What is Digg?72 Comments
- pahoehoe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+31There seems to be some confusion between the F-35 and the F-22.
F-22 is an air-supremacy fighter that is designed to replace the F-15 and is currently operational (since December of last year). It has two engines, and is very expensive.
F-35 is a multi-role fighter designed to replace the F-16, A-10, F-18 C/D, and the Harrier. It has one engine and is designed to be more affordable. It uses much of the technology developed for the F-22.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-22
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-35 - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -21/+43Gotta love being an American :-)
- bflfab, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18You must be talking about F-22s, this is the first time the F-35 has flown.
- brianbennett, on 10/12/2007, -8/+24America! ***** yeah!
- pahoehoe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16If something is too high up to get good pictures, isn't it too high to precisely identify it?
- scottylist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14...and British.
"Its development is being funded by the United States, the United Kingdom, and other partner governments. It is being designed and built by an aerospace industry team led by Lockheed Martin and major partners BAE Systems and Northrop Grumman."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-35 - iMrEuphony, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12That died pretty quick,
For you lazy diggers, here it is at the top...
http://www.duggmirror.com/general_sciences/F_35_Lightning_First_Production_Flight/ - impulsiveboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Oh, it's not the firepower. It's the cost and the ...well... have you ever seen an A-10 after it's come back from a mission? It was designed to take so much of a beating that you could do pass after pass over your enemy and just soak it all up as long as you had wings left on the thing. I'm just an eager kid who likes big toys, but I'd really like to see what happens if you fire an AK-47 into the underside of a F-35 in those conditions. Pierre Sprey was a genius.
- impulsiveboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Not to be cheeky, but the F-35 probably won't replace the A-10. It isn't supposed to be phased out until 2028 and even then, it's shaky.
Good call on the links though. - pahoehoe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10@stupidverizon
You're 90% certain and 100% wrong. Stealth does not mean silent. The engines on the F-22 and F-35 make noise, and they make a lot of it. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13proud taxpayer of an f-35!
- salinemist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Currently we spend about 3.8% of GDP on defense, and 7% on social programs. In the 60's that ratio was flipped.
- habu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9The YF-35 has flown for a bit during fly offs, but not sure when it was last in the air or if it still is. This is the first F-35.
- Shorties, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14n/m Digg Me Down
- Valarauka, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12We aren't taxed enough to afford anything right about now - do the terms "federal budget deficit" and "trillions of dollars" mean anything to you?
- fugazi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Hell we could win Iraq in a matter of days its just we dont feel like killing off every single Iraqi through bombings. We are trying to win in a way that a war can not be fought. We are fighting a war without guns as of now... (we could of taken out every iraqi with the amount of bombs we have)
On a brighter note that looks like one expensive ass spot. - Valarauka, on 10/12/2007, -30/+37Except when you realize the money going towards these is NOT going towards providing body armor inserts and other necessities for active troops...
- Netmindstorm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7May use direct energy weapons....from the wiki
"Directed-energy weapons may be installed in conventional takeoff F-35 Lightning IIs, whose lack of a direct lift fan frees up about 100 ft³ (2.8 m³) of space and whose engine provides more than 27,000 hp (20 MW) for electrical power.[25] Some concepts, including solid state lasers and high-power microwave beams, may be nearing operational status" - bflfab, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9It was beautiful. I saw it firsthand, what a proud moment!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I think we are taxed enough that we can afford both.
I find it funny that no says. "Shouldn't we be spending this on welfare, other entitlements or on medical care for illegal aliens?" - pahoehoe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Tell that to all of the engineers, scientists, technicians, managers, pilots, and computer scientists, who have worked on this project. I'm sure they'd much rather be teaching shoolchildren while the United State's technological, scientific, and manufacturing skills stagnate.
- ubisuck, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Canadians just gave 500$ millions for R&D for this, supposed to replace the old CF-18. There was a Digg article yesterday. There are other countries too helping with this.
- mjr123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6http://www.lockheedmartin.com/pressrelease/F-35.html
- dustyshadow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I could be slightly off but I remember hearing a story about a female A-10 pilot returning to base after half of her wing was blown off. A-10s are flying tanks.
- salinemist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Try http://www.truthandpolitics.org/military-relative-size.php
Relative Size of US Military Spending, 1940--2003 - tafty86, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Why couldn't they come up with a better name, I know that it has been over 60 years but come on.
The real Lightning: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-38 - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Agreed. The F-35 will have a new 25mm cannon but it has less ammo and firepower than the A10.
- jtolsdorf, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Nice shots. Lockheed should be proud!
- Netmindstorm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=446310
"The A-10 has survived the Air Force's attempt to get rid of it numerous times. It flies presently with active-duty and Reserve forces and Air National Guard. One of the primary reasons for its continued existence is that there is no viable replacement for it. Proposed replacements have included a ground-attack F-16, Harrier AV-8B jumpjets, and now the Joint Strike Fighter. All of these suffer from a severe fragility when compared to the A-10. During the Gulf War, one A-10 was struck by anti-aircraft fire but returned home despite losing several feet of one wing and having a hole the size of a picnic table ripped through the other wing near the root. This sort of guts endears the plane to its crews." - TheDrunkMonkey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I wonder if/when the Thunderbirds will be converted to F-35s (seeing as the F-35 is replacing the F-16). It is obviously not a big priority, so probably not for at least a few years. The F-16 looks a lot nicer anyway- the air intake is awesome.
- mfratt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Man, Lockheed has done so much. I'd suggest Ben Rich's book "Skunk Works." He lead the project for a few decades and writes about it in his book.
- SundayTrain, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7"The bravery of being out of range"
-Roger Waters - fenris6644, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2And they're both classified as stealth aircraft, anyways. They both have radar signature returns at least as small as the old F-117A.
- impulsiveboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2True story of USAF Captain Kim Campbell - "Within minutes, Campbell dropped her A-10 Warthog from the clouds and was staring into the firefight on April 7. On Campbell's final pass her jet took a crippling hit, most likely from a surface-to-air missile, which disabled the plane's controls and put the pilot to the test. She managed a dramatic, safe landing."
Wikipedia clarifies: "The hit damaged one of the A-10's two engines and destroyed its hydraulic system, disabling the plane's stabilizer and flight controls. Despite this, the pilot managed to fly it for an hour and landed it safely at the air base in manual reversion mode." - KiloCharley, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5replace the a-10 ? not likely.
different roles, helluva bird tho - impulsiveboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Woo! Found the picture just after it was too late to edit the previous comment...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Kim_campbell_damage_a10.jpg - pahoehoe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4From the Lockheed-Martin website...
"The stealthy, multi-service F-35 is the most powerful single-engine fighter in history, and is designed to replace the F-16, F/A-18 Hornet, the Harrier and the A-10."
Oh, and it isn't going to replace the F-18 E/F, because those aircraft are much bigger and fulfill other roles. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What the hell are you talking about? It'll replace virtually all the roles of air force fighters except as an air superiority fighter which will be filled by the F-22 and will unlikely replace the A-10.
For the Navy it'll not replace the FA-18E/F but will supplement it but all the other fighters and older FA-18s will be replaced. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What do you think the psychological effect of pinpoint 500lb bomb assassinations on the bad guys are? They are not happy. We are used to the terrorists having the advantage in asymetical warfare. This is asymetry the other way. Silent, secret death from above. Near immunity from radar or IR guided weapons. Non stealth aircraft, no matter how capable, are easy targets now.
- whowantthefunk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Stop arguing about what the F-35 is going to replace... The articles are correct and it was bought by the Air Force, Navy, and Marines and some foreign governments. They just haven't decided on a final number, much like the Air Force and the F-22.
Until you've walked around this little baby and seen how well she's built, you don't know ***** about what she can handle in the field. I for one, who have seen it up close and personal, am not worried about her at all. - dmackenzie1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm going to try to collate some of the other pics that I've seen at this location.
http://www.godavidgo.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10
We're the only/tallest building in west fort worth. 5 miles away and we can see right down the runway. - CoFRBrutus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2This was not the first production flight of the F-35. This was the initial flight by LH Ft. Worth. Testing by the Air Force is not slated until 2008. From there it will take 5 - 10 years of testing before it is ready for production.
whowantthefunk,
you walking around the aircraft does not mean anything. The F-35 has a number of issues that are not cosmetic, such as heating of the electronics due to poor airflow, etc.
This was just the first flight, it will be years before it is fielded. - Axlrose, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I get to see A-10's everyday, I live right near an ANG base in Mass. With the restructuring of the bases though, the A-10's are moving to Conn. and we are getting F-15's. Slight noise difference.
- rspeed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@dustyshadow
I recall a story about Capt. Paul Johnson having a hole blown clear through the left wing. It sent a few big chucks into the left engine, which proceeded to chew it up and continued to work (at a reduced power). The primary hydraulics were killed and Capt. Johnson was worried that the wing would fall off when he put the gear down, but it managed to hold up. I wish I could find a picture, because the hole was MASSIVE. - dstew74, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That looks like a relatively small aircraft, roughly on par with a F-16. The F-22 is huge, easily doubled the size of the of the F-16. I work right across from Lockheed Martin and get to see the F-22 test flights. F-22 is relatively quiet too, especially compared with those damn F-16 chase planes.
- impulsiveboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Dusty
I've heard the same story; didn't know if it was myth or not. I do know that everything is SUPER redundant inside the plane though. The cockpit is guarded by a big tub to protect the pilot and besides that, you could pretty much shred 60% of the plane and still have things "functional". The main problem with the plane isn't the hardware, it's the pilots accidently shooting up friendlies. I won't justify that, but *****, I'd get itchy on that trigger finger too with that baby under me. (Which is probably why I'll *never* be an A-10 pilot) - pahoehoe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sorry Drunk Monkey, I dug you down because I misinterpreted your comment. Shame on me. Digg this down.
- salinemist, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2“Every attempt to make war easy and safe will result in humiliation and disaster”. --William Tecumseh Sherman
- elliotm01, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1So THAT'S what I saw a few days ago!
I was wondering why they were flying so low...figured it might be some sort of test or training. - djAnakin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I can't wait till they come here and start ECM testing! [China Lake, Echo Range]
-
Show 51 - 72 of 72 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 