MarkW

Yep, just enough SH to buy some time, but not a complete replacement. Be interesting to see if Prime Minister Bieber goes through with this for real, or if this is a ploy to eventually buy F-35s and save face. Either way, I'll believe it when rubber is on the ramp.

Canada in Crisis!! http://www.defensenews.com/articles/canada-announces-plan-to-buy-18-super-hornets-start-fighter-competition-in-2017?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Breaking News 11.22.16&utm_term=Editorial - Breaking News

News: F-35 continues to be a hot item. http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a23757/f-35-fighter-catches-fire/

It's not an APU, it's called the IPP, or Integrated Power Package. The difference is far more than an acronym; the IPP runs before the engine starts, during MX, and after the main engine shuts down. It provides full time power and cooling to the AC systems AL THE TIME. It also is the emergency power in case the main fails, and can provide the electrical power to keep the flight controls working if the main goes. It is an essential part of AC operations, not just a glorifies start cart. The Kittyhawk kits left off both the inlet, exhaust, and the aero "bump" in front of the IPP that is ess

The use of an UCA to keep LRIP 9 & 10 going is a big freakin' deal. OSD HATES UCA's. http://www.defensenews.com/story/breaking-news/2016/08/12/f-35-jpo-lockheed-martin-undefinitized-contract-action/88600730/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Breaking%20News%208.12.16&utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Breaking%20News

Oh no he didn't! It's on! http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-reason-why-americas-f-35-would-crush-chinas-j-20-stealth-17315

Your arrogance and presumption about who the rest of us are certainly qualify you as the most knowledgeable. Bravo sir. It at the very least validates you are what you say you are.

Roping off F-22s was fairly common too. Don't hold your breath on Singapore: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-08/singapore-puts-off-decision-on-whether-to-buy-lockheed-s-f-35 Note: Singapore has always been a joke on the program. They have been about as serious as a Kamikaze pilot on his 35th mission....

Wait...Axe was wrong?!

This guy is priceless. STOVL was a component of the JAST program from the get-go. Oh, wait, the Marines insisted on STOVL in 2008, causing seven simultaneous Nunn-McCurdy breaches. Curse their Vexiness! Yeah, that's the ticket.

Heeeeeeee's Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack! Messier Axe. Note there are zero calories or new content in this post. Copied here in entirety to avoid upping the click bait count:

Good points. Active is a more elegant solution, eventually the vehicle would be ridiculous given the cat and mouse nature. And ATGM videos posted by ISIS are very easy to find. None if these systems should rely on a single solution, just like the F-35 and F-22 rely on way more than just shaping to do their job.

I'm not understanding the distinction. RPGs and ATGM basically use the same HEAT type warhead, so how is the reactive armor defnse mechanism different? Granted wire mesh won't work...

I find it ironic in a thread where the F-35 was falsely accused of requirements creep the EFV comes up. Literally the text book case at Defense Acquisition University. Get it right people: EFV = requirements creep, to death F-35 = gross/criminal program office mismanagement

Hey, news: CANADA IN CRISIS (part 487): http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/f35-stealth-fighter-jet-1.3696269

Quit your whining, baby. You got the latest model M60s didn't you? And those Sheridan's look barely used. Okay, I've tried so hard to remain aloof and anonymous and yet all of a sudden everybody knows what I'm thinking? And to be fair, the part you cited I was worried would be misinterpreted. Your reading way too much into it.I was referring specifically to the initial radar capability versus later radar capability. Having worked with the tail end of the PEACE MARBLE program, I am intimately familiar with what you can and cannot stuff into the existing outer mold line of an F-16. And as w

I'm still trying to figure out where Gunny thinks I'm coming from... And seriously, there was nothing OPSEC related in his post. I don't think Hun U boats will be targeting the Wasp based on what he wrote...

While every cubic inch is spoken for, not all are being used currently. Future hardware upgrades would come to the mission equipment--an EW pod, maybe better EOTS, etc. Flares are always being upgraded, do that could happen too. The biggest changes will come in computer upgrades; faster processing time will allow for improvements in EW and fusion performance. But the outer mold line is set, the volume to play with is fixed. Signature is still king there. As for the IPP, the power and cooling budgets are also fixed. The IPP itself is a marvel for doing what it does. But it does have lim

Wait a minute, you can quote yourself on the Internet and that makes you even more authoritative?! Why didn't anyone ever tell me this before? All I've ever heard is that repeating the same wrong information doesn't make it true. The analogy to the F-16 is completely not applicable. Why? I'm glad you asked. There simply is no comparison between F-16 "concurrency" and what the F-35 program is going through. The F-16 was constructed as a largely empty jet with significant space available. The fact that it went from the block 10 to the block 30 upgrades so quickly was more about developin

While all of the above is generally true, none of the above is specifically true for the F- 35. The JORD was set in stone fairly early in the program; so while blaming requirements creep is attractive, it is factually incorrect. And F-35 funding has remained fairly stable; it was a protected program. Capping runaway costs is not the same thing as cutting a productive program. Other than those two point being totally wrong, good conversation so far. This is the point I was trying to make, that was so smarmily dismissed. Yes, JSF requirements are changing all the time but the process is not

Well, I was a bit tongue in cheek too. But when you only attack the negative points, and don't own that the jet still has some growing to do, AND is insanely behind schedule as they whittle away capability to make it fit into what time remains, it strikes me as a bit delusional. Comparing it to old crap that wasn't supposed to fix all the sins of old crap makes NO sense. Sure, the F-151617181920 whatever will tear you entrails out if you slip on the boarding ladder. Got that. But the F-35 was supposed to have the first ever nondisembowleing entry ladder, and it still spills guts on the t

Before you two lovebirds get your panties any more knotted, there are some real issues here. Sure, the article references War is Boring, BUT (and it is a BIG BUT): Internal carriage of the 2000 JDAM is a big damn deal for the AF variant. Because if they can't carry them internally, they can't carry them externally either. It is an IOC requirement they'll let slip if they do it without the 2000 bomb. And there are plenty of time where a 500lb wont do. The fuel chiller trucks is another issue that impacts some operations. It is also a fact of life with 5th Gen aircraft that aren't swiss c

This article is pretty darned informative, and has answered a few questions recently posed (yes, Virginia, LM did support the recent "deployment" to Hill): http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-f-35-stealth-fighter-the-ultimate-weapon-or-the-ultimate-17016?page=2

Reuters, no fan, wrote a fluff piece: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-airshow-britain-lockheed-fighter-idUSKCN0ZV287

The C has a maximum landing speed requirement of 145kts, the others come in around 160-180 IIRC and depending on what they are bringing back. The Brits and Marines were looking at a 20 kt rolling landing to enable them to bring back more weight for the B model. They've already tested that capability, the jet can do it. The larger wing should increase drag and lift, so the C is a tad slower than the other two. But keep in mind the 7g versus 9g business is all about what the services do with the jet. It's also why the A has an internal gun, and the B & C carries a pod. The Navy and Corp