Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 Thrust to weight and wing loading have nothing to do with the F-35's advantage in drag. The maneuverability maps for various planes, as far as I know, are not things that are readily public from my research, so when we really have to go on what little information we have and what the pilots are saying. Aside from disingenuous LM spokespeople, I've read nothing that suggests the F-35's internal weapons bays and fuel pods are going to make enough of a difference in terms of drag to make up for its severe wing-loading and thrust/weight ratios. I rephrase: Look at the wing loading of the F-4 and F-16.……..Do you think the F-4 would fly circles around the F-16? Exactly.......Like I was saying, there are a myriad of factors to consider, drag, lift coefficient, thrust to weight, thrust to drag and as I said L/D…….not to mention modern flight controls and the aerodynamics of the of the airframe of a given type, which on aircraft like say the F-35 or F-22 (unlike legacy aircraft) are also designed to be conductive of Lift…..a factor that wouldn`t show up in wing loading. It's not a matter of outrunning a missile. It's a matter of launching your own missiles at greater height and speed (thus longer range) than your opponent. If you can turn, climb and fly faster than your opponent, that allows you to launch your weapon at longer range than him, and then turn quickly away and gain as much speed and altitude as possible. If you fire first outside your opponent's range, and then turn and fly faster than him, you ideally keep yourself out of his weapon range, or give yourself the space needed for the evasive maneuvers that will eventually burn his missile out. Of course if you can't see you opponent in time, this doesn't work, and that's what the F-35 is counting on. That and a whole host of other factors. I'm not an engineer, but from what I know basic aerodynamics dictate that the lower the wing load, the tighter the sustained turn. As you continue your turn, you bleed speed and require more lift to continue the turn. A plane that generates more lift for less thrust is naturally suited for this. Higher wing loading tends to allow faster instantaneous turns with lower bleed, but they have trouble sustaining the turn. That's why you see interceptors like the Starfighter with such high wing loading. They weren't meant for turn fights, but flying fast and straight. I am an engineer, and basic aerodynamics have been thrown on their ear since the advent of fly-by-wire technology........... The Starfighter's airframe was conductive of drag........The F-22 and F-35 airframes are not...Incidentally said airframes and flight control systems of both aircraft were designed and improved upon by the same people. Wing-loading is weight relative to wing surface from what I understand. Those are the figures we see, and whether your fuel and weapons are loaded inside or outside doesn't change that basic math. Internal weapons/fuel reduce drag certainly, but I've read nothing to indicate that it'll be enough to make up for the large disadvantage it has in fundamental wing-loading math. I know what it is.......but as outlined: This aircraft: could not out perform this aircraft: Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 F 135 F 136 basically the same engine. All having failures. Same engine? You understand the whole lift-fan concept right? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 Same engine? You understand the whole lift-fan concept right? Yep and the xition vibration is one of the realms that causes failures. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 Yep and the xition vibration is one of the realms that causes failures. You're suggesting you know the cause of the recent failure? You better get on the horn to LockMart!!!! Quote
waldo Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 (edited) Get a better source......the Marines and British resumed flights last Friday. Read your link: read this one... from the U.S. DOD... note the July 03 date - why..... that would be today! Release No: NR-358-14 July 03, 2014 Statement from Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Admiral John Kirby on F-35 Fleet Grounding The technical air worthiness authorities of the Department of the Air Force and Department of the Navy have issued a directive to ground the F-35 fleet based on initial findings from the runway fire incident that occurred at Eglin Air Force Base on Monday, June 23. The root cause of the incident remains under investigation. Additional inspections of F-35 engines have been ordered, and return to flight will be determined based on inspection results and analysis of engineering data. Defense Department leadership supports this prudent approach. Preparations continue for F-35 participation in international air shows in the United Kingdom, however a final decision will come early next week. Edited July 4, 2014 by waldo Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 You're suggesting you know the cause of the recent failure? You better get on the horn to LockMart!!!! Let's see if we can put 2 and 2 together. Do you know where the engine is in the F 35? Now do you know where the report says the fire eminated from? That of course is not conclusive, but it's a pretty good indicator based on the history. And of course I'm sure you would know that take off is one time when you ask a lot of the engine. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 Let's see if we can put 2 and 2 together. Do you know where the engine is in the F 35? Now do you know where the report says the fire eminated from? That of course is not conclusive, but it's a pretty good indicator based on the history. And of course I'm sure you would know that take off is one time when you ask a lot of the engine. No, that's a guess based on media reports.......but let's assume you're correct, what are the differences between the F-35B`s engine and that of the A and C (besides being marinised)? Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 read this one... from the U.S. DOD... note the July 03 date - why..... that would be today! Hey you came back!! Yeah, the release that all media reports stem from.........As I said, the F-35B resumed flights last Friday. Quote
waldo Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 Hey you came back!! Yeah, the release that all media reports stem from.........As I said, the F-35B resumed flights last Friday. uhhh... all the media reports you're quoting prior to the DOD news release??? Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 uhhh... all the media reports you're quoting prior to the DOD news release??? The several posted by OGFT dated several hours ago.......chicken and the egg Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 No, that's a guess based on media reports.......but let's assume you're correct, what are the differences between the F-35B`s engine and that of the A and C (besides being marinised)? And what are you basing your guesses on? Or are you ignoring those reports? Media reports or not, there seems to be a reason the F 35 won't be showing up at Farnsborough. Quote
waldo Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 The several posted by OGFT dated several hours ago.......chicken and the egg here's one a few hours old... that agrees with the content/timing of the DOD release from today: Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 And what are you basing your guesses on? Or are you ignoring those reports? Media reports or not, there seems to be a reason the F 35 won't be showing up at Farnsborough. What guess? Three F-35B's from Yuma flew to Patuxent River last Friday.......The delay of their flight across the pond is due to the delay incurred by the sole British B having yet to leave Florida. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 here's one a few hours old... that agrees with the content/timing of the DOD release from today: Ahh the good old CBC.......I see the story has been "updated", sans their prior determination of cause Quote
waldo Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 Ahh the good old CBC.......I see the story has been "updated", sans their prior determination of cause no need for you to disparage the CBC... target the U.S. DOD instead. You were provided with the link/quote from the news release put out by DOD today, July 3rd. Are you saying the U.S. DOD news release is...... wrong/dated/incorrect? Just what is it you're saying in all your whirly-twirly best? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 What guess? Three F-35B's from Yuma flew to Patuxent River last Friday.......The delay of their flight across the pond is due to the delay incurred by the sole British B having yet to leave Florida. Scroll back up a little ways and read Waldo's link. The flight over the pond is cancelled due to an engine fire on takeoff at Elgin. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 no need for you to disparage the CBC... target the U.S. DOD instead. You were provided with the link/quote from the news release put out by DOD today, July 3rd. Are you saying the U.S. DOD news release is...... wrong/dated/incorrect? Just what is it you're saying in all your whirly-twirly best? I’m not……their earlier version named the cause in detail……only problem, it was from the engine issue last December. And no, I'm not saying the DoD release is wrong. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 Scroll back up a little ways and read Waldo's link. The flight over the pond is cancelled due to an engine fire on takeoff at Elgin. No it was not......the fire occurred in a F-35A owned by the USAF, not the F-35B owned by the British. Quote
waldo Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 catchup/housecleaning: update on Italy's further anticipated reduction in it's initial F-35 commitment... originally down from the initial 131 commited to a reduced 90 figure, Italian lawmakers have voted to half the funding allotment for those (presumed) 90: "cutting by half the 12 billion euros ($16.72 billion) earmarked for Italy's order of 90 Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter jets." Quote
waldo Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 And no, I'm not saying the DoD release is wrong. your comments certainly don't align with that DoD release, hey! Quote
waldo Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 No it was not......the fire occurred in a F-35A owned by the USAF, not the F-35B owned by the British. unknown cause... hence all variants are grounded. What's your point? Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 But since I’ve got both the resident Super Hornet champions here, based on the precedent of the Super Hornets two incidents that led to fleet wide groundings prior to being fully operational, could it be surmised that maybe, just maybe any issues with other aircraft undergoing development could also be resolved? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 No it was not......the fire occurred in a F-35A owned by the USAF, not the F-35B owned by the British. Apparently you pay no attention to links provided. http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/03/us/f-35-fleet-grounded/index.html Quote
waldo Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 But since I’ve got both the resident Super Hornet champions here, based on the precedent of the Super Hornets two incidents that led to fleet wide groundings prior to being fully operational, could it be surmised that maybe, just maybe any issues with other aircraft undergoing development could also be resolved? again with your continued 'champion' BS... cu later! Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted July 4, 2014 Report Posted July 4, 2014 again with your continued 'champion' BS... cu later! Real simple question.......what afraid to answer it? The Super Hornet that you love so much was grounded twice due to engine issues, but is now fine, but the same metric can't be applied to the F-35 family? Are you on the payroll of Boeing and General Electric? What's your stake? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.