F-35 Problems?

thurley42

HY;FR
All of the above is true, however once you remove the pilot, the mission of the UAV changes. UAVs will never be dogfighters. Look at all the UAVs in our arsenal now, no dogfighters. All are long range strike/recon devices.

never say never.....but not in the next 20 years...
 

Aerogal

USMC 1983-1995
All great aircraft, but sadly all retired.........

Boeing seems to have cornered the fighter-attack market......for now.
 

flomaster

J.F. A sus ordenes!
From what I understand the F22 can out fight anything in the sky and the F16 was/is no slouch either. Why we need high tech weapons like this any more is beyond me. Sure, keep researching and building prototypes and be ready to go into full production if needed. But to do something like this, on this scale is wasting money. Just my .02.

Being they are taking our aircraft down with sling shots anymore its hard to think of spending money on some anti-aircraft weapons that will probably never be used against us especially where our fronts are being faught. My 2 cents two. :patriot: It is nice to know that when things like Korea that may bring us a new front that some of these hi-tech items are available. Keep our boys safe up there.
 

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
Hey Baja, a pre-dawn launch of the Pratt & Whitney J58-P4 equipped Habu is about as exciting and noisy as it gets.
 
I don't need to read about it, I was there for the Libyan shoot down. Long range missiles do not a fighter make unless the ROE enable the fighter to shoot what he has not visually confirmed. My point is that a fighter aircraft needs to be able to fight when in close proximity to his enemy. I understand love for the aircraft you have worked with but the F-14 and F-15 were not great dogfighters. The F-14 wing sweep transition time was much too slow to be effective in a true fighter environment and the F -15 is just too big and heavy to be able to turn inside the enemy in a true dogfight. I still maintain that unmanned aircraft are the future. Take your beloved F-14 for example. If there were no need for support of a human, how much smaller, lighter and more maneuverable could the aircraft have been made? No environmental equipment, no seat, no gauges, no controls, etc..... The limit to manned aircraft today is the human inside it.

I have no special love for the F-14. And I need to correct my earlier post about the incident. The first two long range missles failed to hit, it was only after engaging in a very short dog fight that the F-14 got one with a sparrow and the other with a side winder missile. I don't think the F14 was really designed to be a close in dog fighter. More of and intercepter. Still they trained for both.

J-57.
Any idea what A/C?

The ones I remember smoking a lot were A7s and F4s at low altitude.
 

Mafeeshmuskela

New Member
I worked 4-midnight at Moody AFB. Dorm was near the runway. Sound asleep at 7:00am when they started taking off. And the Prat & Whitney J-79 burned fuel like crazy! Damn I hated those loud effers. :lmao:

Missed this earlier, J-79 is actually a GE product. And yes they are gas hogs.
If memory serves, 17 thousand#s per hour in AB.
 

RPMDAD

Well-Known Member
Hey Baja, a pre-dawn launch of the Pratt & Whitney J58-P4 equipped Habu is about as exciting and noisy as it gets.

SR-71 Blackbird, have met Ret. Colonel Rich Graham several times and have read one of his 3 books. Awesome aircraft. Ken were you at Kadena A B?
 
Last edited:
Top