development of the F35 so there may be an element of sour grapes in the comment)

Still cost of the aircraft is not the only factor as the infra-structure also has to be considered; and I assume that much of the infrastructure for the Hornet is compatible with that required for the F35

I'm disappointed that our government did not insist on construction in Australia. Turkey manufactures F16's under licence and it would be a great boost for Oz industry to build these planes (and the proposed new generation submarines) in Australia.

User avatar
mikeg
I was online for our Birthday Number 3!
I was online for our Birthday Number 3!
Posts: 2251
Joined: 23 Jun 2008 11:21
Location: Ile Bizard, Quebec, Canada

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by mikeg »

But all the Power Point presentations for all this are beautiful :lol:

Which is all that matters to these people nowadays :shock:

User avatar
stallzer
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
Posts: 5463
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 00:46
Location: Newport, MN USA

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by stallzer »

This certainly is not the normal doings of our Government and defense contractors. Since the 1930's our Military has had the air superiority due to their choices in which aircraft to invest in and which defense contractors win the awards. We have a long history
of having the "Top Guns" in the air.

1930's saw our P-40 Warhawks in the Chinese theater.
1940's saw the P-51 Mustang, F4F / F6F Hellcat, F4U Corsair, B-17 Flying fortress
1950's saw the F86 Sabre
1960's saw the F-111 & A6 intruder
1970's saw the A-10 Warthog, AV8B Harrier, F-18 Hornet
1980's saw the F-14 Tomcat & F-15 Strike Eagle
1990's saw the new F-18's and updated F-14 / F-15
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did–in his sleep. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car."

User avatar
60022Mallard
BLUE Shooting Star Posting GURU!!
BLUE Shooting Star Posting GURU!!
Posts: 884
Joined: 08 Jul 2011 03:04
Location: Norwich, England

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by 60022Mallard »

stallzer wrote:This certainly is not the normal doings of our Government and defense contractors. Since the 1930's our Military has had the air superiority due to their choices in which aircraft to invest in and which defense contractors win the awards. We have a long history
of having the "Top Guns" in the air.

1930's saw our P-40 Warhawks in the Chinese theater.
1940's saw the P-51 Mustang, F4F / F6F Hellcat, F4U Corsair, B-17 Flying fortress
1950's saw the F86 Sabre
1960's saw the F-111 & A6 intruder
1970's saw the A-10 Warthog, AV8B Harrier, F-18 Hornet
1980's saw the F-14 Tomcat & F-15 Strike Eagle
1990's saw the new F-18's and updated F-14 / F-15
I thought the idea of "top gun" was that of the best air superiority fighter, in which case I cannot concur with many aircraft mentioned.

The history of warfare is a tooing and froing as one side develops a "winner" only to be thwarted by the other side with their latest.

Even though you may have technically superior aircraft the Russians and Chinese were and are prepared to fund much larger numbers of competent aircraft such that the possibility of defeat by attrition is every bit as important as individual prowess. You might get two with your latest but their third one gets you! Aircraft and pilots cannot be produced at the same pace in the short to medium term like they were in WWII so when we buy in "penny" lots we are inviting trouble if we ever have to grapple with a nation with well organised air defences or attack capability.

I believe there is a rough rule of thumb nowadays that you need about three times as many planes at home to back up those on operations.

I also believe that defence procurement tends to be based on the last conflict fought and the next one tends to pop up as a surprise and we do not have the correct kit. Consider the kit that was first sent to Afghanistan with that at the end. All sorts of modifications, improvements etc were made in a hurry in the light of operational experience.

User avatar
maszki
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
Posts: 4301
Joined: 06 Dec 2011 07:57
Location: Maszki, Poland

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by maszki »

stallzer wrote:This certainly is not the normal doings of our Government and defense contractors. Since the 1930's our Military has had the air superiority due to their choices in which aircraft to invest in and which defense contractors win the awards. We have a long history
of having the "Top Guns" in the air.

1930's saw our P-40 Warhawks in the Chinese theater.
1940's saw the P-51 Mustang, F4F / F6F Hellcat, F4U Corsair, B-17 Flying fortress
1950's saw the F86 Sabre
1960's saw the F-111 & A6 intruder
1970's saw the A-10 Warthog, AV8B Harrier, F-18 Hornet
1980's saw the F-14 Tomcat & F-15 Strike Eagle
1990's saw the new F-18's and updated F-14 / F-15
Very impressive and in the main, very good aircraft; but just as with the F35 there are or were other aircraft out there with equally impressive performances...Spitfire, ME109, ME 262, Meteor, several of the MIG series for example.

You mention the Tomcat, and yes, in reviewing its specification I am left wondering why the US has chosen the F35 over the Tomcat (even if it is aging) as it is 50% faster and with basically the same range etc. Would I be too crass to speculate that money changed hands somewhere along the contractual program?

Your post just adds to my disappointment in relation to the Oz government's decision to purchase the F35 after what I see as an inadequate assessment of our defence policy and threats and consideration of what was available in the marketplace; and a failure to press for a 'construct in Australia under licence' contract.

My only direct experience with US aircraft was with B52, Phantoms, Puff the Magic Dragon, and the occasional Jolly Green Giant.

User avatar
mozzerb
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Posts: 2594
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 03:25
Location: London, UK

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by mozzerb »


User avatar
Global Administrator
The Sheriff
The Sheriff
Posts: 64927
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 22:57
Location: Tombstone
Contact:

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Global Administrator »

aethelwulf wrote:
Canada's armed forces are a shambles...

- Signed up for the F-35
- Paid millions for ship blueprints that were just off-the-shelf existing ones
- Bought used subs that constantly breakdown and see little sea time
Did you employ our folks, or did we employ yours?

Sounds like the same song to me.

User avatar
Lakatoi 4
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Posts: 21776
Joined: 19 Apr 2007 20:41
Location: First star on the right then straight on till morning ...

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Lakatoi 4 »

Why would the F35 go for a 30mm cannon when the 20mm Vulcan cannon used on the F18 is fine for it's purpose and has a much smaller shell, so more can be carried.

The 30mm shell used on the Apache helicopter and the A10 Warthog is the size of a small milk bottle. It's fine for slowish ground attacks on tanks, etc. but something that big for a fighter.....come on.... what were they thinking :roll:

I agree to a post above that lauds the F14 Tomcat, what an aircraft particularly it's ability to launch missiles at multiple targets simultaneously at over 100 nautical miles. No other aircraft today can match that.

They just needed to make it stealthier, update the avionics a bit and it would have lasted another 10 years at least.

But what would I know.
Tony
"A cancelled stamp tells part of the story, a cover tells it all"

User avatar
stallzer
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
Posts: 5463
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 00:46
Location: Newport, MN USA

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by stallzer »

The F-22 also has the 20mm Vulcan cannon so not sure why they'd want to outfit the JSF with a 30mm. It appears as if they've fixed the oxygen issue with the F-22's so they now should be our flagship fighter and will greatly outperform the F-35's.

Mach 2.25 (1500 MPH) with a range of 1600 miles. The limitation on the F-22 is that it's basically only an interceptor but it is the most advanced aircraft in the world. Federal law prevents the defense contractor (Lockheed Martin) and the US Government from allowing our allies to own these.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=totzfPN4hWQ
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did–in his sleep. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car."

User avatar
maszki
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
Posts: 4301
Joined: 06 Dec 2011 07:57
Location: Maszki, Poland

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by maszki »

The problems with the F35 were broadcast on Russia Today today

User avatar
The Pom
I was online for Post Number 4 MILLION!
I was online for Post Number 4 MILLION!
Posts: 12039
Joined: 02 May 2007 08:08
Location: Great Britain

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by The Pom »

I can't speak for this case, but part of the problem is the rate of development of technology.

With anything like this, by the time you've commissioned, designed, developed, tested & built it, it will already be out of date.

No end of projects get to quite an advanced stage before someone decides that it would be best to start all over again.

It's an exercise in swimming against the tide.
Always on the lookout for Australian pre decimal First Day Covers.

User avatar
maszki
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
Posts: 4301
Joined: 06 Dec 2011 07:57
Location: Maszki, Poland

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by maszki »

The Pom wrote:I can't speak for this case, but part of the problem is the rate of development of technology.

With anything like this, by the time you've commissioned, designed, developed, tested & built it, it will already be out of date.

No end of projects get to quite an advanced stage before someone decides that it would be best to start all over again.

It's an exercise in swimming against the tide.
I think the point here, if I read it correctly, is that the latest development is not as good as an existing aircraft. The question now is, how long will it be before the decision makers understand they have made a mistake and cancel the program? The first estimate is already in... after building 500 the rest of the program will be scrapped. A trillion dollars down the tube.

User avatar
Lesley
I was online for Post Number 4 MILLION!
I was online for Post Number 4 MILLION!
Posts: 1692
Joined: 01 Nov 2013 15:25
Location: Cockatoo, Victoria, Australia

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Lesley »

Aircraft builders never learn , they place reliance on super duper missiles for air to air combat.
During the Vietnam conflict , the Phantom The F-4 was originally designed without a cannon as it was believed that missiles had made guns obsolete. Combat experience in Vietnam showed that a gun could be more effective than guided missiles in many combat situations

A retro fitted M61 Vulcan rotary cannon ,did the trick.

Les

User avatar
Lakatoi 4
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Posts: 21776
Joined: 19 Apr 2007 20:41
Location: First star on the right then straight on till morning ...

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Lakatoi 4 »

As a comparison here are the details of the current best air superiority fighters:

Sukhoi Su-35
Also known as Super Flanker, is a designation for two separate, heavily upgraded derivatives of the Su-27 'Flanker'.
Top speed: 2,500 km/h
Range: 3,600 km
Unit cost: US$40M–US$65M (2013)
Gun: 1× 30 mm GSh-30 internal cannon with 150 rounds, 4000–6000 rounds/min
Image

Lockheed Martin F-35
Top speed: 1,930 km/h
Cruise speed: 1.2 mach for 9.8 min[236]
Range: 2,220 km
Unit cost: US$114M–US$132M (2014)
Gun: 1 × General Dynamics 25 mm GAU-22/A 4-barrel Gatling gun, internally mounted with 180 rounds, 1800 to 4200 rounds/min
Image

A few points:

1. The Sukhoi SU-35 has a bigger gun but empties in half the time of the F-35 Lightning (though they probably have differing max. burst times which may equalise things).

2. The max. range of the S-35 is 3,600km compared to 2,200km for the F-35 (50% more), a big difference when you look at the distances required in Australian air defence.

3. The SU-35 is in service and is superior to the U.S. F-22 Raptor, the F-35 has ongoing issues.

4. The SU-35 is much faster (2,500km/hr.) compared to the F-35 (1,930 km/hr.)

5. The Su-35 is faaaaaar cheaper to buy (basically half the cost).

So why didn't we buy the Sukhoi >>>>> Politics and a requirement for inter-operability with U.S. aircraft.
Tony
"A cancelled stamp tells part of the story, a cover tells it all"

User avatar
Global Administrator
The Sheriff
The Sheriff
Posts: 64927
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 22:57
Location: Tombstone
Contact:

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Global Administrator »

The rouble has lost 50% in recent months. And they have a plane that DOES work.

The $US has gained 20% in the same period. And they hava plane that barely works.

If the ozzies even MENTIONED they were talking to the Russians, the American price would halve is my guess. :mrgreen:

User avatar
stallzer
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
Posts: 5463
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 00:46
Location: Newport, MN USA

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by stallzer »

Lakatoi 4 wrote:3. The SU-35 is in service and is superior to the U.S. F-22 Raptor
I wouldn't go that far. A few things you can't compare are the stealth capabilities in the F-22, the pilots, and most importantly the avionics systems. If I were an friend of the U.S. I would hold off payment on the JSF 35 and demand F-15 Strike Eagles, these currently are probably our best aircraft until the F-22 gets finished with it's 3.2B upgrades.

The upgrades to the F-22 will give it the ability to fire AIM-9X missiles which will help it tremendously in close combat. Australia, Japan and others have been asking the U.S. to release an export model of the F-22 but as of now there will be none.

https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f22-raptor-procurement-events-updated-02908/
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did–in his sleep. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car."

User avatar
maszki
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
Posts: 4301
Joined: 06 Dec 2011 07:57
Location: Maszki, Poland

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by maszki »

It all sounds like 'my dick is bigger than your dick' mentality.....

fighter aircraft are assault weapons that are susceptible to 'defensive weapons'

In Australia, to use the F35 or Su equivalent is to acknowledge that an 'enemy' is already in Australia... not a good start for the defence of our country

Somebody once said that diplomacy is probably better than military equipment but if memory serves me correctly he was howled down by the military industrial complex

Very few people stand up and say they want a war.... but of those who do, the majority seem to be American. Is there a message there somewhere

User avatar
stallzer
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
Posts: 5463
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 00:46
Location: Newport, MN USA

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by stallzer »

Where to begin other than facepalm again.

What a bunch of rubbish. To use a fighter jet means the enemy is already in your yard ? Funny the ONLY air combat our jets see is over foreign soil, kind of their purpose ?

Now your anti-America sentiment is well known in these parts but can you please stick to subject without veering off into one of you anti American rants ? I don't believe I've ever heard any citizen or politician in this country stating they want war, but what would I know, I only live here.
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did–in his sleep. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car."

User avatar
maszki
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
Posts: 4301
Joined: 06 Dec 2011 07:57
Location: Maszki, Poland

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by maszki »

stallzer wrote:Where to begin other than facepalm again.

What a bunch of rubbish. To use a fighter jet means the enemy is already in your yard ? Funny the ONLY air combat our jets see is over foreign soil, kind of their purpose ?

Now your anti-America sentiment is well known in these parts but can you please stick to subject without veering off into one of you anti American rants ? I don't believe I've ever heard any citizen or politician in this country stating they want war, but what would I know, I only live here.
Stallzer, whether the SU or the F35, both have limited ranges. If they are to be deployed in defence of Australia, from Australian bases, the enemy would have to be ON or NEAR the Australian continent.

I know that the US empire has bases all over the world, but we in poor old Australia do not.

So to put your mind at rest, I am talking (or rather, writing) about the defence of Australia and the selection of a suitable fighter.

PS You may live in the US but you clearly do not listen to the rants of your politicians... let me see now... let's bomb Libya, let's invade Iraq (again and again); let's invade Afghanistan; let's confront Russia; let's drone Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, ad infinitum, ad nauseum......

What the US does, or does not do is irrelevant.

There is a big wide world out there beyond the shores of the US

User avatar
Lakatoi 4
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Posts: 21776
Joined: 19 Apr 2007 20:41
Location: First star on the right then straight on till morning ...

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Lakatoi 4 »

Maszki,

To be deployed in defence of a country, aircraft don't have to always fly from their home bases.

They can be foward deployed to any base that can accommodate them and that has the necessary maintenance and ordinance capabilities.

Ferry range for that scenario is almost immaterial with in flight refueling and the "fast packs" that modern aircraft can carry.

In the case of Australia and a conflict with say China, aircraft could be deployed from Australia to Malaysia, Guam, etc. and fly missions from there.
Tony
"A cancelled stamp tells part of the story, a cover tells it all"

User avatar
stallzer
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
Posts: 5463
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 00:46
Location: Newport, MN USA

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by stallzer »

Maszki, you also seem to forget that Australia is an ally of the U.S. which means mi casa, su casa.
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did–in his sleep. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car."

User avatar
bazza4338
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
Posts: 119680
Joined: 12 Dec 2009 16:50
Location: Korumburra Vic. Australia

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by bazza4338 »

Lakatoi 4 wrote:
2. The max. range of the S-35 is 3,600km compared to 2,200km for the F-35 (50% more), a big difference when you look at the distances required in Australian air defence.
The F-35 couldn't fly non-stop Sydney-Perth or Melbourne-Darwin.

Image

Image

User avatar
stallzer
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
Posts: 5463
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 00:46
Location: Newport, MN USA

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by stallzer »

Not what it's designed to do. Since there are 20 or so RAAF bases in Australia I'd imagine you'd have all the coast line covered.
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did–in his sleep. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car."

User avatar
bazza4338
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
Posts: 119680
Joined: 12 Dec 2009 16:50
Location: Korumburra Vic. Australia

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by bazza4338 »

"Australia has committed to 72 F-35A aircraft – comprised of three operational squadrons - two at RAAF Base Williamtown and one at RAAF Base Tindal. In addition, a training squadron will be based at RAAF Base Williamtown."

".....RAAF Base Williamtown in New South Wales and RAAF Base Tindal in the Northern Territory."

http://www.airforce.gov.au/Technology/Future_Acquisitions/F- ... T1rt+Ym4K3

"Royal Australian Air Force's Base Tindal is 15kms outside Katherine and 320kms by road south-east of Darwin in the Northern Territory."

"Royal Australian Air Force's Base Williamtown is 30kms north of Newcastle."

http://www.airforce.gov.au/RAAFBases/?RAAF-EYD01E6ZiPbV0Cl+C+GKu4PSUCVwrBfQ

User avatar
stallzer
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
Posts: 5463
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 00:46
Location: Newport, MN USA

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by stallzer »

I am sure that they don't intend on having just those JSF 35's as the only aircraft patrolling the Australian air space.
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did–in his sleep. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car."

User avatar
Lesley
I was online for Post Number 4 MILLION!
I was online for Post Number 4 MILLION!
Posts: 1692
Joined: 01 Nov 2013 15:25
Location: Cockatoo, Victoria, Australia

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Lesley »

stallzer wrote:I am sure that they don't intend on having just those JSF 35's as the only aircraft patrolling the Australian air space.
You are not familiar with R.A.A.F , besides 3 Front line fighter squadrons ,we have only transport ,logistic ,maritime surveillance and AWAC's. This why we always try for combined interceptor/strike aircraft. I will stand corrected but Indonesia has a bigger and more varied Air force than us.

We had the Commonwealth aircraft factory but closed that down as USA would not let us build any aircraft under licence.

No fighter/strike aircraft in Victoria/Tasmania. Indeed over the last 20yrs a lot of bases and facilities have been closed and sold with more planned sales .

les

User avatar
Philanthropist
Sadly departed RIP. Greatly missed here
Sadly departed RIP.  Greatly missed here
Posts: 6170
Joined: 29 Jul 2008 17:18
Location: Melbourne

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Philanthropist »

Well, apart from politicians, I would have thought that the answer was obvious :idea: :idea: :idea:

Do NOT become involved in any wars before 2020 :roll: :roll: :lol: :shock:

User avatar
Gordon
Senior Member Advanced Posting Guru
Senior Member Advanced Posting Guru
Posts: 239
Joined: 21 May 2013 20:47
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Gordon »

And let us not forget the Mirage, which only had sufficient fuel endurance to take off from Williamtown and spend about 15 minutes over Sydney before having to refuel. And its tyre pressures were so high that very few airports in Australia could take them. We had three come into Dubbo once and they left deep ruts in the main runway.

User avatar
maszki
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
Posts: 4301
Joined: 06 Dec 2011 07:57
Location: Maszki, Poland

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by maszki »

A country's (read Australia) defence posture SHOULD be determined on a stand-alone basis for the simple reason that you never know who may be your enemy. Any treaties are an add-on to, NOT a replacement of, a country's defence policy and posture. As an example, re-positioning our fighter aircraft to a foreign country; for example, to Singapore or Malaysia in the event of a conflict between Australia and Indonesia would be a nonsense, and in all probability not be approved by the host country (who wants to be dragged into a war between 2 of your close neighbours?).

Equally silly would be their repositioning to Guam or other US bases given their limited range.

The selection of this aircraft as the strike fighter for the defence of Australia is, to my mind, a total nonsense- a waste of $10 billion or more. It adds little, if anything, to the defence of Australia- in fact it may actually reduce our defence capacity because we do not control the spare parts and technology back-ups necessary to keep these things in the air.

There is an old principle (the KISS principle) that was forever being quoted to and at me during my days in the Army

Keep it simple.......

In days gone by (Maszki places steel helmet upon head and adopts hull down position) ground support aircraft could be flown into open paddocks or roads just behind the front lines and operated in direct support of troops on the ground. Now, fixed wing ground support aircraft require sophisticated technical equipment and hard surface fields often hundreds of miles behind the 'front-line'.

Look at what is happening in Syria and Iraq as we debate this issue. These high tech platforms are flying off carriers or from airfields hundreds of miles from the target. Time over the target is extremely short and the distance/time to target prevents opportunity strikes. Parallel that with the Vietnam situation where spotter planes were over the battlefield and could call in either helicopter of F4 ground attack aircraft within minutes.

Technology is a great thing if appropriate to the situation. I think the UK got it right with the development of the Harrier as a ground attack vehicle; and the US Marine Corps acknowledges that opinion with its insistence that the Marine Corps F35 model be a VTOL aircraft designed for close support of soldiers on the ground.

In the Australian context, my opinion is that the F35 is the wrong vehicle; and gives our political and military leaders the false impression that our security is somehow enhanced by having these fault prone aircraft parked securely at Tindal and Williamtown, 1000's of kilometres from where they may be needed.

PS hopefully NZ will not invade us.

User avatar
maszki
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
Posts: 4301
Joined: 06 Dec 2011 07:57
Location: Maszki, Poland

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by maszki »

stallzer wrote:Maszki, you also seem to forget that Australia is an ally of the U.S. which means mi casa, su casa.
mi casa, su casa? Only so long as we toe the party line. To quote some American..."I have a dream, that someday......." Australia will adopt an independent ( and neutral) foreign policy

User avatar
mozzerb
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Posts: 2594
Joined: 18 Apr 2007 03:25
Location: London, UK

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by mozzerb »

maszki wrote:Technology is a great thing if appropriate to the situation. I think the UK got it right with the development of the Harrier as a ground attack vehicle; and the US Marine Corps acknowledges that opinion with its insistence that the Marine Corps F35 model be a VTOL aircraft designed for close support of soldiers on the ground.
In that article I linked to above, it seems that it was the Marine Corps' insistence that the F-35 should have a VTOL option that is the root cause of many of the problems -- the design compromises necessary to allow for that possibility (the other US arms don't include it in their versions) hamstrung the whole effort.

Having one all-purpose super-aircraft to do everything sounds like a great idea in principle, but in practice specialised aircraft for specific jobs are going to beat it unless your technology is so superior it trumps everything. These days, China and Russia have caught up with US technology.

As for Australia -- well, presumably alliances meant it was a case of having to buy whatever the Americans had available to sell as the only practical option. Buying from people you might end up fighting (i.e. China) is not an appealing idea, rolling your own from scratch is an expensive crapshoot, and buying from someone you're not allied to (i.e. Russia) is both risky and guaranteed to infuriate your allies.

User avatar
maszki
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
Posts: 4301
Joined: 06 Dec 2011 07:57
Location: Maszki, Poland

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by maszki »

Too true mozzerb.

Personal opinion based on the various posts is that the USAF and USN should have gone with up-grades of earlier models; and the USMC upgrade the Harrier. Might have saved a few dollars.

As to alliances and treaties; very comforting but also restrictive. I still wonder how Turkey managed to get a licence to manufacture the Hornet; and why Australia was not able to get a similar deal with the F35? Would have been a considerable boost for Oz industry.

I have the same opinion about the proposed submarine deal- build at home.

User avatar
stallzer
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
WINNER! Stampboards Poster Of The Month
Posts: 5463
Joined: 01 Sep 2010 00:46
Location: Newport, MN USA

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by stallzer »

maszki wrote:As to alliances and treaties; very comforting but also restrictive. I still wonder how Turkey managed to get a licence to manufacture the Hornet; and why Australia was not able to get a similar deal with the F35? Would have been a considerable boost for Oz industry.
My guess would be due to the technology of the JSF-35 where the F/A-18 (Hornet) was rolled out in 1983.
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did–in his sleep. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car."

User avatar
bazza4338
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
Posts: 119680
Joined: 12 Dec 2009 16:50
Location: Korumburra Vic. Australia

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by bazza4338 »

The F-35's onboard software system is having even more problems

Image
An F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing aircraft flies behind a tanker on a mission over Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., in September 2013.

In yet another blow for the F-35 program, the plane’s highly advanced onboard sensors are simply too sensitive, Breaking Defence reports.

The sensors are responsible for tracking and sorting through external threats facing the plane, such as an enemy missile launch. However, the plane’s sensors collect so much data that the onboard software is overwhelmed. The plane is unable to effectively sort through the information it’s receiving, leading to an unacceptable frequency of false alarms.

Dr. J. Michael Gilmore, the director of Operational Test and Evaluation for the Department of Defence’s weapons systems, wrote in his 2014 annual report that the “fusion of information from own-ship sensors, as well as fusion of information from off-board sensors is still deficient.”

“The Distributed Aperture System continues to exhibit high false-alarm rates and false target tracks, and poor stability performance, even in later versions of software,” he wrote.

Still, Gilmore noted, the onboard software did continue to make gains and is steadily improving the reliability of the sensors.

Thomas Lawhead, an Air Force civilian involved in the F-35A program, echoed this view. Lawhead told Breaking Defence that the missile warnings for the F-35 were “still a little too sensitive.” In his view, the threat-tracking software will not be ready until close to the F-35′s operational debut in 2015.

According to Lockheed Martin, the F-35 uses a set of integrated sensors that provide multiple levels of redundancy. In the case that a sensor becomes damaged, the comprehensive nature of the sensors allow the F-35 to continue to operate fully. This type of system is already in place in the F-22, but it was anticipated the F-35 would represent a significant upgrade.

Ideally, groups of F-35s should also be able to share their sensor information with each other in order to give aircraft a more complete view of the battlefield.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/f-35s-sensors-are-too-sensitive-2015-3

User avatar
Andyref2
PLATINUM Star Serious Stamp Poster
PLATINUM Star Serious Stamp Poster
Posts: 383
Joined: 24 Apr 2013 07:54
Location: Phelan California USA

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Andyref2 »

Perhaps the cannon doesn't work, but you should see what the damn laser can do! Only problem is I couldn't tell if the target (a Ford F150) was moving or stationary. Not sure if I can forward the link, but the picture shows approximately an eight inch hole from the hood through the engine when fired upon by the F35 laser. It may have also cut through the front axle but the photo isn't clear on that.
However, if that is the case, who needs a cannon?
Be Safe!
Andy Z.

User avatar
Lakatoi 4
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Posts: 21776
Joined: 19 Apr 2007 20:41
Location: First star on the right then straight on till morning ...

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Lakatoi 4 »

Don't know about an F35 carrying a laser weapon :?:

I know that DARPA were testing airborne chemical lasers in very large aircraft basically because the whole setup is so big and heavy and requires a lot of power.

They do have shipboard lasers now on a couple of USN vessels, testing them to shoot down incoming missiles and possibly damage aircraft enough that they turn and run, but to do the level of damage you're talking about would take one monster of a laser.
Tony
"A cancelled stamp tells part of the story, a cover tells it all"

User avatar
bazza4338
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
Posts: 119680
Joined: 12 Dec 2009 16:50
Location: Korumburra Vic. Australia

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by bazza4338 »

I just happened upon this website.

"Stop The F-35 - Protect Vermont"

http://www.stopthef35.com/

Our mission is to stop the basing of the F-35A Joint Strike Fighter at the Vermont Air National Guard Station located at the Burlington, Vermont International Airport. We oppose the basing in order to protect the over 6,000 people living around the airport from the dangers associated with its basing. Some of these include negative health impacts on children and adults, cognitive impairment in children, reduction in property values, classification of thousands of affordable homes as being unsuitable for residential use, disproportional negative impacts to minorities and people with low incomes, and risk of loss of life from crashes.

Five Areas of Concern

1. Cost To Our Country
The lifetime cost of the F-35 is over 1.4 TRILLION dollars – and rising.
The price per plane has doubled since 2001.

2. Technological Disaster
After fourteen years in development and testing, the F-35A still
• can’t support ground troops
• can’t defend itself from air or ground strikes
• can’t hide from enemies
• needs a larger, faster, more maneuverable aircraft to protect it
• uses outdated stealth technology
• can’t fly in the rain or near thunderstorms.
The F-35A has had more fleet-wide groundings than any other fighter aircraft in the last 50 years.

3. Military-Industrial-Political Corruption
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”
- President Dwight Eisenhower
“The F-35 is both a scandal and a tragedy” and is “the worst example of the military-industrial-congressional complex.”
- Senator John McCain (R-AZ)

4. Adverse Health Impacts
“There is overwhelming evidence that exposure to environmental noise has adverse effects on the health of the population.”
(World Health Organization Report: Burden of Disease from Environmental Noise, 2011)

5. Harm To Children
“A growing body of scientific knowledge demonstrates that children may suffer disproportionally from environmental health risks and safety risks. These risks arise because children’s neurological, immunological, digestive, and other bodily systems are still developing”
(Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks, April 2003)
“There is increasing awareness that chronic exposure to high aircraft noise levels can impair learning.”
(Air Force Environmental Impact Statement, 2013)

User avatar
Lakatoi 4
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Founder Member Joined April 2007
Posts: 21776
Joined: 19 Apr 2007 20:41
Location: First star on the right then straight on till morning ...

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by Lakatoi 4 »

For God's sake, these people are living next to an existing Air National Guard base where just about everything has landed and taken off (except for say a B52, B1 and a B2 and those are BIG).

So they are just another small military jet and probably quieter than other recent types like the F15......duh :!:
Tony
"A cancelled stamp tells part of the story, a cover tells it all"

User avatar
bazza4338
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
I was online for Post Number 7 MILLION!
Posts: 119680
Joined: 12 Dec 2009 16:50
Location: Korumburra Vic. Australia

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by bazza4338 »

I was lead to the article because of this news side-banner...

Winooski moves toward F-35 lawsuit decision

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/local/2015/04/ ... /25393369/

First paragraph follows...

WINOOSKI – City Councilors have narrowed their options down to two choices regarding their decision to enter a lawsuit on the environmental impact statement of F-35 fighter jets.

User avatar
maszki
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
2500 Stampboards Post - Senior Guru
Posts: 4301
Joined: 06 Dec 2011 07:57
Location: Maszki, Poland

Re: F-35 stealth jet 'will not be able to fire guns until 20

Post by maszki »

Well, with the earlier article that the F35 will not be able to fire its guns until 2019 then the citizens of Vermont don't have to worry about being shot up/out of their homes.

As an alternative, given the right of US citizens to bear arms, the Vermont citizens might consider buying a few Sukhoi SU35 fighters (which are faster and have guns that actually fire) to defend themselves.

:evil: :evil: :evil:

Post Reply

Return to “'The Water Cooler' - A relaxing and FUN place to let off some steam ......”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bill H UK, Global Administrator and 2 guests