Like Tree0Likes

F-35 promo Video

Reply
Old 06-30-2010, 05:15 PM
  #1
Charter Member#203
Charter Member
Thread Starter
 
Pete B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft.Myers, Fl/ Atlanta, Ga/ Worldwide
My Boats: 98 Scarab 302 Sport
Posts: 12,562
Default F-35 promo Video

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/how/st...vl_player.html
Pete B is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2010, 06:02 PM
  #2
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Arlington Tx
Posts: 9,373
Default

Absolutely ridiculous that this program was allowed to proceed. It's at LEAST 50% over budget, and computer hackers stole the build plans in 2007 to formulate defensive plans against it. It weighs a piggish 60,000lbs so maneuverability will not be its strong suit. Another negative is it needs air to air refueling, which in one scenario resulted in destruction of the tankers, forcing the planes back to the base.

Why do we continue to throw money at these incredibly expensive boondoggles when we're fighting ragtag terrorists on the ground???
Catmando is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2010, 06:07 PM
  #3
Charter Member#203
Charter Member
Thread Starter
 
Pete B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft.Myers, Fl/ Atlanta, Ga/ Worldwide
My Boats: 98 Scarab 302 Sport
Posts: 12,562
Default

[QUOTE]Another negative is it needs air to air refueling, which in one scenario resulted in destruction of the tankers, forcing the planes back to the base./QUOTE]

what the hell are you talking about, air to air refueling is a requirement that all services want, this is a joint strike fighter that will be sold to many countries. air to air re-fueling provides longer range and time on station, so why is this bad???
Pete B is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2010, 07:07 PM
  #4
Registered
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Carlos, Sonora, Mexico - Tucson, AZ
My Boats: 13' Hobbie Cat - Fuel is free and the tramp is comfy
Posts: 68
Default

I think he is referring to an article I saw. The article referred to some study evaluating the mission capability of the F35.

The one major negative scenario. Was that when the refueling tanker got shot down, the aircraft were forced to return to base without completing the mission.

The article attempted to make it sound as if the aircraft was a failure due to this one scenario. All modern combat or military support aircraft rely on air to air refueling. The exact same scenario would have the same exact affect on any aircraft operating on a mission that requires aerial refueling. All air forces of the world are well aware of this type of scenario. Each take measures to protect the tankers as best as possible.

This one scenario in no way what so ever, proves that the F35 is a bad airplane.
SinOjos is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2010, 11:06 PM
  #5
Registered
 
vette131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Slidell,La
My Boats: 26 american offshore ,28 donzi 33 Scarab
Posts: 1,113
Default

Ignore cat he is a troll
vette131 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:07 PM.


Copyright 2011 OffShoreOnly. All rights reserved.