F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

• 1Ovo se svidja korisniku: ssekir75
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

@ ltcolonel

Zar nije bolje ćutati i pustiti ih da kupuju do mile volje? Toliko su blatili svaki sovjetski i ruski avion, a plaše ih se. Rusi samo pametno ćute i borbeno potvrđuju svoje letilice.

• 1Ovo se svidja korisniku: ssekir75
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

ltcolonel ::Cigi kako te nije sramota da klevećeš i lažeš.
Da, da LM je najbolji na svetu.
F-35 će uspeti samo u modelarstvu.
Ovaj naguzitis je dostojan Amerike.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Borbeno su potvrđene letelice koje učestvuju u sirijskom konfliktu. Na stranu što tamo neke prevelike opasnosto od PVO gotovo da nema, ali ni amerikanci od 1990 u dva slučaja su imali konflikt sa zemljama koje imaju PVO. Irak 1991 i Srbija 1999. U svim ostalim konfliktima ista situacija manje više kao i u Siriji. Drugo borbeno su se potvrdile letelice 4 i 4+ generacije, koje su demonstrirale nove mogućnosti ruskog RV. Ali one nisu za poređenje sa F-35 ta letelica je avion 5 generacije, još u fazi uvođenja iako je deklarisana inicijalna borbena upotrebljivost, letelica sa novih hi-tec tehnologija, ali i sa svim manama od cene, kompromisa da bi jedna letelica zadovoljila potrebe sva tri roda vojske SAD. Njegova prava vrednost će se otkriti u budućim ratovima, i sva ova piskaranja od pljuvanja do dizanja u nebesa ove letelice, imaće potvrdu odn demant kada F-35 bude učesnik nekog rata.

• 3Ovo se svidja korisnicima: randja26, Sim.a, carpbuster
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Citat:CHESAPEAKE BAY, Md. (Oct. 17, 2016) Aircraft CF-02, an F-35 Lightning II Carrier Variant attached to the F-35 Pax River Integrated Test Force (ITF) assigned to Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23 completes a flyover of the guided-missile destroyer USS Zumwalt (DDG1000). (U.S. Navy photo
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5345/30328178971_872a1f8802_o.jpg

• 4Ovo se svidja korisnicima: Sim.a, carpbuster, jazbar, Mercury
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Sim.a ::

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Hvala, promaklo mi je ako bilo već a interesantno mi je pakovanje.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Citat:But two F-35 squadrons at the Marines' air station in Yuma, Ariz., are now classified as "operational."

The Green Knights of Fighter Squadron 121 are set to deploy to Japan in January and the Wake Avengers of Squadron 211 are slated for sea duty near the Middle East in 2018.

"There's no other plane in the world I'd rather fly into combat, no other plane in the world," said the 211 squadron's commander, Lt. Col. Chad "Mo" Vaughn.

The 41-year-old native of Virginia recently received his tenth F-35B fighter, an aircraft that can take off and land vertically on the battlefield, and will get an additional six before his squadron deploys.

In talking with Marine pilots like Vaughn, a picture of how radically the F-35 could reshape aerial warfare emerges.

The jet's vast and swift computing power, advanced battlefield sensors, stubby but stealthy profile and precision bombs and missiles allow it to survive far behind enemy lines, even above dense arrays of foes' most advanced anti-aircraft missile batteries.

Attacking like a marauding linebacker in the enemy's backfield, the F-35 also will become coach and quarterback, telling older legacy aircraft -- like the F-18 Hornets -- and new robotic drones where to strike and what spots on the battlefield to avoid.

"I'd say that's the coolest part of the job. It's unlocking the capabilities of the airplane," said Maj. Alexander "Oprah" Mellman, 34.

The San Franciscan, who's part of a digital generation that grew up in front of a computer screen or with a smartphone in his hand, said new technology never wows him -- unless he's in the F-35 cockpit.

"There's a lot of information coming at you, but that's the beauty of this aircraft -- the fusion," said his boss, Vaughn. "Those sensors are doing a lot of the work for you. They're literally just showing you the information. You're not working the sensors very much. You're just looking at the output of the sensors. It allows you to be a tactician."

The Joint Strike Fighter's comparative invisibility, sensors and computing power give it an unchallenged "first shot" capability. Instead of waging a war of attrition in the skies between American "fourth-generation" fighters such as the Hornet and the Russian-built Flankers, F-35s can see and kill an enemy fighter, radar site or missile battery before it's detected.

That's why Mellman said the Marines spend a lot of time learning to win dogfights before they start, destroying enemies "chiefly beyond visual range."

"We're only beginning to scratch the surface. Yuma is pretty far along in changing tactics to meet what this plane can do," said John "JV" Venable, a defense analyst at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C.

A retired Air Force colonel who flew the F-16 Fighting Falcon and commanded the Thunderbirds aerial acrobat team, Venable is conducting an ongoing survey of F-35 pilots in his former service and the Marine Corps.

He has done 40 interviews, and the pilots overwhelmingly favor the Joint Strike Fighter.

But critics disagree with the rosy assessments.

Dan Grazier, a former Marine tank officer and now a defense analyst at the D.C.-based Program on Government Oversight, is "not a big fan of the F-35" partly because its "actual usefulness in combat hasn't been demonstrated." Key reasons for this absence of operational proof are recurring software glitches, engine snafus and safety worries.

Grazier said some pilots he has interviewed dislike the F-35, citing its meager bomb payload -- a pair of half-ton munitions-- and its lack of a high cockpit canopy, which could limit their ability to see the enemy during dogfights.

But the most persistent criticism The San Diego Union-Tribune has heard about the F-35 has been its expense.

"Here's the problem: You have replacement airplanes that now cost a lot more money than originally intended. Because they're behind schedule, you have rising costs for maintaining and operating the older aircraft. At some point, those costs start eating into the budget to replace the airplanes in the first place," said James Hasik, a former Navy aviator and currently the senior fellow for defense at the Brent Scowcroft Center on International Security at the Atlantic Council, a D.C. think tank.

"You have the Pentagon saying that the U.S. military will buy all 2,400 or so Joint Strike Fighters, but you begin to suspect that it'll be much lower, that you won't be able to fly all of them because of the money you're losing now and the escalating procurement costs," he added.

The Navy plans to purchase 260 F-35Cs that can operate from aircraft carriers. The price tag for those being delivered today is about $115.7 million each, not including the engine.

About three years behind schedule, each F-35B arriving at the Marine base in Yuma costs $102 million. The Corps intends to buy 353 of them, plus 67 F-35Cs, and the last of them won't roll off the assembly line until 2031.

Grazier at the Program on Government Oversight said a hidden expense is the $1.1 trillion the Pentagon estimates will be spent maintaining the aircraft.

"What you're going to find is that the contractors working on the F-35 program are going to make their money on the back end, through support," Grazier said. "This problem is exacerbated by a 'revolving door' from the Pentagon to the contractors. They set themselves up for lucrative jobs post-retirement from the military."

However, former Harrier mechanic Staff Sgt. Derek W. Hockgeiger said Yuma's F-35s are so far "a lot easier to work on." He pointed to a complicated chore like removing a strike fighter's engine. It takes "about a shift" to complete -- half the time a Harrier demanded.

"It's interesting. It's a flying computer. It's very intelligent. It's very autonomous," said Hockgeiger, 29, from Indiana.

Citat:For the moment, Mabus and the Marines are speeding up orders for the Joint Strike Fighter before the Hornets and Harriers wear out completely.

"What we need now is to get more of these (F-35) aircraft as quickly as we can so that we can get those legacy aircraft out of the fight and get their pilots retrained (to) fly the F-35s as soon as possible," said Vaughn the squadron commander in Yuma.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/10/23/new-.....-wars.html

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Lockheed CFO: No Agreement Yet on Price, Profit for F-35 Lots 9 and 10
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/lockheed-cfo-n.....s-9-and-10
Citat:A month ago at the Air Force Association conference, F-35 Joint Program Executive Officer Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan said he expected to finalize the LRIP 9 and 10 contract by the end of the year. The deal, which would cover about 150 jets, has an estimated value of $14 billion, Bogdan has said.
Da se sada isprati ova priča. Koliko, po kojoj ceni.

• 0Niko još nije pohvalio poruku.
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Nesto o Fiber Mat materijalu primenjenom na F-35

Citat:But during development, something happened. First, program officials began hinting the F-35 might be stealthier than the F-22; hard to believe, given its less-disciplined shape. Then officials started referring to a material secret, a “conductive layer . . . where the magic happens.” In May of 2010, Tom Burbage, then executive vice president for the F-35 program, disclosed the incorporation of “fiber mat” technology, describing it as the “biggest technical breakthrough we’ve had on this program.”

The fiber mat would replace many RAM appliques by being cured into the composite skin, making it durable. Burbage further specified the mat featured a “non-directional weave”— which would ensure EM properties do not vary with angle. Baked into the skin, this layer could vary in thickness as necessary. Lockheed declined to provide further details, citing classification. Without further evidence, fiber mat would imply use of fibers, rather than particles, which would make for stronger surfaces and the word “conductive” points to carbon-based RAM.

But only a month before Burbage’s disclosure, Lockheed filed a patent claiming the first method of producing a durable RAM panel. The patent details a method for growing carbon nanotubes (CNT) on any kind of fiber—glass, carbon, ceramic or metal—with unprecedented precision in control of length, density, number of walls, connectivity and even orientation. The CNT-infused fibers can absorb or reflect radar, and connectivity among the CNTs provides pathways for induced currents.

Significantly, the CNTs can be impregnated with iron or ferrite nanoparticles. Fibers can have differing CNT densities along their lengths and homogenous fibers can be layered or mixed. The embodiments described include front layers with impedance matching air, use of quarter-wavelength depths for cancellation, stepped or continuous CNT-density gradients and continuously varying densities at specific depths for broadband absorption. The fibers can be disposed with “random orientation” in materials including “a woven fabric, a non-woven fiber mat and a fiber ply.”

The patent claims composites with CNT-infused fibers are capable of absorbing EM waves from 0.1 MHz to 60 GHz, a bandwidth unheard of in commercial absorbers, with particular effectiveness in L- through K-band. The patent does not quantify the absorptivity, but does say the panels would be “nearly a black body across . . . various radar bands.” Also, interestingly, a layer can be composed so an attached computer can read the induced currents in the fibers, making the layer a radar receiver.

While the patent mentions stealth aircraft, it does not mention the F-35 specifically, and the manufacturing readiness level of the material at the time it was granted is not known. But the proximity in timing and technology of the filing to the “fiber mat” disclosure is hard to ignore. Asked to comment on whether CNT-infused fiber RAM is in use on the F-35 and whether it is the technology to which Burbage had referred, Lockheed Martin spokesman Mike Rein stated only, “We have nothing to add to what was outlined in the patent submittal.”

http://aviationweek.com/CloserLookAtStealth3