The F-35 is a lemon

Mad Mike said:
Well, on the bright side, now you can make lemonade.. :D

Seriously though, I didn't know South Africa is going to buy some F-35s. I thought you had the Gripen, which seems a good fit for a country like South Africa.
Click to expand...

Sorry, forgot to edit that bit out ... yeah we got the Gripen... can't really afford that either as the economy stands.
 
Well we can afford them: total of 35 F35's will be the whole air force of the Netherlands!! Very curious how you participate in all kinds of NATO peace keeping forces, protect the Dutch and NATO skies, have some in the US for training the pilots still some grounded due to maintenance. In theory it is great plane, but stealth isn't as special anymore as it once was and stealth is mainly iimportant if you don't have air supremacy. What is the extra benefit of a F35 over a F16 or Gripen or Rafale if yoy bomb IS or the Taliban?

Think we should have accept the 2009 offer from Saab to deliver 85 Gripen NG for 4,8 billion euro's. Since then the budget for the purchas eof the new planes has come down to 4,5 billion euro's, which buys only 35 F35's. At first there were plans to purchae 85 for that amount...

Here's a nice blog by a Canadian who thinks the GRipen is the best buy for Canada: http://gripen4canada.blogspot.nl/
 
Anyway, a total of 43 aircrafts are on the way:
- 29 for Usa
- 4 Japan and UK
- 2 Israel, Norway and Italy

A large piece of cake is the final assembly in Cameri, but the big deal is the maintenance contract reserved to whom have already bought the fighters.
That's why other countries have signed for an additional order.
 
6a00d8341c2cc953ef0168eb6ae9c5970c-250wi
 
And apparently it doesn't like it when the fuel pumped into the tank is a 'little warm.' Sure that won't be a problem here in Australia... or on deployment in warzones it will likely be required. We're fighting the next war in Scandinavia right?
 
I was asked to take part in a web radio debate about this plane where they were talking to one of the test pilots. I declined as it would have been in the middle of the night and it wasn't really a subject I was to savvy about.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't we learn a long time ago, that making an aircraft to fill so many roles, winds up being mediocre in many of them.

And don't get me started about why we need a Close Air Support aircraft to replace the awesome A-10!
 
Why anyone thought it would be a good idea to replace it with this piece of crap is just beyond me!
Click to expand...

As the Forward Air Controller (FAC) for my Inf Company (D 1/4) during my Tour of Duty in Vietnam, I have had hands on experience working with a few Close Air Support aircraft in my day (see pics below). I also had the opportunity to watch the A-10's during my years of training with the Army, sometimes I was their target, but was always astounded at what that aircraft could do in the hands of a pilot who knew how to fly it like it was meant to be flown. None of the aircraft I worked with in Vietnam, could hold a candle to what the A-10's are capable of.

The Air Force doesn't like having to provide Air Support, as it takes them away from flying their 'hot fighters'. When the Air Force let it be known that they wanted the A-10 program ended, the Army offered to take the A-10's and set up an Air Support wing with them. As of my last inquiry, the A-10 is still operational and I hope it stays that way, just like the venerable B-52.

A-10 Thunderbolt II

A-1 Skyraider

A-4 Skyhawk

A-6 Intruder

F-4 Phantom

F-8 Crusader

F-100 Super Sabre
 
Last edited:
The A-1 had the best time on station, which meant he could hang around and harass the NVA for awhile.
The A-6 had the best payload, and if we used a radio beacon to paint the target, it was deadly accurate. Side note, my Mom worked for Kaiser Aerospace and Electronics which made the black boxes that gave it it's digital flight path and delivered the bombing solutions with such great accuracy, as well as it's all weather flight capabilities.
But the F-4 was the show stopper with it's accurate delivery of it's payload, as well as the impressive roar it let out in it's approach and delivery.
 
Last edited:
I know this is going to be a wild ass proposal, but I am of a mind that US air doctrine should change a little. Air Force handles interdiction and strategic strikes, US Army and Marines provide CAS over the battlefiled. Give the Warthog - and the pilots-to the Army. No arguments, no political BS. The Army's argument to Congress-USAF doesn't want the mission, we need the mission, give us the air frame and the pilots...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom