F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

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

Mean

Čini mi se da će ono pre novac davati da srede probleme koje F-35 ima a koji se mogu srediti. Jer ovaj multipraktik će nositi najveći teret sukoba u nekim budućim sukobima. F22 kao i budući lovac imaju jednostavne zadatke a to je prevashodno prevlast u vazdušnom prostoru. Dok F-35 obavlja sve druge zadatke koje se postavljaju pred avijaciju sva tri vida OS SAD.


LT

Ali RM SAD nije na floridi nego u samom persijskom zalivu, i indijskom okeanu...Zasada

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

PS Apsolutno se slažem sa mena mascinom.

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

I tako dalje...

"KESTEREN, Netherlands --- On Thursday, February 21, 2013, the Pentagon Friday ordered the grounding for all F-35 aircraft, after a routine check at the Edwards Air Force Base revealed a (zabranjeno) in a low pressure turbine blade in the engine of an F-35A.

This is but the latest incident concerning the Pratt & Whitney F135 engine, as during 2007-2009 repeated problems with turbine blades led to significant delays in the test program and a partial redesign of certain parts of the engine.

On February 19, 2013 a routine inspection took place of a Pratt & Whitney F135 engine at Edwards AFB, USA. During the inspection using a borescope, there were indications that there was a (zabranjeno)=zabranjeno je pisati rec za lom navodno, in a LPT turbine blade. It was confirmed after further investigation. The turbine blade is sent to Pratt & Whitney in Middletown (CT), USA for further investigation. "

Izvor

defense-aerospace.com/article-view/feat.....blems.html

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

Napisano: 13 Dec 2015 17:47

TheSource ::Osim toga imaju mnogo problema i sa stealth osobinama jer je specijalna boja osetljiva na meteroloske uslove identicno kao i kod $280.000.000 skupog F-22.

Gde si to lebati procitao ili cuo???

F-35 ima impregniran upijajuci sloj u kompozitnoj oplati bas da bi se izbegli problemi kod ranijih steltova, i naravno vrlo male zazore pri izradi.

Ako nesto kod F-35 valja to je zmaj.

Dopuna: 13 Dec 2015 17:49

I ne moras da postavljas tekstove i linkove koje smo vec imali prilike da citamo. Procesljaj temu pa ces videti da sve sto si postavio bilo je na forumu ranije

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

"The source"

Sve već to znamo i sve je već to obrađeno na ovoj temi. F-35 ima svojih mana i sa njegovim uvođenjem će se nastaviti cena će verovatno i dalje rasti jer će Pentagon trošiti pare da ispravlja sve navedene nedostatke. Neke neće moći kao što je mogućnosti u vazdušnom dvoboju aerodinamika je takva kakva je itd da ne nabrajam sve. Ostale probleme će morati da reše košta će ih još dosta dosta...

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

dragon986 ::Mean

Čini mi se da će ono pre novac davati da srede probleme koje F-35 ima a koji se mogu srediti. Jer ovaj multipraktik će nositi najveći teret sukoba u nekim budućim sukobima. F22 kao i budući lovac imaju jednostavne zadatke a to je prevashodno prevlast u vazdušnom prostoru. Dok F-35 obavlja sve druge zadatke koje se postavljaju pred avijaciju sva tri vida OS SAD.


LT

Ali RM SAD nije na floridi nego u samom persijskom zalivu, i indijskom okeanu...Zasada

Kad sam ja davno u Flight-u (mislim) citao o JSF (2000/2001god. cini mi se) secam se da je tad neki USAF oficir lepo rekao da posao JSF nije da se bavi borbom u vazduhu vec je to posao F-22. A od tad se mnogo sta promenilo, imaju znatno manje F-22 nesto sto su planirali, Rusi i Kinezi ce imati operativne steltove kad i F-35 postane zvanicno operativan (to npr. krajem 1990tih nikome nije mogao da predvidi).

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

Jos jedan dokaz protiv F-35 a koristeci ono najbitnije, zdravu logiku. Gubi u svakom rezimu protiv aviona III i IV gen osim u stealth-u sto kompletno negira njegovu ulogu iznad bilo kog voista.
Nema oklop kao A-10 ili Su-25 da bi bio avion za podrsku, ne poseduje ni pokretljivost MiG-21 a kamo li aviona IV generacije, niti ima dolet neophodan za presretanje bilo cega. Da li bi iko iole normalan kupio jedan F-35 umesto 5-6 F-16CJ aviona?!

"The Problem with Stealth
By Ben Cohen

The US Air Force intends to replace its current fleet of F-16's and A-10's with stealthier F-35's, but aircraft expert Pierre Sprey thinks that's a bad idea. While the F-35 is indeed stealthier than either of these planes, stealth is not the most important quality for the planes the F-35 is set to replace. The A-10 is built strictly to provide close air support on the battlefield where stealth would be irrelevant to its mission, since it flies at such a low altitude. The F-16 is designed to attack enemy planes and ground targets. To do this it has to be fast and maneuverable in order to dodge missiles, antiaircraft guns, or dogfight with other planes. Building a stealthier aircraft means sacrificing these other capabilities; the F-35 lacks the A-10's thick armor and compliment of weapons, and it also lacks the F-16's maneuverability. Because of this the F-35 is less capable than the fighters it is replacing, at least in the roles the air force intends it for.

As Sprey explains, in order to make the F-35 stealthier they had to change the shape in ways that reduced maneuverability. Stealth aircraft can still be seen visually and they do have a radar signature, albeit a smaller one. Stealth fighters are at a disadvantage in a dogfight or if they have to dodge missiles, because of the design compromises necessary to reduce their radar signature. It is also harder to train pilots on an F-35 because it requires more maintenance than an F-16. Pilots can't practice flying when their plane is being worked on. The F-35 also costs ten times as much as the F-16, largely because of its stealth capability.

Replacing the A-10 Warthog with the F-35 is a particularly bad idea. The A-10 is a specialized aircraft designed for close air support. It is designed to fly at very low altitudes in support of ground troops, where the biggest threat is enemy soldiers shooting at it with machine guns and anti-aircraft artillery. To accomplish this task the A-10 is slow, heavily armored, and carries a large cannon. The F-35 has none of these capabilities; it also costs eighteen times as much as the A-10.

For the last decade the U.S has been engaged in fighting terrorists and guerillas armed with basic infantry weapons. U.S aircraft are used almost exclusively to support ground troops, something the A-10 is perfectly suited for and the F-35 is not. Replacing the entire fleet of F-16's with stealth fighters would draw a considerable amount of resources away from the war on terrorism. It could also provoke a procurement war with China and Russia, which would draw even more resources away from the fight against terrorism, at a time whereterrorism is clearly a far greater threat than either Russia or China.

Stealth technology in aircraft represents a classic tradeoff. We can replace all of our current F-16's and A-10's with F-35 stealth fighters, but our fleet will be smaller, more expensive, and in some ways less capable. Considering the technical and economic tradeoffs involved, along with our likely enemies, is it worth the tradeoff?"


P.S.
Da "procesljam" i memorisem skoro 450 stranica samo da ne bi kojim slucajem mozda okacio link ka vec postavljenom linku?!
Wow! Politicka korektnost je defacto presla svaku granicu.

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

Napisano: 13 Dec 2015 18:05

Ne, nego sve sto si ti ispisao je vec x puta bilo ispisano i postavljeno. Ako bas hoces da se ponavljas koristi opciju spojler ili linkuj neki tekst da ne zatrpavas temu.

Dopuna: 13 Dec 2015 18:10

I ne mozes kupiti pet sest F-16 za cenu jednog F-35A. Potrazi na netu koliko su kostale F-16 pre samo koju godinu i to bez nisanskog kontejnera, sa slabijim radarom i senzorima od F-35A (sve to dobijas u paketu kod F-35A)

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

mean_machine ::Napisano: 13 Dec 2015 18:05

Ne, nego sve sto si ti ispisao je vec x puta bilo ispisano i postavljeno. Ako bas hoces da se ponavljas koristi opciju spojler ili linkuj neki tekst da zatrpavas temu.

Dopuna: 13 Dec 2015 18:10

I ne mozes kupiti pet sest F-16 za cenu jednog F-35A. Potrazi na netu koliko su kostale F-16 pre samo koju godinu i to bez nisanskog kontejnera, sa slabijim radarom i senzorima od F-35A (sve to dobijas u paketu kod F-35A)

Ako se ne varam UAE su plaćali F-16 block 60 (prije dvije godine) 105M$.

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

Мени једна ствар није јасна...зашто је ф-35 добио лиценцу за извоз,а рецимо ф-22 није...кад би требало да је ф-35 непреднији у технолошком смислу...што рече поручник са технологијом од пре 20+ година...
Са продајом ф-22 имали би више и за себе и ето решен проблем...