TR Turkiye's F-35 Project and Discussions

[Sanchez]

Because VTOL airplanes are not actually airplanes. They should be counted in the helicopter class, in aspect kinematically.

F-35B very much acts like any other fixed wing jet fighter kinematically.

 

[Merzifonlu]

F-35B very much acts like any other fixed wing jet fighter kinematically.

The B model was VTOL (or STOVL) right, thanks for that kind correction. Model B behaves like fixed-wing aircraft only when flying straight. And partly it does. F-35B can never be as robust as the A model. The story is different in landing and take-offs.

 

[Sanchez]

The B model was VTOL (or STOVL) right, thanks for that kind correction. Model B behaves like fixed-wing aircraft only when flying straight. And partly it does. F-35B can never be as robust as the A model. The story is different in landing and take-offs.

Kinematic characteristics hardly matter during take offs and landings for a fighter jet's role.

For users of F-35B the downsides compared to F-35A also don't really matter as they can use them en masse aboard LHAs, unlike any other fighter jet in the world. People always forget that F-35B is not a F-18 replacement but a Harrier replacement. Now Harrier, that bird sucked kinematically against peers. F-35B does not.

 

[Chocopie]

As a downside F-35Bs have a lesser MTOW which reduces the operation range and weapons load. F-35Cs are the real replacements for carrier-borne F/A-18s.

I bet my left nut that some untraced spare parts landed in Chinese hands. More for making a quick buck with fake copys than military espionage, damn them greedy merchant maniacs

 

[Heartbang]

I think adding the "B" model was the "kiss of death" for the F-35 program. I can see the only solution: Upgrade with added swarm drone management capability and manage spare parts and maintenance properly. BTW, I would immediately cancel the "B" model.

After this stage, the only issue that concerns us in the F-35 project will be getting back the money we paid.

P.S. Correction, B model.

In the beginning, there was only the A model(for the Air force) and the B model(for both Navy AND the Marines.). They designed and flown them both, with high commonality between parts and subsystems.

However, that resulted in the B variant performing in an underwhelming manner. They had to redesign the B model to meet the needs. Which meant they had to redesign the A model as well, to keep the interchangeability aspect. That's where the meme-worthy project costs come, BTW.
They basically had to redo both models mid-way.

Also around the same time, US Navy started to throw a hissy-fit about the redesigned B model's gimped specs. They had to placate them by hastily coming up with a C variant. (They still haven't wholeheartedly adopted the F-35C, they got a load of Super Hornets just before the assembly lines closed and they're working on the F/A-XX as we speak. They might never put F-35C into full service.)

And that's how we got the F-35 we know. Lesson?
If you must do Joint fighters, start with the naval/VTOL fighter and turn that into an air force fighter. Not the other way around.
(If you have any doubts with this, look at the F-4 and the F-18.)

 

[uçuyorum]

In the beginning, there was only the A model(for the Air force) and the B model(for both Navy AND the Marines.). They designed and flown them both, with high commonality between parts and subsystems.

However, that resulted in the B variant performing in an underwhelming manner. They had to redesign the B model to meet the needs. Which meant they had to redesign the A model as well, to keep the interchangeability aspect. That's where the meme-worthy project costs come, BTW.
They basically had to redo both models mid-way.

Also around the same time, US Navy started to throw a hissy-fit about the redesigned B model's gimped specs. They had to placate them by hastily coming up with a C variant. (They still haven't wholeheartedly adopted the F-35C, they got a load of Super Hornets just before the assembly lines closed and they're working on the F/A-XX as we speak. They might never put F-35C into full service.)

And that's how we got the F-35 we know. Lesson?
Start with the naval/VTOL fighter and turn that into an air force fighter. Not the other way around.
(If you have any doubts with this, look at the F-4 and the F-18.)

I don't think that's the right lesson at all. It might be more like if you need a different plane make a different plane, deriving vtol and ctol from same plane isn't less costly due to all that nonsense. That and don't trust corporate marketing empty promises

 

[Heartbang]

I don't think that's the right lesson at all. It might be more like if you need a different plane make a different plane, deriving vtol and ctol from same plane isn't less costly due to all that nonsense. That and don't trust corporate marketing empty promises

Oh yeah, definitely LOL.
I guess my lesson is the 2nd best thing to that. Gonna change it accordingly.

 

[Merzifonlu]

And that's how we got the F-35 we know. Lesson?
If you must do Joint fighters, start with the naval/VTOL fighter and turn that into an air force fighter. Not the other way around.
(If you have any doubts with this, look at the F-4 and the F-18.)

I agree with you. A navalized joint fuselage and interchangeable wings were sufficient. They should never have included the B model in the F-35 development program. A separate development program for a modern interpretation of the Harrier would be much cheaper to implement if the VTOL aircraft were needed.

 

[Heartbang]

They should never have included the B model in the F-35 development program. A separate development program for a modern interpretation of the Harrier would be much cheaper to implement if the VTOL aircraft were needed.

Agreed.

 

[Yasar_TR]

I agree with you. A navalized joint fuselage and interchangeable wings were sufficient. They should never have included the B model in the F-35 development program. A separate development program for a modern interpretation of the Harrier would be much cheaper to implement if the VTOL aircraft were needed.

The whole idea of F35B was revolving around the notion of producing a supersonic replacement of Harriers. UK planes were very difficult to fly. If you listen to F35B pilots now, you will hear nothing but praise about the way these new planes handle themselves especially when they are compared to the Harriers.
US naval forces loved the Harriers. But they were very difficult to handle. They wanted an improved STOVL plane to to follow in the footsteps of the British aircraft.
The mistake was to join all three versions under one roof.

 

[uçuyorum]

Bigger mistake was giving all fighter projects to LM. Lack of competition reducing quality and terrible project management is sure to make them suffer for years. I mean Northrop at least has bombers, but if Boeing does't get F/A-XX they may end up having to buy F15s for years to come to keep GE and Boeing interested in defense. Well, it's their problem, anyways.

 

[Afif]

Bigger mistake was giving all fighter projects to LM. Lack of competition reducing quality and terrible project management is sure to make them suffer for years. I mean Northrop at least has bombers, but if Boeing does't get F/A-XX they may end up having to buy F15s for years to come to keep GE and Boeing interested in defense. Well, it's their problem, anyways.

By definition they are not going to give F/A-XX and NGAD to one company.
Boeing probably going to get the F/A-XX, and LM and Northrop is probably going to compete for NGAD.

 

[Stimpy75]

@Bogeyman friend who worked over 15 years on the F-35 program as a data analyst and who knows a shit ton about all the F'35 said once: there are so many morons who failed upwards by kissing ass of the right persons....he is now a radar engineer for another company

 

[bisbis]

It is very likely that after Sunday, February 28, Türkiye will not have a project called f35 or f16 project.

As of this date, only Türkiye's Kızılelma, Kaan, Hürjet and Anka 3, Özgür f16 projects will be. As soon as Mr. R.T.Erdogan wins the presidential election, I think the Biden administration will not approve the sale of f16 to Türkiye.

As Mr. İsmail Demir stated, I predict that Türkiye will modernize its f16 aircraft with domestic systems.

Although the next government after the Biden administration wants to sell the F35 to Türkiye, usa will not find a buyer in Türkiye.

They'll have to come up with a solid excuse for that f35 selling. There are rumors that the Germans had to buy the f35 just for common ammunition. Maybe usa offer common ammunition to Anatolia?

 

[Heartbang]

Although the next government after the Biden administration wants to sell the F35 to Türkiye, usa will not find a buyer in Türkiye.

They'll have to come up with a solid excuse for that f35 selling. There are rumors that the Germans had to buy the f35 just for common ammunition. Maybe usa offer common ammunition to Anatolia?

Germany's need in F-35's are due to the fact that they are a part of the NATO nuclear sharing program and the US requires Luftwaffe to use American aircraft to yeet those nukes.

As for the Turkiye getting F-35s, I would be against it unless it means the return to the status quo pre-2019. (joint production and all.)
With that precondition set, a full squadron of F-35B's to compliment TCG Anadolu would be nice.

 

[Zafer]

F-35B's to compliment TCG Anadolu would be nice

I wonder what we can do with F35B, attack;

• Russia which gives us; gas, oil, nuclear power, tourists, access to Turkic world
• Greece which is a vassal of the US
• South Cyprus which is a vassal of the US
• Israel which is the boss of the US
• Egypt which we gain nothing from

F35B is a losing deal even if we get it for free.

 

[YeşilVatan]

I wonder what we can do with F35B, attack;

• Russia which gives us; gas, oil, nuclear power, tourists, access to Turkic world
• Greece which is a vassal of the US
• South Cyprus which is a vassal of the US
• Israel which is the boss of the US
• Egypt which we gain nothing from

F35B is a losing deal even if we get it for free.

Iran, which some americans (neocons) plan to attack using vassals, like us if we would bend the knee.

Which supports your thesis btw. F-35 is a losing deal in all the scenarios we pursue independence. Technical capabilities are well and good, but the state is not for the military, the military is for the state. No weapon is worth that much.

 

[Bogeyman]

What’s it like to fly an F-35 fighter jet? Test pilot answers questions​

How does it feel to fly the F-35, the fifth-generation combat and intelligence-collection platform that is currently the best aircraft on the planet and the tip of the spear for both the US and Israeli air forces?


Tony “Brick” Wilson is an F-35 test pilot for Lockheed Martin, which produces the aircraft.


Previously, he served in the US Navy and was the first pilot to land an F-35C on an aircraft carrier.

Flying the F-35: The best aircraft on Earth​

Questioned on Wednesday in a webinar organized by Lockheed Martin about what it is like to cope with the g-forces (gravitational forces) that hit the pilot while flying the F-35, he responded, “It’s like an 800-pound gorilla sitting on your chest.”


Aircraft-to-aircraft “dog fighting” is like a full-body workout, and “you are wiped out” at the end, he said.

Monessa “Siren” Balzhiser is also an F-35 test pilot for Lockheed Martin and has flown more than 1,800 hours in the T-6, T-38C, L-39, F-16 and F-35, with over 320 combat hours. Prior to joining Lockheed, she served in the US Air Force.


In the webinar, Balzhiser also addressed the question about dealing with g-forces.


“Your average roller-coaster pulls about three to four g’s [g-forces] max [maximum],” she said. “For a g-force, think about your weight. So if you were 100 pounds, pulling 9 g’s, you would be pulling 900 pounds of force on a person’s body. Imagine that much pressure on your body. It takes a lot of training and special training.”


After some training, pilots come out looking like they are 100-years-old,” she added.

What’s it like to fly an F-35 fighter jet? Test pilot answers questions

The F-35 is the fifth-generation aircraft considered the best in the world and is the tip of the spear for both the US and Israel.

www.jpost.com

 

[Bogeyman]

Lockheed backs new AETP engine for F-35​

Lockheed Martin is officially supporting an alternative to the legacy F135 engine that powers the F-35, the head of the company’s aeronautics division said in an interview at the Paris Airshow today.

“I’m going to advocate, and I do advocate, for [the Adaptive Engine Transition Program, or AETP], another engine,” said Greg Ulmer, Lockheed’s executive vice president of aeronautics. “I think some of the approaches today are very short-sighted and not considering a longer-term view” for the F-35, he added.

Ulmer’s backing of a new engine for the Joint Strike Fighter stems in part from its decades of remaining service life, which will include future upgrades. “Let’s put as much margin in the airplane as we can today, such that in the future, I don’t have to put another motor in. I don’t have to bring new power and thermal management cooling into the airplane,” he said.


And, Ulmer highlighted, an adaptive engine brings further improvements beyond power and cooling increases, such as greater thrust and fuel efficiency. “So you get the benefit of new capability in terms of power and cooling. But you also get aircraft performance improvement with AETP,” he said. “I’m thinking broader. I’m thinking longer-term.”

The advocacy of the jet’s prime contractor on behalf of AETP is a boon to GE Aerospace, which has been pushing for an adaptive engine option, and is conversely a blow to incumbent engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney, which is seeking to continue its lock on powering the tri-variant fleet. Both engine manufacturers have designed prototypes through AETP, which would be expected to compete in the event that an adaptive engine solution is ultimately pursued, but Pratt, as the incumbent engine provider, stands to benefit from keeping the F135 in place and improving it through its preferred Engine Core Upgrade (ECU).


Despite the Air Force’s decision to shutter AETP as part of its fiscal 2024 budget request, Ulmer insisted that interest in AETP prevails in the halls of the Pentagon. “I think they’ve made a decision informed by block four and the requirements as they understand them today. I think there’s elements within the Pentagon talking along the lines that there will be a block 5 and a block 6, and there’ll be other considerations in the future,” he said.

It’s unclear how the fighter’s international buyers might react to a decision to re-engine the aircraft with the pricey adaptive powerplant, which Ulmer described as a “trade” that each customer will have to weigh depending on their planned requirements. Since the adaptive engine won’t fit with the vertical takeoff and landing variant of the fighter, for example, Ulmer reasoned that the ECU will be available to those customers who don’t want to field an adaptive engine.



Additional sustainment infrastructure will be needed to support more than one engine type, though Ulmer downplayed that concern, emphasizing that capability requirements must come first. “If the capability is required, from a technology perspective, they’ll have to put the infrastructure in place to support that,” he said.

“If they go to an [adaptive engine], they’ll have to put whatever those deltas are in place to support that,” he said. “But it’ll be capability driven, in my view.”

But funding AETP — much less AETP and ECU simultaneously — will be expensive, a key reason why Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said earlier this year that the service decided to discontinue AETP. Members of the House Armed Services Committee would seek to keep AETP going in FY24 with approximately $588 million in funding, according to draft text of the legislation previously posted by the committee, with House appropriators similarly backing continued funding but at the lower amount of $150 million.

Ulmer said that $150 million would be enough to keep the program alive until next year, when the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) is expected to formalize its requirements for power and cooling out to the end of the aircraft’s service life.

Alongside engine modernization, the JPO is also pursuing changes to the aircraft’s Power and Thermal Management System (PTMS). “We’ll use the requirements to define what we need, and then we’ll determine what we think provides the best solution,” he said.

On Monday, Raytheon Technologies (now rebranded as RTX) through its subsidiary Collins Aerospace emphasized that its offering for the PTMS, called the Enhanced Power and Cooling System, would offer significant cooling margin to support future upgrades.

Ulmer said he’s open to options beyond the current Honeywell-supplied PTMS, though he emphasized that the requirements must come first before the right choice for the Joint Strike Fighter can be identified.

“Just because someone has an offering today, doesn’t mean that’s the solution,” he said.

Lockheed backs new AETP engine for F-35 - Breaking Defense

“I’m going to advocate, and I do advocate, for [the Adaptive Engine Transition Program, or AETP],” said Lockheed Martin aeronautics chief Greg Ulmer, who labeled “some” current approaches to the fighter's engine modernization as “short-sighted.”

breakingdefense.com

 

[Ecderha]

Who have a lot of money?
And want to burn them?
I am not asking, I am saying to DO it.

The RAM of this F-35C (carrier based version for the US Navy) is getting corrosion.
It mean all which have F-35 carrier based to use it are fucked.
Think it that why -> you F-35 got corrosion-> call usa to repaint -> Pay lot of money.
If you do not then bye bye Stealth , got it.
There are no other logical option, so gave me you money......

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1681514173035888640

To make it clear.
It's RAM which went Rust, but not aluminum corrosion rust.