Can someone more knowledgeable than me in this matter explain why fighter jets still require human pilots? Why aren't they completely replaced by drones?
Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold
21–30 of 267 posts
Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold
#22Weird theory of mine: The DoD ultimately picks these winning planes based on which one “looks cooler” or basically has better aesthetics. I think the F-35 has better aesthetics than the Boeing X-32, just like the F-22 has better aesthetics than the YF-23. You could say I’m used to seeing the winning designs as “normal”, but I distinctly remember having this reaction before the JSF competition was over.
This is not your weird theory. There is some truth to it. Look up Kelly Johnson’s account on several books about military airplanes.
In case if anyone doesn’t know he is: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_Johnson_(engineer)
Basically his philosophy, at some corner of his brains was "If it cools beautiful, it will fly well." The way I think of it is - streamlined shapes are generally more pleasing to human vision system. Not sure why, some innate biological/evolutionary trait. So, Kelly designed a lot of beautiful planes with his gut instinct when there is no data/objectivity, but only some instincts to rely on. Legendary engineer!
Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold
#23Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold
#24Good. The whole thing should be shut down.
It is not good. Like it or not, this is the only alternative NATO has for the forceable future. The British Tempest and the French/German stealth fighter won’t be operational until 2035-2040 The only alternative are modernizes 4gen fighters which are very vulnerable to modern air defenses. A ‘buggy’ F-35 might still be a better alternative. Also the British are counting for the F-35 to equip its carriers.
Buggy? It barely works. Short flight time. Crap wing loading. Not good at any of it's multi-roles.
We could build 5-10 F-16s for each F-35, and many more A-10s, and they'd be better despite being ancient designs.
They're so expensive we can't even do proper flight training in them, it'd cost too much if we break one.
Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
600 have already been delivered. Covid caused a disruption in final certification, that's it. The F35 isn't being cancelled, although I predict most comments here will devolve into a debate of the plane's merits. The US and many allies are committed, the US will eventually own thousands.
If you didn't know, you've been hell-banned (silently hidden from the HN that almost everyone else sees) for two years. That's why you get so few replies to your comments.
I see their comments like normal, is there something that controls this?
Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold
#26Weird theory of mine: The DoD ultimately picks these winning planes based on which one “looks cooler” or basically has better aesthetics. I think the F-35 has better aesthetics than the Boeing X-32, just like the F-22 has better aesthetics than the YF-23. You could say I’m used to seeing the winning designs as “normal”, but I distinctly remember having this reaction before the JSF competition was over.
I'd be shocked if the military doesn't include aesthetics when considering which new equipment to use.
You'd want to look badass and cool to the people you serve and hellish and terrifying to those you attack. The psychological impact in both directions almost certainly has important, real world consequences.
Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold
#27Weird theory of mine: The DoD ultimately picks these winning planes based on which one “looks cooler” or basically has better aesthetics. I think the F-35 has better aesthetics than the Boeing X-32, just like the F-22 has better aesthetics than the YF-23. You could say I’m used to seeing the winning designs as “normal”, but I distinctly remember having this reaction before the JSF competition was over.
The Boeing was not just ugly, it failed to do both stovl and supersonic in one fighter, which was a requirement
‘ Due to the heavy delta wing design of the X-32, Boeing demonstrated STOVL and supersonic flight in separate configurations, with the STOVL configuration requiring that some parts be removed from the fighter. The company promised that their conventional tail design for production models would not require separate configurations. By contrast, the Lockheed Martin X-35 concept demonstrator aircraft were capable of transitioning between their STOVL and supersonic configurations in mid-flight.[4]
Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you didn't know, you've been hell-banned (silently hidden from the HN that almost everyone else sees) for two years. That's why you get so few replies to your comments.
I see their comments like normal, is there something that controls this?
His stuff starts off "dead" and has to be "vouched" by someone with karma to be expanded/seen by default. Look at his post history.
Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold
#29It's really baffling that the US isn't looking more heavily at cheaper, easier to field aircraft like the A-29 Super Tucano for counter-insurgency operations like Iraq and Afghanistan.
The A-29 isn't that cheap compared to an F-35 (i.e. 1:4), especially when you consider that if you buy an F-35 (at the expense of maintenance costs) you avoid having to buy an F-35 anyway because you have a modern BVR platform
Re: Pentagon Puts F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision on Hold
#30Yet for some weird reason this plane is still one of the 4 plains in the running to replace the old FA-18 in the Swiss air force.
Which plane, exactly, is superior to the F-35?
Pretty much anything from the last generation. Embarrassingly the F-16 beat it in combat, for example.
For close air support the A-10 is vastly superior.
The F-35 is an employment program like the TSA.