WatcherZero
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 22 May 2023
- Messages
- 1,037
- Reaction score
- 2,644
It's a Lockheed Martin plane and an MBDA missile. How is this Boeing's fault? Or is it just a reflex now?
Boeing is just a synonym for delay and failure now.
It's a Lockheed Martin plane and an MBDA missile. How is this Boeing's fault? Or is it just a reflex now?
The comment on the F-35B is particularly enlightening. Makes me wonder if all the earlier rhetorics about how if not for a joint service type none would've gotten their stealth fighter is actually true or not.These comments were deleted from Reddit, but are available here:
Unddit
undelete.pullpush.io
This is also a good reminder that comments, posts, etc. deleted from Reddit are never really deleted, even if it was done by a moderator.
The comment on the F-35B is particularly enlightening. Makes me wonder if all the earlier rhetorics about how if not for a joint service type none would've gotten their stealth fighter is actually true or not.
Well why on earth did the Marines “need” a “stealth fighter”?
Thats one hell of a thread.These comments were deleted from Reddit, but are available here:
Unddit
undelete.pullpush.io
This is also a good reminder that comments, posts, etc. deleted from Reddit are never really deleted, even if it was done by a moderator.
I posted that thread before on this forum. It seems that the mods must have deleted my post.Thats one hell of a thread.
Unless the UK MOD contracts a very sizable order on the next two/three years there's no way that the RAF/RN gets anything near 138 airframes (wich, to be honest is no surprise), some hard choices for John Healey ahead.
If i was the Spanish Defense Minister i would be collecting the money for some twenty "B's" ASAP.
USMC Needs?!? What for? Airshows?They needed a Harrier replacement and so did Britain, this was the next aircraft in development and it would have been hard to justify the cost of developing a solely STOVL fighter.
I'd have preferred if there was no B variant and the UK had to purchase the F-35C and build CATOBAR carriers.They needed a Harrier replacement and so did Britain, this was the next aircraft in development and it would have been hard to justify the cost of developing a solely STOVL fighter.
In that case, the RN might have ended with only one CVF or even none. I also suspect that the chosen aircraft would not be the F-35C and without STOVL the UK MOD would have droped out of the JSF program entirely.I'd have preferred if there was no B variant and the UK had to purchase the F-35C and build CATOBAR carriers.
I'd have preferred if there was no B variant and the UK had to purchase the F-35C and build CATOBAR carriers.
In that case, the RN might have ended with only one CVF or even none. I also suspect that the chosen aircraft would not be the F-35C and without STOVL the UK MOD would have droped out of the JSF program entirely.
Cheers
So does that mean that the USMC will stop all future production of the America class carriers and being more reliant on the large US Navy aircraft carriers in the future?
The comment on the F-35B is particularly enlightening. Makes me wonder if all the earlier rhetorics about how if not for a joint service type none would've gotten their stealth fighter is actually true or not.
The whole program would faced a lot fewer delays and produced an aircraft with much better kinematics.
It was the C model that had serious development issues, the A and B models had relatively trouble free development.
Perhaps I misremembered. Where the issues weight related or technical? If the former, then I wonder how much the B length limit induced problems with the C.
And been cheaper. The difference in price would probably have covered the difference in cost between a STOVL and CATOBAR carrier.The whole program would faced a lot fewer delays and produced an aircraft with much better kinematics.
I posted that thread before on this forum. It seems that the mods must have deleted my post.
While it might be possible to swap out missiles (like using a 9X), it would likely require adjustments or modifications, as the bay's configuration is designed around certain dimensions. The whole setup is more about stealth and performance, so I doubt it’s as simple as just swapping missiles.Regarding the F-35's self-defense AMRAAMs, are they married to those missiles on those bay door hard points? In other words, if time/cost is of no consideration, can I put a 9x on the bay doors? Would I need a something virtually the same size and shape in order to replace the AMRAAM as the weapon du jour? From the layman's view, I would assume they are stuck with AMRAAMs, due to other weapons' unique arrangements. If this is the case, I will be stunned.
Meteor beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile (BVRAAM), has been successfully flown on the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II fighter jet for the first time.
On February 28, the UK Royal Air Force (RAF) reported that an F-35B, a short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) variant operated by the US Marine Corps (USMC), carried an inert version of the missile during test flights conducted from Naval Air Station (NAS) Patuxent River in Maryland.According to the announcement, the trials were a collaborative effort involving the UK and US governments, along with the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD), Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S), and industry partners MBDA and Lockheed Martin.
In this video, Defense Updates analyzes how integration of Meteor BVR missile will significantly enhance the lethality of F-35?
*Trump voice* Get me Marillyn Lockheed!Defense Updates has put out a video about apparent concerns from the PRC concerning the potential sale of F-35s to India
On February 13, during a meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the White House, President Trump offered the F-35 Lightning II stealth fighter jets. Trump stated, “We’ll be increasing military sales to India by many billions of dollars. We’re also paving the way to ultimately provide India with the F-35 stealth fighters.”
When was this?Now as to PRC concerns I have no doubt that they don't like the idea of F-35s being able to get detailed scams of their J-20, apparently the Su-35 has no trouble detecting and tracking them.
Naval News has received confirmation that the U.S. Navy has taken delivery of ‘Six-in-the-Bay’ capable F-35Cs delivered in the previously-held Lot 15 aircraft. Deliveries of these aircraft resumed in July 2024 with 41 aircraft delivered across the Joint Strike Fighter program by the end of fiscal year 2024. As part of those 41 aircraft, several F-35Cs were delivered to the U.S. Navy with necessary weapons bay modifications needed to enable the internal carriage of the two additional air-to-air missile
Several services have been experimenting with mirror-like coatings designed to reduce the corrosion and general degradation of radar absorbent coatings used on stealth fighters. As Naval News understands, the F-35 will receive a new coating developed in the Next Gen 2.0 OML Coating Program, designed to improve both maintainability and survivability. It is currently being tested with Test and Evaluation Squadron 9 (VX-9) and was trialed with VFA-125 onboard USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) in 2023.
Ooooh, sidekick! Now I want to see a picture and find out if it enables internal AIM-9X carriage as some contended....with necessary weapons bay modifications needed to enable the internal carriage of the two additional air-to-air missile