Topic: F-35 production delayed

[JMM]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=2&u=/nm/20040617/ts_nm/arms_fighter_lockheed_dc_3

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/military/2002/5/flexible_flyer/

3,000 of these babies for 200 billion? Hades, for almost the cost of Iraq we could have bought all those 3,000 aircraft and just bombed Iraq into submission, AND combat tested at the same frigging time!

If this thing is stealthy as well, it kind of makes me wonder if we need so many Raptors, or maybe a better balance between the two numberwise. 3,000 jets is a LOT of frigging jets! Not to mention the other 2500 plus for international sales!

Lockheed Martin surely will not be hurting on the books or employment wise anytime soon.  

Boeing just got the boot from Virgin Airways, they chose the new Airbus 737 type birds that are roomier and the pilots can fly other Airbus aircraft after training on the 737 types due to Airbus having pretty much the same cockpit control systems on each type of aircraft, pretty efficient if you ask me. Any of you that have flown on a 737 can definitely remember the "cattle car" feeling.  

[Kmelew]

It says in the article that the Royal Navy is buying some planes.  Well maybe they'll be used on  this.  

[Iceman]

Considering the F-22 is a land based fighter, and the F-35 is going to (hopefully) replace the F-14 and F/A - 18 Super Hornet fleet, yeah 3000 is a good number.  

[Iceman]

Also, the F-22 was designed with air superiority in mind, while the F-35's were designed with attacking ground targets in mind.

 

[Elvis]

Don't confuse the F35 "Joint Strike Fighter" with the F22 "Raptor".

Also Virgin Airlines, is also known as Virgin Atlantic Airlines which is a different entity than Virgin America, which is a brand new low cost start up. I'm not sure which Vurgin Atlantic flies, but Virgin America is the airline that just ordered the A320s and A319s. Virgin America should start flying in 2005. They will have a total of 33 aircraft in the A320 family,.  

   

[JMM]

Nobody is confusing the two Elvis, but 3,000 vs a limited number of Raptors is not a good thing, IMO, a more realistic approach to a successful fighter cover is 1 to 3 (These are not the days of WW2 where B-17s could spit out lead as well as a P-51 escort). The navy is relying on F-18s to provide air superiority for the naval version of the F-35, as well as the marines are too. IMO, it would have been best to stipulate the F-22 had to be CV capable as well. With the extreme cost of aircraft nowadays, we cannot have a gazillion different types of aircraft running around as in days past. The fighting and competition between the services is a bad thing, IMO, and cost taxpayers more than they needed through the ages. We are at the point in time where the "best of the best" is the only one to be chosen as we cannot afford to purchase different types from different manufacturers.

I've always wondered what WW2 would have been like in Europe had Hitler and his staff chosen the ME-262 (instead of having different aircraft like the ME-109 and FW-190) as the only fighter to still be authorized production in 41 back when it was prototyped and shown with awesome results (developed in 39, built in 41), that superior aircraft, in combination with the Sturmovik, well, it would not have been good at all for the Russkies or Brits or anybody else that got in the way.

cool link on that jet:

http://www.warbirdalley.com/me262.htm

Regarding Virgin Atlantic, there is a great site regarding what aircraft you will be flying on:

http://www.v-flyer.com/chance.asp

VS is Virgin flights, seems they prefer 747s and Airbus series for international flights. You might want to ask the Brits what's used for local and for flights to France and Germany. I imagine them being a European company they prefer to do business with Airbus.

Virgin America is still in the wings, as U.S. law stipulates any U.S. based domestic airline HAS to be majority owned by U.S. stockholders, thus Branson will only be able to have 49.9% shares, and he already has Americans (Allied to his business interests of course   ) lined up. It's just a matter of going through our wonderful govt. red tape. I agree with the protection law, I just hate govt. red tape, as Virgin Atlantic has a damn good safety record, and their company philosophy is based on having fun and doing successful business at the same time. Branson's business will create jobs for Americans, just as the Toyota plants in KY and San Antonio, TX created jobs. Hopefully Branson and crew bring British stewardesses!    

[Iceman]

The super hornet is an excellent aircraft, and an F-22 is too heavy to land on a carrier. It could probably take off, but it wouldn't be fun landing it. You'd probably have to come down at such and angle and speed such that you would a) collapse the landing gear or b) incinerate on touchdown.

WHat you were saying aboubt simplification is the entire point of this project.  By designing and building the F-35, you can replace the Harrier, F-14, F-16, A-10, F-15 any any number of others that I don't know off the top of my head. In this manner you can share parts.  Remember when interchangable parts were first invented? Its the same idea, only for airplanes.

Also, the F-22 and F-35 are similiar in so many ways, I wouldn't be surprised if a ton of there respective parts are interchangable as well.

I think there's a similiar number of F-22's on order as well. It wouldn't really be worth it to design a fighter to replace all your other air superiority fighters (mainly F-15's) and not do it. So 1 for at least every F-15, and F-16 in the future. Hardly a small number.

[JMM]

Personally I would have liked to see a "stealth" F-14 Tomcat developed. It performed just as well in the top gun excercises in the U.S. and is one of my favorite jet fighters. We probably could have used interchangeable parts on some components as well.

I do not think we should export the A-10, it was considered "obsolete" in 91 yet was one of the most effective ground attack planes during DS part 1. Better to scrap them, employ Americans doing it, and put more valuable metals back in the system, IMO.  

[JMM]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=2&u=/nm/20040617/ts_nm/arms_fighter_lockheed_dc_3

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/military/2002/5/flexible_flyer/

3,000 of these babies for 200 billion? Hades, for almost the cost of Iraq we could have bought all those 3,000 aircraft and just bombed Iraq into submission, AND combat tested at the same frigging time!

If this thing is stealthy as well, it kind of makes me wonder if we need so many Raptors, or maybe a better balance between the two numberwise. 3,000 jets is a LOT of frigging jets! Not to mention the other 2500 plus for international sales!

Lockheed Martin surely will not be hurting on the books or employment wise anytime soon.  

Boeing just got the boot from Virgin Airways, they chose the new Airbus 737 type birds that are roomier and the pilots can fly other Airbus aircraft after training on the 737 types due to Airbus having pretty much the same cockpit control systems on each type of aircraft, pretty efficient if you ask me. Any of you that have flown on a 737 can definitely remember the "cattle car" feeling.  

[Kmelew]

It says in the article that the Royal Navy is buying some planes.  Well maybe they'll be used on  this.  

[Iceman]

Considering the F-22 is a land based fighter, and the F-35 is going to (hopefully) replace the F-14 and F/A - 18 Super Hornet fleet, yeah 3000 is a good number.  

[Iceman]

Also, the F-22 was designed with air superiority in mind, while the F-35's were designed with attacking ground targets in mind.

 

[Elvis]

Don't confuse the F35 "Joint Strike Fighter" with the F22 "Raptor".

Also Virgin Airlines, is also known as Virgin Atlantic Airlines which is a different entity than Virgin America, which is a brand new low cost start up. I'm not sure which Vurgin Atlantic flies, but Virgin America is the airline that just ordered the A320s and A319s. Virgin America should start flying in 2005. They will have a total of 33 aircraft in the A320 family,.  

   

[JMM]

Nobody is confusing the two Elvis, but 3,000 vs a limited number of Raptors is not a good thing, IMO, a more realistic approach to a successful fighter cover is 1 to 3 (These are not the days of WW2 where B-17s could spit out lead as well as a P-51 escort). The navy is relying on F-18s to provide air superiority for the naval version of the F-35, as well as the marines are too. IMO, it would have been best to stipulate the F-22 had to be CV capable as well. With the extreme cost of aircraft nowadays, we cannot have a gazillion different types of aircraft running around as in days past. The fighting and competition between the services is a bad thing, IMO, and cost taxpayers more than they needed through the ages. We are at the point in time where the "best of the best" is the only one to be chosen as we cannot afford to purchase different types from different manufacturers.

I've always wondered what WW2 would have been like in Europe had Hitler and his staff chosen the ME-262 (instead of having different aircraft like the ME-109 and FW-190) as the only fighter to still be authorized production in 41 back when it was prototyped and shown with awesome results (developed in 39, built in 41), that superior aircraft, in combination with the Sturmovik, well, it would not have been good at all for the Russkies or Brits or anybody else that got in the way.

cool link on that jet:

http://www.warbirdalley.com/me262.htm

Regarding Virgin Atlantic, there is a great site regarding what aircraft you will be flying on:

http://www.v-flyer.com/chance.asp

VS is Virgin flights, seems they prefer 747s and Airbus series for international flights. You might want to ask the Brits what's used for local and for flights to France and Germany. I imagine them being a European company they prefer to do business with Airbus.

Virgin America is still in the wings, as U.S. law stipulates any U.S. based domestic airline HAS to be majority owned by U.S. stockholders, thus Branson will only be able to have 49.9% shares, and he already has Americans (Allied to his business interests of course   ) lined up. It's just a matter of going through our wonderful govt. red tape. I agree with the protection law, I just hate govt. red tape, as Virgin Atlantic has a damn good safety record, and their company philosophy is based on having fun and doing successful business at the same time. Branson's business will create jobs for Americans, just as the Toyota plants in KY and San Antonio, TX created jobs. Hopefully Branson and crew bring British stewardesses!    

[Iceman]

The super hornet is an excellent aircraft, and an F-22 is too heavy to land on a carrier. It could probably take off, but it wouldn't be fun landing it. You'd probably have to come down at such and angle and speed such that you would a) collapse the landing gear or b) incinerate on touchdown.

WHat you were saying aboubt simplification is the entire point of this project.  By designing and building the F-35, you can replace the Harrier, F-14, F-16, A-10, F-15 any any number of others that I don't know off the top of my head. In this manner you can share parts.  Remember when interchangable parts were first invented? Its the same idea, only for airplanes.

Also, the F-22 and F-35 are similiar in so many ways, I wouldn't be surprised if a ton of there respective parts are interchangable as well.

I think there's a similiar number of F-22's on order as well. It wouldn't really be worth it to design a fighter to replace all your other air superiority fighters (mainly F-15's) and not do it. So 1 for at least every F-15, and F-16 in the future. Hardly a small number.

[JMM]

Personally I would have liked to see a "stealth" F-14 Tomcat developed. It performed just as well in the top gun excercises in the U.S. and is one of my favorite jet fighters. We probably could have used interchangeable parts on some components as well.

I do not think we should export the A-10, it was considered "obsolete" in 91 yet was one of the most effective ground attack planes during DS part 1. Better to scrap them, employ Americans doing it, and put more valuable metals back in the system, IMO.  

[JMM]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=564&ncid=564&e=2&u=/nm/20040617/ts_nm/arms_fighter_lockheed_dc_3

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/military/2002/5/flexible_flyer/

3,000 of these babies for 200 billion? Hades, for almost the cost of Iraq we could have bought all those 3,000 aircraft and just bombed Iraq into submission, AND combat tested at the same frigging time!

If this thing is stealthy as well, it kind of makes me wonder if we need so many Raptors, or maybe a better balance between the two numberwise. 3,000 jets is a LOT of frigging jets! Not to mention the other 2500 plus for international sales!

Lockheed Martin surely will not be hurting on the books or employment wise anytime soon.  

Boeing just got the boot from Virgin Airways, they chose the new Airbus 737 type birds that are roomier and the pilots can fly other Airbus aircraft after training on the 737 types due to Airbus having pretty much the same cockpit control systems on each type of aircraft, pretty efficient if you ask me. Any of you that have flown on a 737 can definitely remember the "cattle car" feeling.  

[Kmelew]

It says in the article that the Royal Navy is buying some planes.  Well maybe they'll be used on  this.  

[Iceman]

Considering the F-22 is a land based fighter, and the F-35 is going to (hopefully) replace the F-14 and F/A - 18 Super Hornet fleet, yeah 3000 is a good number.  

[Iceman]

Also, the F-22 was designed with air superiority in mind, while the F-35's were designed with attacking ground targets in mind.

 

[Elvis]

Don't confuse the F35 "Joint Strike Fighter" with the F22 "Raptor".

Also Virgin Airlines, is also known as Virgin Atlantic Airlines which is a different entity than Virgin America, which is a brand new low cost start up. I'm not sure which Vurgin Atlantic flies, but Virgin America is the airline that just ordered the A320s and A319s. Virgin America should start flying in 2005. They will have a total of 33 aircraft in the A320 family,.  

   

[JMM]

Nobody is confusing the two Elvis, but 3,000 vs a limited number of Raptors is not a good thing, IMO, a more realistic approach to a successful fighter cover is 1 to 3 (These are not the days of WW2 where B-17s could spit out lead as well as a P-51 escort). The navy is relying on F-18s to provide air superiority for the naval version of the F-35, as well as the marines are too. IMO, it would have been best to stipulate the F-22 had to be CV capable as well. With the extreme cost of aircraft nowadays, we cannot have a gazillion different types of aircraft running around as in days past. The fighting and competition between the services is a bad thing, IMO, and cost taxpayers more than they needed through the ages. We are at the point in time where the "best of the best" is the only one to be chosen as we cannot afford to purchase different types from different manufacturers.

I've always wondered what WW2 would have been like in Europe had Hitler and his staff chosen the ME-262 (instead of having different aircraft like the ME-109 and FW-190) as the only fighter to still be authorized production in 41 back when it was prototyped and shown with awesome results (developed in 39, built in 41), that superior aircraft, in combination with the Sturmovik, well, it would not have been good at all for the Russkies or Brits or anybody else that got in the way.

cool link on that jet:

http://www.warbirdalley.com/me262.htm

Regarding Virgin Atlantic, there is a great site regarding what aircraft you will be flying on:

http://www.v-flyer.com/chance.asp

VS is Virgin flights, seems they prefer 747s and Airbus series for international flights. You might want to ask the Brits what's used for local and for flights to France and Germany. I imagine them being a European company they prefer to do business with Airbus.

Virgin America is still in the wings, as U.S. law stipulates any U.S. based domestic airline HAS to be majority owned by U.S. stockholders, thus Branson will only be able to have 49.9% shares, and he already has Americans (Allied to his business interests of course   ) lined up. It's just a matter of going through our wonderful govt. red tape. I agree with the protection law, I just hate govt. red tape, as Virgin Atlantic has a damn good safety record, and their company philosophy is based on having fun and doing successful business at the same time. Branson's business will create jobs for Americans, just as the Toyota plants in KY and San Antonio, TX created jobs. Hopefully Branson and crew bring British stewardesses!    

[Iceman]

The super hornet is an excellent aircraft, and an F-22 is too heavy to land on a carrier. It could probably take off, but it wouldn't be fun landing it. You'd probably have to come down at such and angle and speed such that you would a) collapse the landing gear or b) incinerate on touchdown.

WHat you were saying aboubt simplification is the entire point of this project.  By designing and building the F-35, you can replace the Harrier, F-14, F-16, A-10, F-15 any any number of others that I don't know off the top of my head. In this manner you can share parts.  Remember when interchangable parts were first invented? Its the same idea, only for airplanes.

Also, the F-22 and F-35 are similiar in so many ways, I wouldn't be surprised if a ton of there respective parts are interchangable as well.

I think there's a similiar number of F-22's on order as well. It wouldn't really be worth it to design a fighter to replace all your other air superiority fighters (mainly F-15's) and not do it. So 1 for at least every F-15, and F-16 in the future. Hardly a small number.

[JMM]

Personally I would have liked to see a "stealth" F-14 Tomcat developed. It performed just as well in the top gun excercises in the U.S. and is one of my favorite jet fighters. We probably could have used interchangeable parts on some components as well.

I do not think we should export the A-10, it was considered "obsolete" in 91 yet was one of the most effective ground attack planes during DS part 1. Better to scrap them, employ Americans doing it, and put more valuable metals back in the system, IMO.