Yep, Dave arrived. Its hideously ugly, bland, boring, over budget, under performing and probably the biggest waste of money ever spent on an aircraft.
Demonstration of its capabilities, yep each one refuelled 15 times on the way over - that tells you a lot !!!
It does nothing for me....
Hmmmm!!!...I'm not sure......... I could have got this completely wrong.....maybe I'm reading too much into it or I'm barking up the wrong tree but something tells me that your not all that keen on the F35 Rich??
If it set off from the west coast then 15 times is I suppose acceptable, but if it was from the east coast then thats less fuel capacity than a Harrier. Naval aircraft (such as the F18) are famous for not having a great range, but that is unaaceptable. Will they even be able to fly from Marham to Lossiemouth without needing to refuel at Leuchars?
I loved the articles use of the word supersonic. To my cynical mind it almost read as if the F-35 was the RAF's first supersonic fighter. Is fighter still a valid term?
No Amount Of Evidence Will Ever Persuade An Idiot (probably not Mark Twain)
Agree what is the relevance of being supersonic? Greater than Mach 1 I suppose? We have had Lightnings, Phantoms, Tornados and Typhoons in service in the UK over the decades which could achieve supersonic speed in level flight. And there was even the Concorde which could probably out pace (and certainly out range) all of them!
If it set off from the west coast then 15 times is I suppose acceptable, but if it was from the east coast then thats less fuel capacity than a Harrier. Naval aircraft (such as the F18) are famous for not having a great range, but that is unaaceptable. Will they even be able to fly from Marham to Lossiemouth without needing to refuel at Leuchars?
The article says that they set off from a USN base in South Carolina (East Coast USA)
So all any enemy needs to do is shoot down the tankers or just the last one before the attack. I think I have spotted a flaw in the military planners thinking
I assume any deep penetration into enemy territory would not be possible as you wouldn't want tankers flying over enemy airspace.
No Amount Of Evidence Will Ever Persuade An Idiot (probably not Mark Twain)
Making a rough measurement in GE the straight-line distance for SC to UK is around 3500 nm. The given range on internal fuel for the F35B is 1200nm.
I cannot see how 15 in-flight refuels would be necessary unless it means a total of 15 for the THREE aircraft, i.e 5 each. Actually 6 tankloads if the on-ground pre-flight fuel is included,
The One Show
tonight has a film on the arrival of the F-35Bs with Carol Vordermann (looks as if she is on the open ramp of a Hercules with the F-35B trying to land on it!)
We use cookies to improve our website and your experience when using it. Cookies used for the essential operation of this site have already been set. By continuing to use this site you are agreeing to this. To find out more about the cookies we use and how to delete them, see our privacy policy.
