F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

• 2Ovo se svidja korisnicima: CheefCoach, buster
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Umanjeni radarski odraz jeste bitan ukoliko se ide protiv protivnika sa naprednom i brojnom V i PVO. Inače razlog zašto se išlo, makar u originalnim planovima, na veliku seriju F-35 je radi unifikacije i umanjenje troškova, a ne jer im je potreban toliki broj tih aviona. Mornarica će još nekoliko decenija koristiti avione 4-te grneracije. I mislim da mašiš suštinu moje priče. Ja sam uzeo da pišem o realnim mogućnostima, a ne da nipodaštavam stelt ili nešto drugo.

Uzmi koliko misija su leteli F-16, a koliko F-117. Iz toga možeš zaključiti koliko će procentualno F-35 ići na zadatke sa oružijem pod krilima, a ne samo u trupu.

Potencijalni protivnici zemljama koje će koristiti F-35, još dugo vremena neće imati stelt avione i veću količinu naprednih PVO sistema. Gledajući trenutno političku situaciju jedino Rusija i Kina predstavljaju tvrd orah, te se eventualno Iran može naoružati dobro. Naravno to su rivali koje neće direktno napadati. Indija, Brazil, Meksiko itd. ne dolaze u obzir.

Kini je trenutno dovoljno da izgradi nekoliko eskadrila J-20. Oni bi se mogli iskoristiti protiv brodova, te AWACS-a i tankera. Time bi svaka potencijana akcija protiv njih bila obesmišljena.

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

Napisano: 13 Mar 2016 12:11

CheefCoach ::
Australijskih ili Americkih? Ne zaboravi da je Hrvatska imala ponudu za nove F 16 (koji su manji avioni od F 35, a cena zavisi od velicine), za 80 miliona amerckih po komadu.
E pravo da ti kazem nisam siguran ovde govore o 20 billion $
Pretpostavljam da je US$ jer ovde za sve vojne cene nabavke itd daju cene u US$ cak i za podmornice koje treba da proizvode ovde u Adelaidu cene navode u US$
U svakom slucaju 277 mil $ po komadu je mnogo pa bili AU$ ili US$.
Jedino bi se izvadili kad bi bio u pitanju HK$
I pazi to je cena za sada bez garancije da se i to nece povecati jer se na ovu cenu doslo nakon 3 ili 4 povecavanja originalne cene.

Dopuna: 13 Mar 2016 12:52

Hajde jos malo
Citat:The US defence force has discovered its F-35 program is a trillion dollar blunder
July 1, 20155:28pm

MATTHEW DUNNnews.com.au
WITH the total program costing more than a trillion dollars, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters are the most expensive weapon in history.
So, when a test pilot wrote a seething review of the pricey new stealth jet following a series of mock air battles in January, the US defence force would have been left scrambling for solutions.
Especially since the defence force and its allies, including Australia, were banking on the JSF to replace its current fleet of fighter jets.
Speaking to the media today, Prime Minister Tony Abbott said he was not deterred by the report and stood by Australia’s decision to buy the fighter jets for our military.
The test in question took place over the Pacific Ocean near Edwards air force Base in California on January 14 this year.
Flying in an F-35, the unnamed pilot set flight with a two-seat F-16D — one of the fighter jets set to be replaced by the newer model.
So, you are telling me this trillion dollar program has been a fail.Source:Supplied
In the simulation the F-35 pilot was trying to “shoot down” the F-16, while it was doing its best to evade the attack.
“The evaluation focused on the overall effectiveness of the aircraft in performing various specified manoeuvres in a dynamic environment,” the F-35 tester wrote in the report obtained by Medium.
“This consisted of traditional Basic Fighter Manoeuvres in offensive, defensive and neutral setups at altitudes ranging from 10,000 to 30,000 feet.”
Making the results worse was the fact the F-35 was flying with no weapons under its wings, fuselage or bomb bay, while the F-16 was heavily equipped.
This was supposed to give the F-35 an advantage in manoeuvrability, but even stripped down it was no match for the much older F-16.
“Even with the limited F-16 target configuration, the F-35A remained at a distinct energy disadvantage for every engagement,” he wrote.
“Instead of catching the bandit off-guard by rapidly pull aft to achieve lead; the nose rate was slow, allowing him to easily time his jink prior to a gun solution.”

It might look outdated, but the F-16 was the king of the skies in this simulation.Source:AFP
Adding insult to injury, when the F-16 had the F-35 in its gun sights, the pilot came to the quick realisation that he was unable to manoeuvrer out of the w In fact, out of the whole test, the F-35 discovered only one way to be victorious in the short-range air-to-air engagement.
However, the pilot said the sliding movement required to complete the action depleted energy stocks quickly.
“The technique required a commitment to lose energy and was a temporary opportunity prior to needing to regain energy … and ultimately end up defensive again.”
In addition to sloppy functionality, the pilot said the design of the cockpit made him vulnerable to enemy attacks.
“The helmet was too large for the space inside the canopy to adequately see behind the aircraft,” he wrote.
Looks like it’s back to the drawing board.
News.com.au has contacted the US Defense Department for comment.

Izvor [Link mogu videti samo ulogovani korisnici]
Ako nije dosta evo i ovo
Citat:Pentagon official declares F-35 Joint Strike Fighter ‘not capable of unsupported combat’
February 2, 20166:26pm
IT WAS supposed to be Australia’s next generation fighter, a weapon capable of destroying and outrunning any enemy. Six years on from a $1 trillion investment, it appears incapable of both.
Plagued by glitches and behind schedule by half a decade, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter might have just received the final nail in its very expensive coffin.
Michael Gilmore, the Pentagon’s director of operational test and evaluation, declared this week the most expensive defence program in our country’s history would struggle mightily in a “dogfight” — a term used to describe the aerial battle between aircraft — despite every assertion to the contrary from Washington and Canberra.
“The F-35B Block 2B aircraft is not capable of unsupported combat against any serious threat,” Mr Gilmore said, according to Aviation Week.
That declaration should come as a giant red flag for the Australian Government but no real surprise to critics who have long insisted the F-35 is a flop, a flying supercomputer that will be outdated before any Australian pilot ever takes the controls.

The F-35 Lightning II is Australia’s next big weapon but it’s so far failed to deliver.Source:Supplied
It’s not the first time a formal critique has been levelled at the F-35. A test pilot wrote a seething review of the stealth aircraft in January last year.
In the simulation, the F-35 pilot was trying to “shoot down” the F-16, while at the same time doing its best to evade an attack. The pilot declared the F-35 was no match for the much older version.
“Even with the limited F-16 target configuration, the F-35A remained at a distinct energy disadvantage for every engagement,” he wrote.
“Instead of catching the bandit off-guard by rapidly pull aft to achieve lead; the nose rate was slow, allowing him to easily time his jink prior to a gun solution.”
It wouldn’t be such a problem if Australia hadn’t committed so much to upgrading its weaponry and if the aircraft weren’t sold as the ideal dogfighter and strike aircraft combination.
The Lockheed Martin-built aircraft will arrive in Australia at a cost of $15 billion. In the US, it’s priced at more than $1 trillion.
Australia has already purchased two Joint Strike Fighters. An additional sixteen aircraft are expected to be purchased by 2019. NewsCorp wrote in January that the F-35 is “too big to fail”. There are no fallback options.
During the aircraft’s development, builders have encountered a host of problems. Among them are issues with the planes’ drive shaft, visibility and fuel tanks. Critics say the real problem is that the F-35 tries to be all things to all people to the detriment of overall performance.
They say it has limited capacity to carry bombs externally and a tiny hidden internal weapons arsenal.
So strong has the backlash against the F-35 become that Canada withdrew from the nine-nation deal as a recipient in October. During his election campaign, new Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Canada wanted to remain a strong member of the coalition against Islamic State but “there are many other fighters at much lower price points that we can use that have been proven”.

Australia’s first Lockheed Martin, F-35A Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, making its inaugural flight.Source:Supplied
The other problem is that aircraft emerging in Russia and China are less sluggish, more nimble and do not have the limitations that the F-35 appears to have.
Retired Air Force wing commander Chris Mills has become so disenchanted with the F-35 build that he last week declared Canberra should lobby the US for F-22 Raptors instead.
“Air combat is the most important single capability for the defence of Australia, because control of the air over our territory and maritime approaches is critical to all other types of operation in the defence of Australia,” Mills wrote in a submission to parliament.
For their part, the Australian Government has stood by the investment. Last year, then-prime minister Tony Abbott said he was not deterred by negative reports on the fighters’ development.
Lockheed Martin, the American-based global aerospace, defence, security and technology company, defended its product. They said teething problems were to be expected.
“As a reminder, the F-35 program is still in its developmental phase,” a spokesman said.
“This is the time when issues are expected to be discovered and solutions are implemented to maximise the F-35’s capability for the warfighter.”

Izvor [Link mogu videti samo ulogovani korisnici]

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

Laksa kaciga i sredjivanje izbacivog sedista

Citat:The JPO and industry will begin testing Rockwell Collins’ latest version of the F-35 helmet, built to be about 6 ounces lighter than the original Gen III helmet, in late March, said Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Harrigian, director of the F-35 integration office. This will be the first time the JPO has tested the full-up Gen III “Light," although the program office has tested a modified helmet that is about the same weight as the light version, he said.
Citat:
All three fixes — the lightweight helmet and two modifications to the F-35 ejection seat — will be finalized and ready for incorporation into the production line by November, said JPO Chief Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan during a March 10 event in Washington.

[Link mogu videti samo ulogovani korisnici]

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

Uloguj se preko Facebooka da bi skinuo fajl:

Verovatno prolazni problemi.

FY15 DOD Programs - F-35 JSF
[Link mogu videti samo ulogovani korisnici]

Citat:• The following details discoveries in F-35A flight sciences testing:
- Testing to characterize the thermal environment of the weapons bays demonstrated that temperatures become excessive during ground operations in high ambient temperature conditions and in-flight under conditions of high speed and at altitudes below 25,000 feet. As a result, during ground operations, fleet pilots are restricted from keeping the weapons bay doors closed for more than 10 cumulative minutes prior to take-off when internal stores are loaded and the outside air temperature is above 90 degrees Fahrenheit. In flight, the 10-minute restriction also applies when flying at airspeeds equal to or greater than 500 knots at altitudes below 5,000 feet; 550 knots at altitudes between 5,000 and 15,000 feet; and 600 knots at altitudes between 15,000 and 25,000 feet. Above 25,000 feet, there are no restrictions associated with the weapons bay doors being closed, regardless of temperature. The time limits can be reset by flying 10 minutes outside of the restricted conditions (i.e., slower or at higher altitudes). This will require pilots to develop tactics to work around the restricted envelope; however, threat and/ or weather conditions may make completing the mission difficult or impossible using the work around.
- Testing to characterize the vibrational and acoustic environment of the weapons bays demonstrated that stresses induced by the environment were out of the flight qualification parameters for both the AIM-120 missile and the flight termination system (telemetry unit attached to the missile body required to satisfy range safety requirements for terminating a live missile in a flight test). This resulted in reduced service life of the missile and potential failure of the telemetered missile termination system required for range safety.

• 2Ovo se svidja korisnicima: 4channer, amir3045
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Leonardo ::Verovatno prolazni problemi.
Koji problemi kod F-35 su prolazni i koji će da ostaju, to ćemo da vidimo.

To, da će imati svu softversku kontrolu prije akcije i posle nje, da mora da bude priključen na američko računalo za dva sata.....Nešto rikne i ode sve u k.....
Možda zbog nedostatka tehničnog znanja nešto ne razumem.

A ovu razumem bolje. Izraelci, da u slučaju rata, da servisiraju motore u Turskoj , ili Americi Koliko je u planu, da ovo traje?
A baš je bila razprava na forumu o američkom održavanju na licu mesta, skupo itd., a Rusi, ne valjaju ništa, oni traže, da se avionski motori servisiraju u Rusiji. A indijske suške stoje zbog toga..

A sada kada istu priču prodaju Ameri to je u redu
Zbog tako velike politizacije projekta F-35, glavni razlog je, da je JEDINI američki projekat, i da je puno dezinformacija. Zbog toga su mi komentari iz Izraela namerodavniji. Nemaju oni vremena za igranke.

• 2Ovo se svidja korisnicima: lacko, zlaya011
  
  Registruj se da bi pohvalio/la poruku!

Neću se upuštati u diskusiju ali samo jedan podatak.
Kada se na osnovu bilo koje metodologije (a ima ih više) ocenjuju letne karakteristike nekog aviona jedan od osnovnih parametara je brzina sletanja i AOA u tom trenutku (naravno uz masu aviona u tom momentu). Na osnovu ovih podataka mogu se empirijskim (iskustvenim) metodama dobiti vrlo pouzdani podaci o letnim karakteristikama nekog aviona (pri brzinama manjim od brzine zvuka). Jedna od najstrože čuvanih vojnih tajni Pentagona je brzina sletanja (i ostalo spomenuto) za F-22. Do skoro je to bilo i za F-35. Slučajno (ja mislim ni najmanje slučajno) iz US Navy je, pre par meseci, procureo zvaničan podatak da je brzina sletanja F-35A 155 kt (pri masi 40000 lb). Kod mornaričke verzije je smanjeno na 135 kt što je maksimum za sletanje na nosače aviona a to je postignuto povećanjem noseće površine krila. Dati su i podaci za AOA takođe.
Dakle da skratim, F-35A ima ubedljivo najgore karakteristike pri sletanju od svih danas postojećih lovačkih aviona. Naravno, ne računajući F-22 za koga nemamo nikakvih ni zvaničnih ni nezvaničnih podataka.
Podaci o sletnim karakteristikama (takođe iz mornaričkih krugova ali nezvanično) su i ranije mogli da se nađu na netu (premda ako ste baš uporni) ali se smatralo da nisu pouzdani jer su više nego loši.
Pametnom dovoljno ...

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

ltcolonel ::Slučajno (ja mislim ni najmanje slučajno) iz US Navy je, pre par meseci, procureo zvaničan podatak da je brzina sletanja F-35A 155 kt (pri masi 40000 lb). Kod mornaričke verzije je smanjeno na 135 kt što je maksimum za sletanje na nosače aviona a to je postignuto povećanjem noseće površine krila. Dati su i podaci za AOA takođe.
Dakle da skratim, F-35A ima ubedljivo najgore karakteristike pri sletanju od svih danas postojećih lovačkih aviona. Naravno, ne računajući F-22 za koga nemamo nikakvih ni zvaničnih ni nezvaničnih podataka.
F-14 brzina prilaska nosaču iznosi 125 kn (231 km/h), a brzine od oko 130 kn se smatraju uobičajenim. Za Su-33 je 240 km/h, a za MiG-29K 250 km/h ili upravo pomenutih 135 kn. Ne vidim u tom pogledu neki problem.

Mornarička verzija F-35 ima za trećinu veću površinu krila od verzija A i B, te specifično opterećenje krila za normalnu poletnu masu manje nego kod F-16, F/A-18 H i SH. Ocenili su ponašanje F-35B na malim brzinama kao približno F/A-18 SH.

Manevarske sposobnosti F-35A sa 4 rakete su uporedive sa podjednako naoružanim F-16 Block 50. Što je dovoljno ispod mogućnosti F-16A. Ukoliko je tačno da je bugaski MiG-29 naoružan sa R-60 bio bolji od F-16 Block 50 naoružanim AIM-9X i mogućnošću korišćenja nišana na kacigi, onda je sve jasno.

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

Uloguj se preko Facebooka da bi video sliku:

Leonardo ::
Manevarske sposobnosti F-35A sa 4 rakete su uporedive sa podjednako naoružanim F-16 Block 50. Što je dovoljno ispod mogućnosti F-16A. Ukoliko je tačno da je bugaski MiG-29 naoružan sa R-60 bio bolji od F-16 Block 50 naoružanim AIM-9X i mogućnošću korišćenja nišana na kacigi, onda je sve jasno.

Meni bas i nije. Da pogledamo ovaj tvoje dijagrame:








Vidi se da je MiG 29 superiorniji od F 16 na vecim visinama, dok su priblizni na manjim visinama. Prvo pitanje je na kojoj su visini leteli u Bugarskoj i drugo kako se F 35 ponasa na vecim visinama?

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

F-35 bolje podnosi promenu visine od F-16. Verujem da su kod neustaljenog i moguće ustaljenog zaokreta čisti Block 50 i 52, da ne spominjemo verzije sa CFT, slabiji od F-16A za stepen do dva na nadmorskoj visini. Jedino što imaju dosta jači motor, te je moguće da dominiraju u vertikali.