phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
Well for one, the Lockheed product could demonstrate: vertical takeoff, transition to forward flight, transition to hover, vertical landing. I believe the Boeing product couldn't really do it...
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
F-35B/C Lightning II (Joint Strike Fighter)
- Thread starter jai5w4
- Start date
Yeah, but she's got a weird nose from certain angles. I wouldn't call it an ugly plane, just not the hottest, that's all.
Edit: I tried to attach a picture to illustrate my point, but Airliners.net hates me.
The competition was intense for such a grand prize and both competitors were neck and neck in just about everything. However, the general consensus was the Lockheed Martin lift-fan propulsion concept would be the most effective solution for the STOVL variant, which made it a bit of a "discriminator" over the Boeing X-32. At the same time, during flight testing, it was determined that the Boeing modified delta wing would not be suitable for the entire envelope and a horizontal stabilizer would have to be added. That meant risk due to redesign required so in my book, that was a significant negative "discriminator". Put the two together and that's enough to put LMCO on top (regardless of looks).
Uhhh ... no, not exactly. As you are aware, flying is only ONE of the criteria for an airplane to be on the government's military procurement list. PLUS ... if you remember the "players" seated in the front row pictures @ Lockheed for the announcement ????
:"....Analysts said Boeing may be in a better position than Lockheed would have been to weather the loss. It is developing an unmanned combat aircraft that could be highly lucrative and, unlike Lockheed, it has a commercial airline business. It also has contracts with the Pentagon to continue building F-18 and F-22 fighter jets until 2011."
"There is nothing larger out there," said Christopher Hillman, a military analyst with the Center of Defense Information in Washington. "There is a concern that the loser of this competition may be driven out of the fighter-aircraft business. But I believe the loser will be around 15 or 20 years from now, when the next generation of planes is designed."
From the Orlando Sentinel on GlobalSecurity.org in 2001:LOCKHEED WINS JET DEAL
My brother-in-law was a lead engineer on the Boeing side of the project, claims to know the "political" side of the decision.
He says the "fix" was in ....
flysupertomcat
Jim told me I can buy Gaydar online
I think the larger wing surfaces of the C model will help it not look so chubby. I see what you're saying though.
Nope. I'm not a big fan. You definitely won't see me asking "when will these hit the fleet" or "if I finish flight school in 20XX will I get a chance to fly the F-35"...
On a different note why does it have a single tire on all of the struts? I thought the navy liked to have two tires on the nose gear? (and yes I know there have been carrier aircraft ahem... A-4's... that had only one)
Point of Order, they havent actually built a Navy variant yet.
blur
A-pool
Ya, I agree. The C variant should improve the aesthetics a bit with the larger wings. The current models have T-rex wings.
Right now there is only the one production F-35 (an Air Force A variant) as apose to the JSF contest when it was the concept demonstrator X-35. Next one off the line is a STOVL version with a further 10 testing aircraft behind that. Heres an article that better shows where they are in the process of flight testing. http://www.lockheedmartin.com/wms/findPage.do?dsp=fec&ci=18438&rsbci=0&fti=112&ti=0&sc=400
lawman said:
You both are confusing the production versions with the demonstrators that were used for evaluating the competitors. There was a X-35A, B and C flown AND airframes were converted showing the commonality between the series.
Flathatter13
Banned
Because evaluating a "flying" version that may not be your exact model is better than staring at a drawing board or computer image of what you will eventually have.
Flathatter13
Banned
Not to be an A10 lover but I seriously doubt that the F-35 is going to "replace" the A10 unless they figured out how to sling the 30mm cannon on it. It may come into to service and take over the A10's role but replace it I doubt.
stepintoliquid
New Member
the a-10's ability to fly slow and use its cannon are two qualities i dont see any fighters of the future being able to match. not going to even touch on the warthog's toughness either....