fulcrum1 Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 (edited) That's the reason why the ALO needs to be apart of the planning process at the BDE level, because someone will eventually mention kicking out a daisy cutter out of the back end of a C-130.......and look like a complete moron giving the COA's to the boss. Edited April 23, 2015 by fulcrum1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DarkKnight Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 what if all the negative comments are a disinformation campaign to fool the enemy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) what if all the negative comments are a disinformation campaign to fool the enemy +1 I've often thought that this might be the case. The bad guys (and you know who you are) read all the negative comments by JSF Haters on ARC, come to the conclusion that the F-35 is just a winged POS and try to attack us. They then get their butts kicked (at least during daylight hours). Edited April 25, 2015 by 11bee Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ross blackford Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 +1 I've often thought that this might be the case. The bad guys (and you know who you are) read all the negative comments by JSF Haters on ARC, come to the conclusion that the F-35 is just a winged POS and try to attack us. They then get their butts kicked (at least during daylight hours). :D, And in good weather. :lol: . Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) Edited April 25, 2015 by Trigger Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dylan Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 thank you Trigger Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 As always great photos Trigger . A question, what is the significance of the "CF-01" on the tail of this ^^^ bird? Canadian? Thanks. Regards, Don. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkW Posted April 26, 2015 Author Share Posted April 26, 2015 AF, BF and CF denote test aircraft for the respective A, B, & C models. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 AF, BF and CF denote test aircraft for the respective A, B, & C models. Thanks. I learned something . Regards, Don. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 :D/>, And in good weather. :lol:. CF-8 got struck by lightning recently. I wouldn't suggest taking a Growler anywhere near lightning just for comparison's sake Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ross blackford Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 :D, Goodness TT. Does that mean that both of our latest and most expensive ever military purchases can only be flown in fair weather? What'll we do when the Invasion comes? Please pray for us TT, we'll need all the prayers our friends can send up. Especially if it comes during weather like we've just had for the last week around Amberley and Williamtown. The small town of Dungog in the Hunter Valley about 50 miles from here last week copped 4" of rain in I bel;ieve 1/2 an hour and the locals have never seen the river there so high. 3 elderly people perished when their house floated away down the main street and no one could get to them in time to save them. Another man there saved 6 people with a wheelie bin. Some people in the Hunter are still without power and may be for another week. If you go to you tube and type in Dungog Floods 2015 the first clip will show you that house floating down the street. There were another 3 houses in Dungog washed away and the fatalties were actually 4. An 86 year old woman drove into flood waters near Maitland and was washed away. She'd gone out to buy a litre of milk. I can attest to the fact that we had torrential rain and howling winds up to 85-90 mph for 4 days straight and then after a couple of days of fair weather, last Saturday and yesterday we had some more torrential downpours. These systems are called East Coast Low Pressure Systems. For several hours in the middle of this rain and wind Newcastle was cut off from everywhere. Sarcasm mode off but I do wonder if these horribly expensive aircraft can operate in conditions that I've seen the old Mirages operate in if needed. Not sure about the F/A-18A/Cs because I never worked on them. I was at Richmond by the time we got those. Even the old WW2 piston engined fighters could and did operate in torrential rain caused by deep low pressure systems in the Pacific and other areas of operations. , Ross. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 (edited) GAO reports slams the reliability of the F135. Pratt (somewhat predictably) has a different opinion. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-27/f-35-engines-from-united-technologies-called-unreliable-by-gao?cmpid=yhoo What I do find interesting are the time between failure numbers offered up by the GAO. As of late December, engines on the Marine Corps’ complex version of the F-35, designed for short takeoffs and vertical landings, flew about 47 hours between failures caused by engine design issues instead of the 90 hours planned for this point, according to GAO officials. Air Force and Navy model engines flew about 25 hours between failures instead of the 120 hours planned. Why would the engine in the Marine version have better reliability numbers, despite being more complicated than the CTOL version? While on the subject, any update on the fire issue? Have they introduced a fix or is the entire fleet still subject to those pretty severe maneuverability / inspection restrictions? Edited April 27, 2015 by 11bee Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Shhhh John, we don't talk about the fire ... -Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Shhhh John, we don't talk about the fire ... -Gregg What fire? :)/> Quote Link to post Share on other sites
82Whitey51 Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 What fire? :)/>/>/>/> WHAT?! THERE WAS A FIRE? WHERE? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Hypothetically speaking - If a fire occurs but there are never any pictures of it released, did it really happen? Sorry, couldn't resist.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 (edited) Don't know if anyone can top the Mirage III but we can sure try Who knows if F-18s can survive weather? CF-8 was only struck by lightning. who knows if it can handle rain? Hypothetically speaking - If a fire occurs but there are never any pictures of it released, did it really happen? based on the demands in this thread, there seems to be some projection here-- how many folks were demanding proof and shouting conspiracy? GAO reports slams the reliability of the F135. Pratt (somewhat predictably) has a different opinion. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-27/f-35-engines-from-united-technologies-called-unreliable-by-gao?cmpid=yhoo What I do find interesting are the time between failure numbers offered up by the GAO. As of late December, engines on the Marine Corps’ complex version of the F-35, designed for short takeoffs and vertical landings, flew about 47 hours between failures caused by engine design issues instead of the 90 hours planned for this point, according to GAO officials. Air Force and Navy model engines flew about 25 hours between failures instead of the 120 hours planned. Why would the engine in the Marine version have better reliability numbers, despite being more complicated than the CTOL version? Hoping this creates enough fear, uncertainty, and doubt to revive the GE engine at a cost of additional billions while people simultaneously complain that the program costs are too high. clearly their data is spot on. Hoping for Revival of X-32 for strategic money purposes. Have they introduced a fix or is the entire fleet still subject to those pretty severe maneuverability / inspection restrictions? http://lmgtfy.com/?q=F135+pratt+and+whitney+engine+fix Edited April 27, 2015 by TaiidanTomcat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 What fire? :)/>/>/>/> -Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 http://lmgtfy.com/?q=F135+pratt+and+whitney+engine+fix Thank you TT, I was unaware of the power of Google. However, this approach is fraught with danger, since Google could provide links to ARC-unapproved websites, like FA, GAO, DAR, AARP, etc, etc. I was hoping to get a Fair and Balanced update on this issue from one of the subject matter experts who reside on this thread. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Barneydhc82 Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkW Posted April 27, 2015 Author Share Posted April 27, 2015 The GAO would criticize how Mother Teresa handled orphans. It's their only job. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ross blackford Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 :D, Thank you Waco. Werther's Originals are my favourite hard boiled lollies. :D TT, I'd forgotten that the F/A-18 was a navy aircraft. That's a great shot you posted of an F/A18 being catapulted through the water on the deck. Thank you for sharing that. , Ross. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 The GAO would criticize how Mother Teresa handled orphans. It's their only job. Agree 100%. The question is whether their criticisms are accurate or not. Specifically, the latest report they put out on the alleged sub-par reliability of the F135. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.