Beyond The Sprues
Modelling => Ideas & Inspiration => Aero-space => Topic started by: GTX_Admin on January 05, 2012, 07:22:19 PM
-
Hi folks,
A thread dedicated to your Lockheed Martin F-35 ideas and inspiration.
To start, something silly: Since it seems the only kit of the aircraft in 1/48 are various iterations of the PANDA MODELS kit.
(http://www.modelworld10.it/images/uploads/PANDA%2048003-1.jpg)
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_TGS61dlat8U/TPi0SBWWkdI/AAAAAAAADGg/jR009Fzyze8/s1600/02+Panda+F-35K.jpg)(http://www.kitreview.com/reviews/images/f35previewcm_1.jpg)
How about an F-35 in a "panda" scheme.
(http://www.konicaminolta.com/kids/endangered_animals/library/field/img/g-panda_img01-l.jpg)
Regards,
Greg
-
Speaking of F-35 Whiffs, here's one straight out of the box:
(http://i318.photobucket.com/albums/mm425/yesfan62/IMG_3743.jpg)
-
Here's the Lockheed Martin YF-45A Starbolt, a small fighter derived from the F-35...
(http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/081/3/3/lockheed_martin_f_45_starbolt_by_bispro-d3c7g5h.jpg)
And here is the QF-35D, an unmanned variant of the basic F-35.
(http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/176/3/2/Lockheed_Martin_QF_35D_UCAV_by_Bispro.jpg)
-
F-22 style fins:
(http://www.fas.org/man//dod-101/sys/ac/jsf-rn.jpg)
(http://f00.inventorspot.com/images/jsf200c.img_assist_custom.jpg)
-
I like that kind of subtle change - would have people scratching their heads knowing something was wrong, but not quite sure just what...
-
The QF-35 isn't that far off. Replace the cockpit with another equipment bay and that pain of a canopy with an access panel and you've got it. The "pilot's associate" that's part of the baseline design takes it lot closer to a UCAV than most designs are.
-
A F-35A derivative that could be done in RL if there was demand would have either dual mode flying boom or probe and drogue in-flight refueling capability or just probe and drogue for those nations without flying boom tankers.
-
I was considering a "Panda" scheme for something in my stash.... A permanant winter scheme basically, When i get around to it... Possibly sometime in the next ten years i still might :D
-
With the US budget deficite the way it is and the size of cuts being planned, the F-35 is now in very real danger of being culled.
So, who will order what to furfill the outstanding requirements????
For the first suggestion, how about the HAL Tejas for the Fleet Air Arm!?!?!
Any other ideas!???
-
(very carefully making comment on the F-35... :icon_ninja:) A year or so ago, Joe (TSR) asked me to do a run of 'alternate F-35' profile options. These included JAS-39s and F/A-18Es.
Regards,
John
-
(very carefully making comment on the F-35... :icon_ninja:) A year or so ago, Joe (TSR) asked me to do a run of 'alternate F-35' profile options. These included JAS-39s and F/A-18Es.
Would USAF "Super Bugs" have been on that list? 'Twould seem an obvious approach. I could also see further F-15 and F-16 developments incorporating appropriate low observables technology (for the F-15, perhaps a step beyond the Silent Eagle) and whatever systems and technology they could from the F-35 (for example, a new block of the F-16 with the F-35's engine and the JIST inlet adapted for production and the requisite airflow).
-
With the US budget deficite the way it is and the size of cuts being planned, the F-35 is now in very real danger of being culled.
*Real World Mode On* Sorry to disappoint some, but there is absolutely NO chance of the F-35 being culled! Anyone who seriously thinks this will happen doesn't have a clue what they are talking about.*Real World Mode Off*
Now in the fantasy whiff-verse:
Options to play with, in various iterations:
F/A-18E/F and developments thereof ( see what was offered to India recently)
F-15E and warmed over developments such as the Silent Eagle
Raffle
Typhoon
Su30/35
Su-?? (T-50)
F-16 developments
JAS-39E/F and developments
UCAVs
...
Regards,
Greg
-
F-18E and F-18F in USAF markings instead of more lawn darts.
-
Evan, I did do a couple of Es and one F Super Bugs in USAF markings but they were for another request.
Greg, one could suggest there have been many times throughout history where 'definite' things haven't happened regardless of all intentions. Time will tell obviously and I suspect at least the CTOL variants will enter service, but to say definitely is brave.
Regards,
John
-
Odds are in the F-35s favor, since jets are sexy, but you never know. The only thing harder to kill than a jet program is probably a ship program.
Marines will still be riding in the old tuna boats since the EFV got the axe. (no, not bitter about that at all...)
-
... options looked at by the Finnish Ilmavoimat as probable legacy F.18C/D Hornet replacements were the Saab Gripen NG, Boeing F.18E Super Hornet and Lockheed's F.35A Lightning. The F.35A has been provisionally chosen altho the Russians have recently offered the Indian backed Sukhoi T.50 'Fitbird' for the same unit price as the Lockheed aircraft ! unfortunately a long shot (aka. not a snowballs chance !) but the lure of an F.22 Raptor equivalent coming onto the export market is an interesting development indeed, i know the Finnish delegation which evaluated the proposals came away very impressed !
John prepared some really neat artwork showing the possible contenders in Finnish markings for a little speculative piece i put together for an article on the F.35 decision
hmm, i agree it (probably) wont be cancelled (altho i can foresee a definate reduction in numbers) but what happens when the F.35C gets delayed now that the UK. has dropped the STOVL. F.35B ? we already have one carrier going straight into mothballs prior to modification as it was planned for the initial type, the second vessel being optimised for the CTOL. carrier version !
Typhoon is a definate nono due to its internal structure not being suitable for carrier type operations, so i guess the possibility is either the F.18E Super Hornet or Dassault Rafale M as interim (or replacement) equipment. The UK. already has pilots on exchange both in the US. and France potentially covering both options
cheers, Joe
-
Typhoon is a definate nono due to its internal structure not being suitable for carrier type operations, so i guess the possibility is either the F.18E Super Hornet or Dassault Rafale M as interim (or replacement) equipment. The UK. already has pilots on exchange both in the US. and France potentially covering both options
cheers, Joe
Joe: I thought I'd read somewhere that the Eurofighter folks had already deisigned a navalised version of the jet? Is that so?
Greg: If I'm ever cynical about anything, it's defence procurement! And I have a sneaking suspicion that, what with loads of countries paying towards the development costs of the jet, the unit price will strangely end up being too high for anyone but the USA to afford...
-
... as far as im led to understand there were feasibility studies carried out a few years back and again recently (re an Indian Navy requirement) a few drawings of a proposed revised undercarriage arrangement have been posted online from the original study, there was also a neat painting from AVPRO showing a naval Typhoon with arrestor hook and twin nosewheels widely circulated at the time of the go ahead for the new Royal Navy CVF.
From a colleague working on the type, Typhoon itself would have to be redesigned completely to take the stresses of an arrested landing as normal practice. The Dassault Rafale was designed from the outset with a 'keel' giving a very stong longitudinal structure wheras the Typhoon's strength is laterally, and when originally proposed there was no need for a naval mission requirement so was never seen as an issue
Its interesting to note the F.35C has had recent problems re arrested landings, the whole mounting having to be resited aft as the previous position was deemed unsuitable, unfortunately again this will probably encrue further strengthening in the resited area to cope with increased airframe stresses
cheers, Joe
-
Ah, cheers mate - I thought I'd heard about that somewhere - though the article never mentoned 'complete redesign'!
Have to say, the Rafale is a beautiful, highly capable jet - I think it would be an excellent choice for the FAA.
Alternatively, both the Aussies and the Canadians, our Commonwealth partners, and not least the US Forces, use F-18 variants, so would it be better for us to maintain commonality with our 'main allies'?
-
Anything other than a French Rafale is about to become a permanent what-if as the
French government is ready to pull the plug on the production line. Evidently they
are tired of keeping the program going only for Dassault's benefit. So Dassault
better make an overseas sale PDQ.
One wonders if the Rafale is the aviation equivalent of the Citroen DS:
fun to drive
great to look at
technically and technologically advanced
reliable engine
an absolute nightmare to maintain and operate on a regular basis
expensive to own (see above)
;D
-
Yep, the last chance for the Rafale is the current Indian contest. I suspect that it will go th the Typhoon though.
Based upon my own experience (and those of colleagues) I would definitely back up the nightmare to maintain issue too. Not trying to sound anti-French (it is after all, a beautiful design, like many of theirs), but the sustainment support from French companies has left an awful lot to be desired when compared to some of their US competitors.
-
I'd place my money on a russian machine for India. ;)
-
Already rejected. The competition is down to either the Rafale or Typhoon.
-
Just for the fun of it...
(http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2010/304/3/3/u_s_navy_dassault_f_28a_rafale_by_bispro-d31w6rs.jpg)
-
We all know i am very pro F-35 and Greg and I are in the same mode. I am not going to get too "real world" on the F-35 (that's for another for another time) :icon_music:
...But I will say, we need to think "more outside the box!!" We aren't being whiffy enough about this! Stop worrying about more of the same old Super bugs with USAF instead of USN. Lets think "new design" because if the F-35 gets canceled, its need for 21st century missions still exists.
Its going to need to be stealthy and with advanced sensors.
Redoing or rehashing a teen fighter means serious expense and development to the point that you might as well start anew.
(http://26.media.tumblr.com/NAJN8JTZ6meczls1HA2UruzSo1_r1_500.jpg)
(http://www.kempart.com/sgallery/concept/pics/wordup.jpg)
-
Alternatively, both the Aussies and the Canadians, our Commonwealth partners, and not least the US Forces, use F-18 variants, so would it be better for us to maintain commonality with our 'main allies'?
Nope, you should get the best plane regardless of compatibility. Who knows what the world will look like in 20 years? Who your (useful) allies will be? Interoperability might be a consideration, but not a determining factor....
...so for us I'd go for the Typhoon over more Hornets. It's just reaching full development in regards to strike capability, BAe has done a lot of work on a possible carrier variant (again, for when/if the F35 gets cancelled) with increased range and tougher landing gear (good for us), and given Europe's financial woes, we could negotiate a really good price....
BTW, history shows us anything can get cancelled - another financial crash could send the US into a deep depression, or a change in Government (Ron Paul for President?!?!), or really bad publicity (like an F35 falling out of the sky)... anything can happen...!
Paul
-
...so for us I'd go for the Typhoon over more Hornets. It's just reaching full development in regards to strike capability, BAe has done a lot of work on a possible carrier variant (again, for when/if the F35 gets cancelled) with increased range and tougher landing gear (good for us), and given Europe's financial woes, we could negotiate a really good price....
But The Hornet does already have strike capability, carrier capability, and I would hazard a guess and say stronger airframe and landing gear to land on ships in the first place. Not trying to nitpick just pointing out that all the stuff the typhoon might get "someday" the Hornet has already.
BTW the latest defense review in the US are showing even more reliance on the F-35 and selling it to allies. The F-35 is getting more and more bulletproof everyday. just sayin'
-
([url]http://www.kempart.com/sgallery/concept/pics/wordup.jpg[/url])
I'd sure as heck like to have a dozen or so of whatever the heck this thing is in my stash!
-
OH HECK YEAH :-*
-
all the stuff the typhoon might get "someday" the Hornet has already.
I suspect the Typhoon is just (half-a-)generation ahead of the Super Hornet, especially in the air-to-air role - but if I were defence minister I'd want a fly-off between them to actually find out for sure. If there wasn't much in it, sure get the Hornets for compatibility reasons, but if the Typhoon was significantly better as an interceptor/air superiority*, that'd trump it for me.
BTW the latest defense review in the US are showing even more reliance on the F-35 and selling it to allies. The F-35 is getting more and more bulletproof everyday. just sayin'
...and speaking personally, I find that utterly horrifying... (still waiting for the "sparring room" to get going on this ;) !)
Paul
* Ah, now I remember why: The outcome of the JOUST Simulation which compared the effectiveness of different aircraft in BVR combat “against an upgraded Su-27 Flanker (comparable to an Su-35 Super Flanker and its equivalents)” resulted in the Rafale achieving an exchange rate of 1 to 1, the F-22 an exchange rate of 10.1 to 1, the Typhoon had an exchange rate of 4.5 to 1, F-16C Falcon 0.3 to 1, F-15C Eagle 0.8 to 1, F-18C Hornet 0.3 to 1, and the F-18+ Super Hornet 0.4 to 1. So, according to this, the Typhoon is better than the Super Hornet
-
Folks,
I want to keep this discussion civil. Please keep that in mind in your responses. Please also try to avoid simply throwing unsupported opinions. If you don't like the F-35 then fine, just say so - just as I personally don't like the TSR.2 then I also don't expect others to like the F-35.
Most importantly though, focus on providing whiff ideas. Ben has the right idea in this regard.
Regards,
Greg
-
When I started this thread I expected the usual Rafale V Typhoon V Hornet thing.
But nobody has passed comment on the HAL Tejas as an option!!!
The Indian Navy ve4rsin is in flight test, it could be supplied as knockdowns assembled by Bae Systems at warton. The cockpit and weapon systems would be lifted straight off the Typhoon to simplify the technian training and provide some economies of scale in the spares purchase.
Just putting it out there for discussion.
-
OK, this could be interesting.
Typhoon cannot be navalised without several billion appearing out of essentially nowhere.
Tejas is at least a generation behind everything else. It has nearly a whole development programme to go.
Rafale has political strings attached (Dassault).
JSF at this rate will enter service when all our (UK) current naval exchange pilots have retired (or died of old age). Tongue only slightly in cheek.
We could have Super Hornet today with AESA, JHMCS, advanced cockpit, a plethora of targeting pods, Growler, the list goes on. Just like I was explaining the Saudi F-15 buy to a friend the other day: Legacy platform, kickass avionics.
I don't pretend to know what's best for the US, Australia et al but I know which option I'd prefer for the UK. Get SH now. Buy JSF when it's mature (that ain't yet).
All IMVHO.
Whiffy option: Taranis successor.
-
(http://agent44.com/blog2/wp-content/images/stealth_gripen.jpg)
Stealthy Gripen!
There are few things to keep in mind with Legacy platforms:
1. In order to succeed the JSF has to fail. Legacy planes can't win on merit by themselves, they can only win "by default" if the JSF fails. They are not comparable.
2. They will need a huge amount of avionics upgrades. IT will increase their cost, and their weight. They will need all the sensors and datalinks and other gizmos to do what the JSF would have done. This means whatever legacy platform you were looking at will have to have significant upgrades.
3. Lack of stealth. I guess to conquer this you have to redesign the aircraft (again super expensive) but maybe you can at least do some "small changes" that reduce RCS a little.
4. Technology marches on. The F-22 isn't for sale. And if the F-35 was causing you sticker shock the F-22 will make you go blind! In the mean time Russia and China are developing fifth gen aircraft. so whatever legacy machine you upgrade and spend all that money on is still behind the competition in only about ten years. Legacy aircraft are still only going to be place holders until the "JSF II" can be developed.
So whatever Hornet, Typhoon, HAL, You are looking at is going to be in serious need of a new variant as it is to "hold the line" for a small time until the next fifth gen platform is up.
I am saying all this not to be rude but to kinda get the creative juices flowing. Think about the parameters above and see what you can come up with. I think the E/F/A-18Z could look interesting 8)
-
Absolute beauty!!! *respect*
-
(http://www.kempart.com/sgallery/concept/pics/MV-36moneyshot~0.jpg)
-
I've always loved the MV-36 project... I've got several pics on my HD but don't know who did it. Do you know who created it? Was it someone from one of the forums?
-
HAL Tejas as an option
First up I will say that I don't like the Tejas - for multiple reasons - yuck!!!!
Now that's that's out of the way, does anyone actually have a line drawing that could be used for profiles? I know there isn't a kit available, which does surprise me.
Regards,
Greg
-
The MV-36 looks like a ageing middle aged F-22 -i.e. it has developed a serious paunch and added a lot of weight, picked up a few tricks along the way and also changed drastically from the original plan... :D
-
My only acceptable replacement for a F-35:
(http://www.ufo-contact.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/NAVY-UAV.jpeg)
-
With an aircraft that will be used by more than one service it is often difficult to discern who is driving what vehicle. My own solution to the problem would be to add external stores pylons that would be peculiar to that branch of service. In the case of land based air forces using the stores pylons from the F-16 Yard Dart along with the wing mounted fuel tanks that are most often seen on that aircraft. The same approach would be applied for the carrier based aircraft such as those to be used by the Royal Navy, US Marine Corps, and US Navy where the stores pylons and fuel tanks from the F-18 Hornet/Super Hornet would be used.
With that mediocre Panda JSF kit you really need to do something other than straight out of the box. Even the later release with the weapons bays leaves much to be desired. Of course I will also be adding wing tip mounted missile launch rails :^)
-
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Marines Take Delivery of F-35B STOVL
The first two Lockheed Martin production model F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft were delivered to the U.S. Marine Corps on Wednesday, the company announced. The two jets are now assigned to the 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing's Marine Fighter/Attack Training Squadron 501 residing with the host 33d Fighter Wing at Eglin Air Force Base (AFB) in Florida.
The aircraft, known as BF-6 and BF-8, flew separately arriving at 3:13 p.m. and 4:39 p.m. CST, respectively, after their approximate 90 minute ferry flights from Fort Worth, Texas. U.S. Marine Corps Maj. Joseph Bachmann piloted BF-6 while U.S. Marine Corps Lt. Col. Matt Taylor flew BF-8. Both fighters will be used for pilot and maintainer training at the new F-35 Integrated Training Center.
“Today marks the beginning of a new era of advanced capabilities for the U.S. Marine Corps,” said Larry Lawson, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 program executive vice president and general manager. “The F-35B’s versatility, as demonstrated onboard the USS WASP last fall, will revolutionize our nation’s expeditionary combat power in all threat environments by allowing operations from major bases, damaged airstrips, remote locations and a wide range of air-capable ships. This aircraft will give our warfighters the ability to accomplish their mission, wherever and whenever duty calls.”
In October, F-35Bs conducted their first set of ship trials, known as Developmental Test 1, 20 miles off the coast of Wallops Island, Va. During the 19-day testing period, BF-2 and BF-4 conducted 72 vertical landings and short takeoffs, accomplishing all of its test milestones during the mission. For the year, F-35Bs accomplished 333 System Development and Demonstration test flights and 268 vertical landings.
BF-6 and BF-8 are the first two F-35 deliveries to the Department of Defense in 2012 and the seventh and eighth F-35 aircraft delivered to Eglin AFB since July 2011. Previously, six U.S. Air Force F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) jets were delivered to the base.
Source (http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/military/Marines-Take-Delivery-of-F-35B-STOVL_75529.html)
-
does anyone actually have a line drawing that could be used for profiles? I know there isn't a kit available, which does surprise me.
A quick google image search throws up a few
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f5/Tejas_3_view.gif (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f5/Tejas_3_view.gif)
http://www.aviationfans.com/images/flca_vl.jpg (http://www.aviationfans.com/images/flca_vl.jpg)
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/TKXOh695jII/AAAAAAAALT8/GVwA37bPjcc/s1600/lca20tejas20topgunchenar4-726756.jpg (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_o_no4M2xEPY/TKXOh695jII/AAAAAAAALT8/GVwA37bPjcc/s1600/lca20tejas20topgunchenar4-726756.jpg)
Interesting plane. Aesthetically, at least, I do like it - looks like the love child of a Mirage 2000 and and Avro Arrow! Should be pretty zippy!
Paul
-
I'm sure it will be some kind of Flying Frito.
That's what replaced the Farley Fruitbat back in the future.
-
HAL Tejas as an option
First up I will say that I don't like the Tejas - for multiple reasons - yuck!!!!
Tejas was like, you know, MiG-21/F-5 of the 21st Century (it has none of the Fishbed's aesthetic shortcomings, I'll give 'em that; and IAF could have put the danged thing in service as soon as the flight envelop issues are taken care of and still benefit from the improvement over their MiG-21). It does fleet air defence and some surface strike with a couple of anti-ship missiles or (unless the Tejas has some really good iron bomb delivery aid, more likely of the precision kind) bombs. Perfect for a defensive navy like that of India but hardly half of what the Americans want to do with their carrier jets.
-
F-35 is cancelled... order new-build Sopwith Camels made with composites etc. Materials stealth coupled with being too slow for most legacy platforms to engage...
-
Of course I will also be adding wing tip mounted missile launch rails :^)
Well, you'd be better off using the production outboard hardpoints for missiles (as it's intended that way). The wingtips are aerodynamic and not structural given the differences between the three wings (though I understand that the outboard wing tips of the A and B variants are very similar, the C variant wingtips are bigger and longer).
-
There are some interesting things which could be done with the F-16 combined with systems and other developments of the F-35. Start with the more extreme variant that was proposed to the UAE (they went with a rather tamer variant), add the F-35's engine and a production version of the F-35 concept inlet tested on the JIST testbed. Replace the existing Vulcan with the F-35A's gun but retain the larger ammo drum (might as well, be way more expensive to design a smaller one in its place). Replace the Sparrows in the wells with AMRAAMs, or Meteors, and add IR-guided short range missiles of choice. Replace the mechanically-scanned radar with an AESA unit (there are several available, including one that uses the same technology as the F-35's radar). It's not as stealthy unless you use lo weapons pods under the wing (much like those proposed for under the Super Hornet's fuselage) but it's still a decided improvement on what's out there. With that for the land-based aircraft and some of the interesting additions and upgrades proposed for the Super Hornet, you'd retain a fair edge in conflicts. Depending on just how far you wanted to go, there's lots that could also be done, beyond the Silent Eagle, to upgrade the F-15 to continue to fight effectively (F-35 engines, anyone?) including wing changes and inlet upgrades to reduce signature. The F135 engine already builds on the results of the LOAN (Low Observable Axisymmetric Nozzle) experimental program and adding in the vectoring of the AVEN (Axisymmetric Vectoring Exhaust Nozzle) would help there (not as stealthy as the F-22's nozzles but better than most of what's out there - there are some very interesting high-temp L-O finishes out there).
-
But nobody has passed comment on the HAL Tejas as an option!!!
The other obvious one no-one has mentioned - if you can't beat 'em, join 'em and get Flankers! They're rugged and reliable, and remarkably cheap for a big, twin engined plane, so even those of us on a budget could afford lots of them. It has 14 hardpoints to carry a huge load of weapons, lots of range, and is probably more agile than any other fighter on the planet. If you want “commonality” between different roles and forces, it comes in a variety of types including single seat air defence fighter, two-seat multi-role fighter, naval version, two seat dedicated strike jet, and super-agile thrust-vectoring models.
If you can't get a licence to make them yourselves, I'd go for Chinese-made over Russian (who have some, er, quality control issues...), and you could either get just the airframe and engines and put in your own avionics, or just go the whole hog and take them as they are, since most of our electronics come from China anyway...
The other major advantage of getting Flankers is we would then know exactly what potential enemies can do. It creates a level playing field, and given the West is always claiming to have better training and tactics (and I don't doubt it) we'd be pretty secure we'd win any clash.
Paul
-
FLANKER POWAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-16571-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-30.html (http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-16571-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-30.html)
-
But nobody has passed comment on the HAL Tejas as an option!!!
The other obvious one no-one has mentioned - if you can't beat 'em, join 'em and get Flankers! They're rugged and reliable, and remarkably cheap for a big, twin engined plane, so even those of us on a budget could afford lots of them. It has 14 hardpoints to carry a huge load of weapons, lots of range, and is probably more agile than any other fighter on the planet. If you want “commonality” between different roles and forces, it comes in a variety of types including single seat air defence fighter, two-seat multi-role fighter, naval version, two seat dedicated strike jet, and super-agile thrust-vectoring models.
If you can't get a licence to make them yourselves, I'd go for Chinese-made over Russian (who have some, er, quality control issues...), and you could either get just the airframe and engines and put in your own avionics, or just go the whole hog and take them as they are, since most of our electronics come from China anyway...
The other major advantage of getting Flankers is we would then know exactly what potential enemies can do. It creates a level playing field, and given the West is always claiming to have better training and tactics (and I don't doubt it) we'd be pretty secure we'd win any clash.
Paul
Again (and I'm a Flanker fan,) Cheap is a relative term you need to add a lot of avionics and equipment. the JSF sensor suite is nothing to sneeze at.
Air to Air is not what worries me, its integrated air defenses. Duke Cunningham, the USN's only Ace in Vietnam was downed by a SAM after getting his fifth kill. The Majority of American Aircraft from Nam to today have been downed by stuff "fired up" from the ground. You can win clashes and still take serious losses. 1/4 of all Vietnam missions from about 1970 onwards were SEAD. Still lost scores of machines. Great pilots can fall to SAMs and triple A (and many have)
I love Flankers but even the Russians see the need to replace them, hence the T-50. I like the thought though, even if I disagree with the logic behind it ;)
-
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/695515/posts (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/695515/posts)
Article by retired Navy Admiral and Grumman Exec about Americanizing the Flanker. Its the "dry version" no pretty pictures but a fun read :)
-
What gets ordered when (if) F-35 is cancelled? The F-15 Active II, of course! >:D
(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/WhIf/F-15Active.png)
None of that promotional "Silent" Eagle mumbo-jumbo. To paraphrase Thomas Conolly: Senator, there is not enough RAM in all of Christendom to make the Eagle stealthy!
I thought the M61 Vulcan could be moved to the aircraft's belly, with parts of the gun faired-in much like the F-4E's six-shooter. It'd loose a little ammo drum capacity in the process, though.
-
No, but there's some design approaches you can take to reduce the signature much like the Super Hornet inlets have rather lower signatures than the basic Hornet inlets and, in the process, incorporate some changes that reduce the airframe signature further. Really reducing the inlet signature require a redesign to be more like the F-22 or T-50 inlets but there's still a fair bit that can be done with the existing inlets. Given how the F-15 wing attaches, you've also got room for design there. I'm not sure if going to 2-D vectoring nozzles is worth the cost difference between those and incorporating nozzles to the existing engines that embody the results of the LOAN and AVEN programs (the F-35's engine, for example, definitely incorporates aspects of the LOAN program).
-
Hi folks,
Would everyone be happy if we merge this thread with the "F-35 Ideas and Inspiration" (http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=273.0) one? PM me if need be so as to avoid clogging up this discussion - unless I receive negative replies, I will assume it is approved.
Kind Regards,
Greg
-
A photo to salute the story above about the USMC getting their first F-35Bs:
(http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/1171/11p00639131.jpg) (http://www.marines.mil/unit/hqmc/PublishingImages/2011/11P00639_13%5B1%5D.jpg)
Click on the pic for a hi-Rez version.
Regards,
Greg
-
([url]http://www.fas.org/man//dod-101/sys/ac/jsf-rn.jpg[/url])
Now that is sexy! >:(
-
Something done by someone ages ago:
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn308/Kypchakturk/f35ehb2.jpg)
-
Yes, maybe laws of aerodynamics left little room for variations, but it's hard for a new comer to come up with a F135-class turbofan in the first few tries. So what do you do? Make it twin-engined of course. ;)
Where I found the pic. (http://www.china-defense.com/smf/index.php?topic=5390.msg172796#msg172796)
-
Air to Air is not what worries me ...The Majority of American Aircraft from Nam to today have been downed by stuff "fired up" from the ground.
Well that all depends on whether you want an Air Force to defend your homeland, or to bomb the crap out of other people's homelands :)
If the former, Air to Air is paramount, if the latter, then yeah you have to worry about "stuff fired up from the ground".....
Paul
-
Paul, that's one of the useful aspects of the all-aspects vision of the F-35's DAS, your sensors are scanning the full volume around the aircraft for things coming up from the ground or elsewhere. Combine that with the "Pilot's Associate" to help manage the workload for the pilot (think of it as a very early R2 approximation) and you've got a very effective aircraft.
-
A couple of simple ideas:
- Iranian F-35...especially if the Shah never fell
- German F-35...maybe the Typhoon program totally collapsed in the '90s
- RAF F-35B...the perfect Harrier replacement ...especially if done up in a camouflage scheme for FOB ops
- Swedish F-35...maybe after the collapse of Saab, the aircraft is purchased...any excuse to see a F-35 on Swedish Splinter scheme
- Spanish F-35B...Harrier replacement...one I expect we will see for real in coming years
- Swiss F-35B...perfect for fighting from those caves...
- Venezuelan F-35...maybe in another Universe...
Regards,
Greg
-
Whoa! That F-22/F-35 hybrid is interesting!
-
This thread was started after I read an article in the January issue of Air International about the US and its slight budget problem.
The article referred to the KC-X, LAS and F-35 programmes, and the degree of risk that each is under.
The highlights are as follows: (some of you may well now all this already, so sorry if I am boring you)
Budget cuts of $1.2 Trillion from Jan 2013, half of this from the defence budget.
USAF COS General Norton Schwartz priorities are KC-X and F-35, not LAS.
KC-X
Boeing has stated that it will exceed the cost ceiling by $500 Million. They will have to absorb this as it is a fixed price contract ($4.8 Billion).
There are no technical problems with the aircraft and Boeing say they are on track to assemble 7 aircraft in 2015, 12 in 2016 and 15 a year thereafter.
F-35
The 33rd Fighter Wing at Eglin AFB was supposed to have started training flight and ground crews in November 2009, this has still not started. They received their first aircraft July 2011 (08-0747). By mid October they had half a dozen aircraft, the 6th being 08-0751. However, they haven’t flown a single sortie as the Air Force Test and Evaluation boss has decreed only test pilots are allowed to fly the aircraft. Thus 08-0746, 08-0748, 08-0749 and 08-0750 are not expected to fly for another year.
Air Force ground crew are not allowed to touch the aircraft, but they can watch civilian contractors.
The 33rd were supposed to get 107 aircraft, but are now getting 59 due to noise concerns!! The F-35A is 9 db louder than an F-15 on mil T/O power, or twice as loud.
The Programme was estimated to cost $276 Billion, now it is projected to cost $623 Billion. It is the most expensive American weapon system of all time. The average cost per aircraft was $82 Million is now $95 Million, and some say it will eventually reach $195 Million or more.
In 2010 Robert Gates fired the programme manager and said that he would with-hold a $614 Million payment to Lockheed Martin. However, once the fuss had died down, no one told the Pentagon not to pay the money.
The F-35B is in greatest jeopardy as Schwartz would let it die to save the A model.
LAS
LAS is in disarray after USAF disqualified the AT-6 Texan II. Hawker Beechcraft has made 2 attempts to find out why, no response from the Air Force. The rival team of Sierra Nevada and Embraer say that they have not been informed of the program’s status.
The programme is for 20 aircraft for the Afghan Air Force to be delivered this year. The USAF hopped to obtain 100 aircraft for use by USAF Special Ops. A $17 Million request to evaluate the Super Tucano in-theatre by US Central Command (under Combat Dragon II) was rejected by lawmakers. There is also no funding to continue the AT-6 flight trials.
-
Folks,
I have merged the "what gets ordered if the F-35 gets cancelled" topic into this one. If anyone finds the ordering of the replies a little confusing, that is why.
Regards,
Greg
-
A comparison between the X-35 and the F-35 from CodeOne Magazine:
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/01_XtoF_Front_1267828237_3499.jpg)
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/02_XtoF_side_1267828237_8155.jpg)
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/03_XtoF_Top_1267828237_6635.jpg)
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/04_XtoF_Bottom_1267828237_8824.jpg)
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/05_XtoF_Back_1267828237_6057.jpg)
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/06_XtoF_cockpit_1267828237_1051.jpg)
Regards,
Greg
-
(http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/3142/f35c.jpg)
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5289/5213252636_0b71194168.jpg)
(http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/839/28067.jpg)
(http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/07/14/F35abc.JPG)
All three variants^ (So far ;) )
-
I like the Super- F-35 with twin engines.
-
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/2011_Spotlight_F35_P38_BD7_2997Xf_1267828237_4715.jpg)
(http://sobchak.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/lightnings.jpg)
-
Scan of a poster I actually have on my office wall at work:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/ALT%20RAN%20FAA/page0000025_4.jpg)
-
F-35 First Night Flight (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-hqmeXxu5E#ws)
-
External Weapons trials (Better Pictures):
(http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/11/5/5b769d91-7281-47da-85ac-bbd5fc63217b.Full.jpg)
(http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/1/7/419ca751-ff55-4044-871b-daa387107b10.Full.jpg)
-
Assembling a F-35...a tad more than glue required (and this doesn't even cover all the subcontractor work that is needed beforehand):
Production F-35 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qvWkdZ2jso#ws)
regards,
Greg
-
One day...maybe:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/image010.jpg)
-
More external weapons trials, this time with the Bravo (note the external gun pod):
(http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/20120222_O_GR159_001.jpg)
(http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/20120222_O_GR159_002.jpg)
-
Nice to see hangy things breaking up the outline. The pod is certainly an odd looking beast. I'm quite surprised as to how big the pylons are in comparison to the wings.
Thanks for sharing.
Regards,
John
-
That pic of the F-35 with AIM-9X and black tails with red lightning bolt - damn, from some angles it's a really sexy beast! :-*
Wow, just noticed how much an outward slant there is to the AIM-9 pylon and launcher! :icon_surprised:
-
Anyone with a set of conformal fuel tanks for the F-16? How about performing a check-fit to see what they would look like attached to the F-35.
-
View showing some of the details of the F-35B lift system:
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7021/6831892599_a431dd5871_b.jpg) (http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7021/6831892599_1f971a45f4_o.jpg)
Click on image for High Res version.
Regards,
Greg
-
Maybe one day:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/Picture1.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/Picture2.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/Picture3.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/Picture4.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/Picture5.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/Picture6.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/Picture7.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/Picture8.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/CAC23/Picture9.jpg)
-
You have to admit, it does look GOOD in those colors!
I'll bite, is the "5" supposed to be viewed while the plane is inverted or did the guy goof?
-
Tejas was like, you know, MiG-21/F-5 of the 21st Century (it has none of the Fishbed's aesthetic shortcomings.....
I don't have any real opinions on the F-35, but you did not say that about the MiG-21, did you?
I'll grant you that she lost a bit in the looks department in later versions, but you can't say she didn't have looks early on:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e59/cancze/Kunovice%20air%20museum/2008_0802Kunovice0339.jpg)
:-*
As for the Tejas, I always saw it as a bit of an unispired bash of F-16XL and Legacy Hornet features.
-
Blue Angels AND Thunderbirds version:
http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5700_F-35_Petrie/00.shtm (http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5700_F-35_Petrie/00.shtm)
Alvis 3.1
-
I don't have any real opinions on the F-35, but you did not say that about the MiG-21, did you?
I'll grant you that she lost a bit in the looks department in later versions, but you can't say she didn't have looks early on......
As for the Tejas, I always saw it as a bit of an unispired bash of F-16XL and Legacy Hornet features.
We're gonna have to agree to disagree here since to me only the tailless delta wing planform (used by the Analog-144) or significant relocation of air intake (used by Ye-8, some proposed model of J-7, and forerunners of FC-1) fixed the look. 8)
-
Blue Angels AND Thunderbirds version:
[url]http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5700_F-35_Petrie/00.shtm[/url] ([url]http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5700_F-35_Petrie/00.shtm[/url])
Alvis 3.1
Alvis, this is completely awesome!!! :-*
-
Blue Angels AND Thunderbirds version:
[url]http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5700_F-35_Petrie/00.shtm[/url] ([url]http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal6/5601-5700/gal5700_F-35_Petrie/00.shtm[/url])
Alvis 3.1
Alvis, this is completely awesome!!! :-*
Ditto
-
This story has just appeared on google news--- :o
http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/jets+purchase+guaranteed+Fantino/6294963/story.html (http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/jets+purchase+guaranteed+Fantino/6294963/story.html)
-
The F-35: The most maligned and disliked plane since, well, I can't remember when!
Despite all the issues surrounding it, I actually like the looks of it.
Alvis 3.1
-
I'm still very much a fan of the type. When the kits of production B models finally hit shelves, I'll be there.
-
I've said before that I think it's a really neat looking plane, just waiting for some good representatives of it to appear in 1/72 scale, even though I do have a couple of the Italeri rendition of it (which have a lot of work to correct it)
-
JSF with JSM ...
http://aviationweek.typepad.com/ares/2007/04/restoring_trini.html (http://aviationweek.typepad.com/ares/2007/04/restoring_trini.html)
-
Yes, the JSM is one of the few weapons which is purpose designed with the F-35 in mind. I have seen some mockups - will try and find the photos. By all accounts it looks very promising and I hope to see it do well.
-
just some cool photos:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/F-35LightningIIJointStrikeFighter2.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/5998327047_13e6ed5063_o.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/6726150329_6bacb85f68_o.jpg)
-
First pic in the last set looks pretty much like CGI to me, not a real photo... ???
-
Some profiles done for me a while back:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/ca15/RAAFF-35A3_03.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/ca15/f-35a_34.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/ca15/f-35a_35.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/ca15/f-35a_36.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/ca15/RAAFF-35A3.jpg)
The last one is one my office wall at work!
-
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-yMQ4LhKMn-A/T2Mc31A6_7I/AAAAAAAAFYQ/Sd0rMt9GiTE/s1600/F-35.jpg)
-
Well that's different.
-
First pic in the last set looks pretty much like CGI to me, not a real photo... ???
Maybe...maybe not. Either way, I love the dark grey look.
-
([url]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-yMQ4LhKMn-A/T2Mc31A6_7I/AAAAAAAAFYQ/Sd0rMt9GiTE/s1600/F-35.jpg[/url])
Clearly the long-range ferry configuration. With a spot of work, you could also add dual-mode (both flying boom and probe and drogue) inflight refueling. The F-35A has the 'real estate" for the probe kept clear to keep a common systems configuration across all the variants.
-
I think Stargazer is right... the shadows from the antenna on the spine and the port V-stab don't originate at the structures. It's like the shadow-model is based on an older exterior model or a more primitive version, it's something you see in FlightSim all the time.
Still, a cool shot.
-
Note the roundel:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/assets_c/2012/04/F12-16157-155123.html (http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/assets_c/2012/04/F12-16157-155123.html)
-
Note the roundel:
[url]http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/assets_c/2012/04/F12-16157-155123.html[/url] ([url]http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/assets_c/2012/04/F12-16157-155123.html[/url])
Pretty.
But what is that? British? Greek? Italian? Peruvian?
They need to keep the pink & powder blue roundels/flash!
-
Note the roundel:
[url]http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/assets_c/2012/04/F12-16157-155123.html[/url] ([url]http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/assets_c/2012/04/F12-16157-155123.html[/url])
Pretty.
But what is that? British? Greek? Italian? Peruvian?
They need to keep the pink & powder blue roundels/flash!
It is the first UK F-35.
-
It is the first UK F-35.
I thought the Brits cancelled their order Greg
-
It is the first UK F-35.
I thought the Brits cancelled their order Greg
Nope. In fact what they have recently done is go from the F-35B (STOVL) version to the F-35C (Carrier) and then back again to the F-35B. They are still in there though.
-
(http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/j18.jpg)
;D
-
not a whif, taiidantomcat ....... the Chinese KGB are outside your door right now :) ;D
-
;D
-
(http://kennwith2nz.com/images/gallery-art-01-(c)-kennwhite.gif)
http://kennwith2nz.com/gallery-01.html (http://kennwith2nz.com/gallery-01.html)
So pretty :-*
-
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/Artic/136086_1.jpg)
-
(http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/5023fa48eab8ea2a2e000000/f-35-b-lightening-bomb-drop.jpg) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbSinROAtHI)
-
(http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/rnlaf_f35_solo_display_2.png)
-
Any plans for a trainer version?
-
In the real world? No. In the whiff verse...well...
-
Whoa!! On the Netherlands bird!!! :-*
(http://www.aerotechnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/LM-UK-F35.jpg)
-
Any plans for a trainer version?
Not that anyone will admit, though LMAero-Fort Worth's AD group has some concepts (I've seen a rendering of one). At the present time, though, the plan is to use the full networking capabilities of the single-seater to effect training in conjunction with simulators. If they did do a two-seater, it would require a change out of the forward section. The most interesting question would be whether they would keep the forward hinged canopy (which would be a bit of a chore to wrestle with for a two-seater) or go with an alternate approach.
-
(http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/aero/photos/aero-home/aerohome_6.jpg)
:-*
-
Nice - strong possibility that South Korean ones will be the next to become reality... ;)
Anyway, here is another nice (IMHO anyway) shot of the F-35. I really like the dark look.
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8004/7552624006_3f83928e87_b.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedmartin/7552624006/sizes/o/in/photostream/)
Click on picture to go to larger version.
-
A different sort of stores configuration for the F-35:
(http://i619.photobucket.com/albums/tt271/SpudmanWP/f-35_VRC-droptest.jpg)
-
Denmark’s Terma is showing off, for the first time here at the show, the multi-mission pod (MMP) it has developed for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The MMP began life as the gun pod for the F-35, which Terma designed and developed on behalf of General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products, but the company has developed it into a more versatile pod that should prove attractive, in particular, to overseas operators of the JSF.
(http://i.imgur.com/S9z7o.jpg)
Hmmm...possibilities - I can't wait to see if these are in the new Kittyhawk kit.
-
Britmodeller has a REVIEW (http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=234924464) of the Kitty Hawk F-35B. No gun pod, I'm afraid.
-
Bugger!!!
-
Maybe something for the future:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/jsf-laser.jpg)
-
Apparently you are not supposed to hot-link images from F-16.net :)
-
Apparently you are not supposed to hot-link images from F-16.net :)
Doh!!! Fixed! :-[
-
Annoy everyone: Sand the Kitty Hawk kit smooth and paint it with all its plywood panels in clear varnish. Install analogue guages.
-
A different sort of stores configuration for the F-35:
([url]http://i619.photobucket.com/albums/tt271/SpudmanWP/f-35_VRC-droptest.jpg[/url])
Nice colour scheme. Is a pale pink or powder blue variant also available?
-
::chuckle:: That's just unpainted structure there. The general finish of the panels is that color. As the aircraft is constructed it makes an interesting contrast with this assemblies that arrive pre-colored. It is also clearly not a fully mission equipped airframe; between the "boomed" nose and the blank panels where the DAS windows would be in a fully fitted out aircraft.
-
(http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7037/6982681131_4121f91476.jpg)
-
([url]http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7037/6982681131_4121f91476.jpg[/url])
Funny. A nice cross between Disney Pixar and Hank Caruso.
-
(http://community.warplanes.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/jsf-f-35.jpg)
-
Ok, so it is only a full-scale model built by Lockheed Martin to measure the antenna performance of the F-35 Lightning II....still, it does have cool markings:
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/08_F35_PoleTest_UpsideDown_W_1267828237_8547.jpg)
-
Even with Full scale models the Jolly Rogers are done to death ;D
-
Even with Full scale models the Jolly Rogers are done to death ;D
Bwahahahaha! (http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m309/ChernayaAkula/Emoticons/hammer.gif)
-
(http://nickdwyer.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/f-35xl2.jpg?w=717&h=510)
-
:-\
-
I LIKE that twin engine !!
-
(http://aviation-art.net/Gallery2012/F-35C.jpg)
-
Yeah! Very nice! :)
More Reapers, less Rogers! ;D
-
DreamModel —— 1:48th scale replacement/substitute photo-etch brass exhaust nozzles for the F-35A/B/C
Apparently a very recent arrival to the aftermarket/accessory producers. Available only by eMail correspondence via a gMail and Yahoo address. The two products they currently offer are both for the F-35 engine exhaust as direct replacement photo-etch brass for the plastic part included in the kit.
See this link for images of the two parts and other details in the ARC Forums: ------> DreamModel —— 1:48th scale replacement/substitute photo-etch brass exhaust nozzles for the F-35A/B/C (http://s362974870.onlinehome.us/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=257422)
-
Very nice...if a little dangerous looking. Might order some...may not all make it onto F-35s though. ;)
-
Very nice...if a little dangerous looking. Might order some...may not all make it onto F-35s though. ;)
Thanks to Moritz for providing a link to the actual web page for this company. Navigate at your own risk as it has no options other than Chinese by which to browse.
They do have a website (LINK ([url]http://www.dreammodel.com.cn/[/url])), but it's rather clumsy to navigate and kinda incomplete (or I just haven't found the right buttons on their page).
You can get their stuff on eBay, too.
-
I get virus warnings with that website, so be careful.
-
Yeah, working with that part means the Modeling Gods will demand a blood sacrifice...
-
Most definitely... ;D
-
Seriously, that part looks like, with a little reinforcement, I could replace the strike-bezel on a SureFire flashlight with it and have a lethal weapon... I think I felt every orifice puckering and most muscles trying to contract on themselves at first sight.
-
([url]http://nickdwyer.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/f-35xl2.jpg?w=717&h=510[/url])
Nice, 'cept the engines are too big. Using two F135s would give you more power than the F-22 has. I'm thinking the J-31 has the right of it with two F414-size engines.
-
Nice, 'cept the engines are too big. Using two F135s would give you more power than the F-22 has.
You say that like it's a BAD thing, LOL... unless it's more power than the structure can take. (Like I said elsewhere, my idea of "enough power" is being able to accelerate straight up, fully loaded. LOL :D )
-
Well, it's more like it's going to make certain problematic systems on the current aircraft (yes, they are being dealt with, but...) more problematic. The other aspect is simply that to fit two engines the size of the F135 with decent aerodynamics and other considerations gives you an aircraft that's once again the size and weight of the F-22. The F-35 is intended as a mid-size fighter, not a heavy fighter. Mind you, a new heavy fighter combining the best of the F-22 and F-35 would be a very dangerous beast indeed; might be interesting to see what might happen if a "scrapped" F-22 was salvaged and a whole lot of upgrades from the F-35, and various other aircraft, were added.
-
That PE Nozzle is unreal :-* Great find!
-
An F-35C painted for its future assignment to US Navy Fighter Attack Squadron 101 (VFA-101) at Eglin AFB, Florida, is shown in the paint facility at the Lockheed Martin facility in Fort Worth, Texas, on 7 January 2013. The original Fighter Squadron 101 (VF-101), nicknamed Grim Reapers, was established 1 May 1952 and flew various fighter aircraft including the F-4 Phantom and F-14 Tomcat. VF-101 was disestablished in 2005. To support the Navy version of the F-35, VFA-101 was reestablished in May 2012 at a new hangar and training facility at Eglin. The unit will serve as the Fleet Replacement Squadron, training Navy Lightning II aviators and maintainers. This aircraft (Bureau Number 168733) is scheduled for delivery later his year.
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/news/2013_CF6_Paint_00392PR_1269967624_4482.jpg)
-
That looks very much like LM-Aero's Fort Worth facility. I believe I've read elsewhere that this aircraft is C/N CF-06 which would make it one of the first LRIP "C" models.
-
2012 F-35 Year in Review (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts8Q6LwDMcs#ws)
From Naval Air Systems Command.
Just meant to show the aircraft in operation (pictures don't do any aircraft enough justice) If you don't like the F-35 or don't want to hear anything positive about it, mute the video or plunge your fingers into your ears and hum real loud. :)
-
An F-35C painted for its future assignment to US Navy Fighter Attack Squadron 101 (VFA-101) at Eglin AFB, Florida, is shown in the paint facility at the Lockheed Martin facility in Fort Worth, Texas, on 7 January 2013. The original Fighter Squadron 101 (VF-101), nicknamed Grim Reapers, was established 1 May 1952 and flew various fighter aircraft including the F-4 Phantom and F-14 Tomcat. VF-101 was disestablished in 2005. To support the Navy version of the F-35, VFA-101 was reestablished in May 2012 at a new hangar and training facility at Eglin. The unit will serve as the Fleet Replacement Squadron, training Navy Lightning II aviators and maintainers. This aircraft (Bureau Number 168733) is scheduled for delivery later his year.
([url]http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/news/2013_CF6_Paint_00392PR_1269967624_4482.jpg[/url])
Is that picture distorted or is it really that stubby/tubby?
-
I think perspective is distorting it a bit, it's not that stubby when seen in RL.
-
She's not stubby/tubby, she's full figured! ;) looking forward to the first time I get to see one of these in person.
-
Cheap wide angle lens?
-
(http://www.igorstshirts.com/blog/conceptrobots/ben_procter_15.jpg)
-
Looks like I'll get to see one of these for real in March down at USMC Yuma
-
Its not tubby...its pugnacious. ;)
-
Looks like I'll get to see one of these for real in March down at USMC Yuma
They really are amazing in the metal(composite)! Enjoy it!
-
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/news/2013_F35C_Refuel_P00022_11_1269967624_6321.jpg)
Something cooly bizarre about a half century old propeller plane refueling 21st century stealth jets.
-
(http://www.eglin.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/2013/01/121015-f-zz999-448.jpg)
Clean and new
-
Photograph or CGI?
-
Why on Earth didn't they make those panel lines the same color as the rest of the airframe? Yick!!!! Is it "too stealthy" to paint?
-
Is there some technical reason those panel(?) lines are painted(?) in a lighter colour that makes it all stick out so?
Kinda gives it an unfinished appearance.
Last two pictures, great shots, it looks super. The fully side-on view, yeah... looks like it got scrunched up a bit.
-
I'd say that, if real, those two aircraft have been photographed prior to paint, with just the basic markings appliques in place for the initial flight testing. That doesn't look that different from a pre-painting F-16.
-
But how about that side view of the C?
-
Photograph or CGI?
Its credited to the USAF at Eglin, but its just unreally sharp!!
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/20130108_F35A_Edwards_SM_1267828237_9916.jpg)
Something different! Parachute attached at Edwards AFB for high AoA testing
:)
-
But how about that side view of the C?
Most of the differences I see there are due to parts being painted at the component level and the mixes not matching exactly and the different reflective properties of some seals. I notice that the pic of the two C-models refueling from a KC-130 doesn't show any of that.
Further note, as far as I can tell, the panel lines you're seeing are outlines of removable or open-able panels and I'm thinking that the sealant tape over the edges shows a bit different light reflective properties. At least, that's my best guess. Heck of a note when I can still identify most of the panels and some of the visible equipment fit on the forward fuselage, even though it's been nearly five years since I left LM-Aero.
-
Another paint question; these are supposed be USN and USMC birds, so where are the USN and USMC colors?! They look more USAF than anything else with that dark gray. Where are the Ghosts and Light and Medium Gray Blues?
-
Honestly? I have no idea what the markings intentions are for these, though I expect they are reasonably standardized across the fleet because some prior finished components are installed in all variants of the aircraft.
-
Another paint question; these are supposed be USN and USMC birds, so where are the USN and USMC colors?! They look more USAF than anything else with that dark gray. Where are the Ghosts and Light and Medium Gray Blues?
(http://dmn.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/VMA-211-Harrier-01.jpg)
Marines have been going dark on the attack aircraft anyway.
-
First F-35A four-ship flies over Eglin (http://www.eglin.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123335153)
Photos - warning Hi Rez
http://www.eglin.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/2013/02/130201-F-zz999-804.JPG (http://www.eglin.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/2013/02/130201-F-zz999-804.JPG)
http://www.eglin.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/2013/02/130201-F-zz999-805.JPG (http://www.eglin.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/2013/02/130201-F-zz999-805.JPG)
-
Countdown to first claim of Photochop has started ...
10-9-8-7 ...
:-X :-\
-
;D
-
(http://www.flightglobal.com/Assets/GetAsset.aspx?ItemID=49485)
(http://www.flightglobal.com/Assets/GetAsset.aspx?ItemID=49490)
Some sharp images
-
Does anyone know if you can get any 1/350 F-35Bs yet. I could use a couple.
-
Does anyone know if you can get any 1/350 F-35Bs yet. I could use a couple hundred.
;D
-
Well, that proves there is a market... ;)
-
(http://www.fas.org/man//dod-101/sys/ac/jsf200.jpg)
(http://www.fas.org/man//dod-101/sys/ac/jsf200b.jpg)
(http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2012/160/7/1/the_modern_ninja_hinja___lm_f_35_jsf_for_japan_by_ghufranali-d52u5d9.jpg)
-
Oh, I do like the Japanese one.
-
Oh, I do like the Japanese one.
Same here, it looks right, as would a JMSDF F-35B over a ski jump equiped DDH-22 8)
-
Some info on the F-35 Cannon Pod (click on the pretty picture to go to the presentation):
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/A9RsgHxJq_zps65a34ebb.jpg) (http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2010armament/TuesdayLandmarkADouglasParker.pdf)
-
LOVE the teeth on the pod! :icon_ninja:
-
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tr8PnTc_Bk4/UPd4Xz90w3I/AAAAAAAAAiE/a1T3_DinCcc/s1600/F35+AOA.jpg)
(http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8218/8368832656_68bb49da76_k.jpg)
AoA
-
F-35B at Yuma 2013 Airshow. The show announcer said that a forth F-35B was to be delivered to Yuma in the next week or so.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa263/kitnut617/Yuma%20Airshow%202013/Yuma2013028_zps97b3a81a.jpg)
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa263/kitnut617/Yuma%20Airshow%202013/Yuma2013029_zpsa93c521e.jpg)
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa263/kitnut617/Yuma%20Airshow%202013/Yuma2013032_zps6dd053e5.jpg)
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa263/kitnut617/Yuma%20Airshow%202013/Yuma2013027_zps2414a3a2.jpg)
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa263/kitnut617/Yuma%20Airshow%202013/Yuma2013051_zpsbd9a9b52.jpg)
-
Some detail shots:
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa263/kitnut617/Yuma%20Airshow%202013/Yuma2013030_zps9318c889.jpg)
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa263/kitnut617/Yuma%20Airshow%202013/Yuma2013033_zps253a31d1.jpg)
-
:)
-
From new brochure promoting the F-35 for Canada:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/photo_zps0fe5a31f.jpg)
-
I was just thinking. We're leaving someone out. The USAF, USN AND USMC are all getting F-35s. But what about the US Army. We talk about Harriers and A-4s etc for the US Army in the whiff verse, but what about the F-35??
-
For the US, Lightning II makes sense (P-38; but that's also why I think if it can't be F-24, it should be F-38). For the UK, Lightning makes sense (EE/BAC Lightning). Canada never had anything called Lightning - so why Lightning II?
-
so why Lightning II?
Err...because that's the name of the plane? I'm sure if Canadians want they can call it something else once its in service.
-
One thing I could see Canada, and some other countries who use probe and drogue refueling, do is add in, for a certain cost and weight penalty, that refueling capability, too. The layout of the F-35A leaves that area clear for maximum commonality and it would be possible to fit the retractable probe in addition to the flying boom receptacle.
-
Well, at least the Israelis seem to be happy with the F-35:
Times of Israel: Jet’s name is just plane ‘Awesome’ - LINK (http://www.timesofisrael.com/jets-name-is-just-plane-awesome/)
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is not only one of the most advanced fighter jets in the world — it now has a Hebrew name, and it’s literally awesome.
On Wednesday, the Israeli Air Force christened the plane Adir, which in modern Hebrew denotes awesomeness, radness and all-around cool (the dictionary definition is a bit more sober).
;D
-
Some interesting reading on potential exports from Wikipedia:
Belgium - In 2009 Belgium suggested that they might buy some F-35s in the 2020s.[177]
Brazil - The Brazilian Air Force recently has added the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to the list of aircraft under consideration for its relaunched new fighter procurement, called F-X2. The F-35 replaces the F-16, which was in contention for the previous F-X BR program, shelved in 2003 and finally abandoned in 2006.[178][179][180] Lockheed Martin did not offer the F-35 and instead bid the F-16BR in 2008.[181]
Finland - The Finnish Air Force has expressed its interest in the F-35, and other "advanced aircraft", as the replacement for its F-18C Hornets. An eventual purchase decision would be taken around 2015.[182]
Greece - Lockheed Martin is offering the F-35 to Greece's Hellenic Air Force as a replacement for F-4E Peace Icarus 2000 and F-16C/D Block 30 aircraft.[183]
Republic of China - Taiwan has requested to buy the F-35 from the US. However this has been rejected by the US in fear of a critical response from China. In March 2009 Taiwan again was looking to buy U.S. fifth-generation fighter jets featuring stealth and vertical takeoff capabilities.[184] However, in September 2011, during a visit to the US, the Deputy Minister of National Defense of Taiwan, confirmed that while the country was busy upgrading its current F-16s it was still also looking to procure a next-generation aircraft such as the F-35. This received the usual critical response from China.[185]
Romania - The Romanian Ministry of Defense has expressed interest in buying the F-35 for its air force sometime after 2020.[186]
South Korea - South Korea is considering the F-35 amongst several other competitors for the third stage of its F-X program.[187][188] South Korean officials have said that the F-35 would only be available after 2018, but Steve O'Bryan, Lockheed's vice president for F-35 business development has said that Lockheed can deliver the F-35 to South Korea by 2016.[189][dead link] Some South Korean Air Force officers have considered possible missions for the stealth fighter such as surprise raids deep into nuclear armed North Korea.[190] Lockheed has refused to allow South Korean pilots access to the aircraft to test it prior to the selection.[191] However the simulation tests to be used are more extensive that the processes used by other customers such as Israel and Japan.[192]
Spain - The Spanish Navy ship Juan Carlos I (L61) is adapted to carry JSF and AV-8B Harrier.[193] JSF Program Executive Officer, Air Force Major General Charles Davis, said in 2008 that discussions had been held with Spain, which could eventually lead to the F-35B replacing the Spanish Navy’s EAV-8B Harrier fleet.[194]
UAE - The United Arab Emirates has requested information about a possible sale of F-35s, however the United States has delayed for months on the response.[195][196]
Saudi Arabia - The Saudi Defence Ministry is said to be keeping all the options open to buy more fighter jets, including notably the Boeing F-15 Silent Eagle and the Lockheed Martin F-35 JSF (Joint Strike Fighter).[197]
Now whilst some of these are very likely (e.g. Sth Korea), others are less so (e.g. Greece). Either way, it certainly provides some whiff potential...I for one am very tempted to do a Romanian, UAE or Saudi F-35A and/or a Spanish F-35B.
-
Classic from Clave:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/photo_zpsd33ce932.jpg)
-
that suggests the possibility of the Thunderbirds and the Blue Angels flying the same aircraft. That could get most interesting.
-
1/72 F-35A United States Armed Forces
Air Demonstration Composite Unit
In the 2020s, severe economic issues both at home and abroad caused some extreme measures to be undertaken by US military organizations. Two such units where the US Air Force and the US Navy Blue Angels Aerial Demonstration Squadrons. Since the F-22 had turned out to far too expensive to purchase for the Thunderbirds, the USAF turned to the hot new jet, the F-35, which was already under evaluation by the US Navy as well. However, restrictions on the overall numbers was pushing both groups to very small teams of perhaps 2 or 3 aircraft. In the midst of this dilemma, a nameless accountant at the GAO (General Accounting Office) came up with the perfect solution:
(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/BlueAngel1_zps3014a613.jpg) (http://s54.photobucket.com/user/Alvis3_1/media/BlueAngel1_zps3014a613.jpg.html)
(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/ThunderBirds1_zps60261929.jpg) (http://s54.photobucket.com/user/Alvis3_1/media/ThunderBirds1_zps60261929.jpg.html)
Amalgamate the two teams!
It was said you could hear the screaming from orbit once this idea got out. "It will never work" screamed the brass. "We can't train the same way" said the pilots. "What are THOSE wrenches for?" asked the airframe techs. "How do we do the paperwork?" cried the paperpushers. "I'm not wearing THAT #$@!*&% uniform!!!" said more than one Navy pilot. But, in the end, the teams were forced together, and in the spirit of traditional shotgun weddings, the new team, the "Thunder-Angels" (or "Blue-Birds" if seen from below) was based in Arkansas!
(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/TopTop_zps4b5b5544.jpg) (http://s54.photobucket.com/user/Alvis3_1/media/TopTop_zps4b5b5544.jpg.html)
(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/FrontOn_zps4ed0ec75.jpg) (http://s54.photobucket.com/user/Alvis3_1/media/FrontOn_zps4ed0ec75.jpg.html)
(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/TopFront_zps882ef823.jpg) (http://s54.photobucket.com/user/Alvis3_1/media/TopFront_zps882ef823.jpg.html)
(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g102/Alvis3_1/Bottom_zpsf42caf3b.jpg) (http://s54.photobucket.com/user/Alvis3_1/media/Bottom_zpsf42caf3b.jpg.html)
Ok ok, it's the X-35 that I used, but hey, it WAS 2007 when i did this!
Alvis 3.1
-
LOL nice :) :)
-
Ok Super Detailers...go Crazy! This is inside the F-35 Weapon's bay:
(http://media.jrn.com/images/660*422/b9933928z.1_20130616220506_000_g1e16ak6.1-0.jpg)
-
Ok Super Detailers...go Crazy! This is inside the F-35 Weapon's bay:
([url]http://media.jrn.com/images/660[/url]*422/b9933928z.1_20130616220506_000_g1e16ak6.1-0.jpg)
Just close the doors and walk away slowly...
-
actually, coat the bay interior with some stickum glue, like Goop. Get all those tiny pieces at the bottom of the spares box and shake them over it. Shake out the excess, wait until dry, and paint.
-
;D ;D ;D
I like how you think!!! All it needs is a weathering wash afterwards and no one will notice ;)
-
It worked for industrial light and magic back at the begining... lol ;D
-
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/F-35s002_zpscd0fdd2djpgoriginal_zps3ff8bac1.jpeg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/F-35s001_zps87180c52jpgoriginal_zps48e31d81.jpeg)
Ignore the comment regarding these being the most likely colour schemes - it's pure fantasy. More likely al will be like these latest Dutch F-35As:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/DutchF35AF002_zpsdedd005c.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/DutchF35AF002A_zps43c1167d.jpg)
Though of course don't let that stop you in your modelling of them in all sorts of schemes... ;)
-
QF-35 Target Drone in high-visibility red-orange.
-
Like button pushed! ;D ;D ;D
-
OK, I've got a question, why is the Canadian F-35A getting different wheels.
http://www.hannants.co.uk/product/RAAW72308 (http://www.hannants.co.uk/product/RAAW72308)
F-35A standard wheels.
http://www.hannants.co.uk/product/RAAW72305 (http://www.hannants.co.uk/product/RAAW72305)
And where does this information come from
-
Beavers Robert.
The number one cause of landing and taxing accidents at RCAF bases is the "runway"beaver.
This sub-species of Castor canadensis landing gear collapsis crosses the runways and taxiways at the most inopportune times. The wheels and brakes are designed to sustain a direct impact with a 40 LB beaver.
-
Beavers Robert.
The number one cause of landing and taxing accidents at RCAF bases is the "runway"beaver.
This sub-species of Castor canadensis crosses the runways and taxiways as the most inopportune time. The wheels and brakes are designed to sustain a direct impact with a 40 LB beaver.
Save a tree and an F-35 by eating more beaver. . .
-
LMAO!
-
OK, I've got a question, why is the Canadian F-35A getting different wheels.
[url]http://www.hannants.co.uk/product/RAAW72308[/url] ([url]http://www.hannants.co.uk/product/RAAW72308[/url])
F-35A standard wheels.
[url]http://www.hannants.co.uk/product/RAAW72305[/url] ([url]http://www.hannants.co.uk/product/RAAW72305[/url])
And where does this information come from
News to me - I suspect the true reason is because someone thinks there are enough fools out there who will buy aftermarket bits...
-
Isreali F-35A built from the 1/48 Kitty Hawk kit- LINK (http://www.themodellingnews.com/2013/07/coloured-lightning-kittyhawk-148th-f.html) to more images on "The Modelling News".
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gcNJsFXaaT4/UfdMXc5FS8I/AAAAAAAAleg/R_AY0DEVoSM/s640/KittyHawk+F-35A+1+48th+scale+Pic+25+%2819%29.JPG)
-
Stick with all grey I say...
-
The Future is coming...
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-w9Qw2G4dH2w/Ufhy1HrZyeI/AAAAAAAACc8/4Oav0QZxFK4/s1600/F-35-Future-Coming-Fast.jpg)
-
Photoshopped F-35s to counter Iranian photoshopped missiles? ;D
Reminds me of the wooden bomb dropped on the wooden airfield decoy! ;D
-
:-* at the F-35I
;D at the photo.
Someday there will be a PR shoot of every country's F-35 out of Eglin flying formation. betcha, betcha.
-
The Future is coming...
([url]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-w9Qw2G4dH2w/Ufhy1HrZyeI/AAAAAAAACc8/4Oav0QZxFK4/s1600/F-35-Future-Coming-Fast.jpg[/url])
Is this a still shot from Ender's game?
At IMDB (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1731141/?ref_=sr_1), more stills from the movie.
-
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-K79j2Qm6R54/UbZ_aqv5H6I/AAAAAAAAMds/la34bgphVEo/s1600/israeli_f35b.jpg)
-
Hmm, that one suggests doing it's predecessor, the F/AV-8I. 'Twould look good sitting next to a Harrier FGR.11 at an airshow.
-
:-* at the F-35I
;D at the photo.
Someday there will be a PR shoot of every country's F-35 out of Eglin flying formation. betcha, betcha.
has anybody flown a 6 ship formation before apart from the red arrows?
-
has anybody flown a 6 ship formation before apart from the red arrows?
Yes, quite a few in fact, and I think the Thunderbirds do for one. Others would be the Frecce Tricolore and the Patrouille de France as well.
-
has anybody flown a 6 ship formation before apart from the red arrows?
Yes, quite a few in fact, and I think the Thunderbirds do for one. Others would be the Frecce Tricolore and the Patrouille de France as well.
it was a joke
-
has anybody flown a 6 ship formation before apart from the red arrows?
Yes, quite a few in fact, and I think the Thunderbirds do for one. Others would be the Frecce Tricolore and the Patrouille de France as well.
it was a joke
Ah right. Perhaps a smiley afterward may have clarified that?
-
has anybody flown a 6 ship formation before apart from the red arrows?
Yes, quite a few in fact, and I think the Thunderbirds do for one. Others would be the Frecce Tricolore and the Patrouille de France as well.
it was a joke
Ah right. Perhaps a smiley afterward may have clarified that?
yeh sarcasm is a bugger on tinternet :P
-
Chill guys ...and have a laugh:
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS1NGuj1icdxXuXH0d8i1MLBhhq1SHsrIN0gPyx87W6DrkZRzW2nA)
-
i actually seen that F-35 jr. in real life.
its really tiny, perhaps no bigger then a compact car ;D
-
Be a blast as flyable kit build !
-
Real World Whatif-ing in action… ;)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/JSF-Patch_zps48802a2a.jpeg)
-
Would this scheme be something close to what the F-35 will get ?
-
Possibly, though I think they will look much more like these:
RAF F-35B:
(http://malaysiaflyingherald.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/air_f-35b_raf_bk-1_inaugural_flight_lmco_lg.jpg)
RNLAF F-35A:
(http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getasset.aspx%3Fitemid%3D50085)
-
Hmm! I thought that all the panel edges wouldn't be like that on an in-service aircraft.
Another question, do the tailplanes cant upwards a bit ?
-
Hmm! I thought that all the panel edges wouldn't be like that on an in-service aircraft.
I may be wrong, but I suspect they will be. It isn't really an issue though since if one is close enough to see them, your close enough to see the aircraft... ;)
Another question, do the tailplanes cant upwards a bit ?
I believe you are right.
-
Another question, do the tailplanes cant upwards a bit ?
I believe you are right.
I had wondered, I had partly assembled the Fujimi F-35B kit I just got and found that the kit tailplanes canted upwards. It didn't look right and my photos of the 'B' I saw in Yuma don't really show it too well, the elevators were turned slightly downwards so you couldn't see the dihedral
-
If you look closely in the attached pics you can just see the slight upward cant.
-
That head-on photo is interesting Greg, have the insides of the intakes been censored ? Reason I ask is that on the kit, the intakes are blanked off a few mm's inside the duct which sort of looks like that --
-
That head-on photo is interesting Greg, have the insides of the intakes been censored ? Reason I ask is that on the kit, the intakes are blanked off a few mm's inside the duct which sort of looks like that --
Can't talk about the kit, but I don't believe typhoons is censored. Here is another:
(http://www.aviationnews.eu/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/F-35A-front-taxi1.jpg)
Do remember that they have some pretty severe internal bending though.
-
And another
-
Awesome pics :) It looks like my plan to build my kits OOB has just gone out the window, I need to make some intake ducts for them ;D
These photos seem to emphasize a comment I have made on another thread that I don't see why the kit manufacturers have gone to the bother of producing parts to make the complete engine when there's nothing to see of the fan front --
-
Or cheat and put intake covers on them. ;)
(http://flores.house.gov/images/user_images/photogallery/Lockheed_Picture.jpg)
-
Just a nice image:
(http://www.sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Grim-Reapers.jpg)
-
That is nice! Plus, it wearing the Grim Reapers livery!!!! Glad to see them back 8)
Just needs two more wearing these schemes for a family portrait ;)
(http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd126/andymullenuk/misc/BM/f14-photo-vf101-04xl.jpg~original)
(http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/attachments/military-aviation/5746d1159553496-f14-tomcat-retires-grim-reaper3.jpg)
-
And one for the "Rivet Counters" (http://www.sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/27-copy.jpg) ;)
-
If you look at the F-35B, the intakes on all the variants curve around where the 'B's fan is. I could see most kits blanking them off there to simplify production. The real inlets are composite assemblies fabricated by Northrop-Grumman and build on some R&D work done during TSSAM with regard to replacing a metallic casting with a composite assembly.
-
And one for the "Rivet Counters" ([url]http://www.sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/27-copy.jpg[/url]) ;)
WHAT is that? The doors alongside the aft exhaust on a 'B'?
-
Can someone explain the patchwork exterior to me please? The differing colors are due to differing materials correct? Are those panels and lines not to be painted? Are they painted with some fancy new RAM paint or something along those lines?
Are there plans to apply camouflage to these birds? The USN Ghost Gray scheme and the USMC Harrier scheme would look rather nice on them and help break up the solid gray scheme they're currently wearing.
-
WHAT is that? The doors alongside the aft exhaust on a 'B'?
Yes
-
An old one by a couple of our members:
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b301/damian2/Profiles/My%20Profiles/F-35/F-35A310EsqPoAF.png)
-
And one for the "Rivet Counters" ([url]http://www.sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/27-copy.jpg[/url]) ;)
Is there a single door covering the rear exhaust or is that the port side of a split door?
-
Split door; they've found that single doors, like that on the nose gear of AA-1 expose a bit too much surface to the wind.
-
(http://i45.tinypic.com/2096h78.jpg)
(http://i47.tinypic.com/10opczm.jpg)
(http://i49.tinypic.com/2it1u7c.jpg)
(http://i47.tinypic.com/zjgvfs.jpg)
(http://i47.tinypic.com/s2r243.jpg)
(http://i48.tinypic.com/iopweb.jpg)
(http://i50.tinypic.com/1fzne1.jpg)
By "Doctor who"
-
Something I've found on the internet
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa263/kitnut617/Misc%20Photos/TF-35A_zps30627daf.jpg) (http://s200.photobucket.com/user/kitnut617/media/Misc%20Photos/TF-35A_zps30627daf.jpg.html)
-
Something I've found on the internet
([url]http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa263/kitnut617/Misc%20Photos/TF-35A_zps30627daf.jpg[/url]) ([url]http://s200.photobucket.com/user/kitnut617/media/Misc%20Photos/TF-35A_zps30627daf.jpg.html[/url])
Looks nice, but wouldn't work in real life, the rear seat is too far aft, behind the break between the forward and center sections. If they did a two-seater, the whole nose would be extended forward with the back seat where the front seat on the single-seater is in relation to, for reference, the inlets.
-
Rear seat occupies the space reserved for the lift fan, perhaps?
-
Looks nice, but wouldn't work in real life, the rear seat is too far aft, behind the break between the forward and center sections. If they did a two-seater, the whole nose would be extended forward with the back seat where the front seat on the single-seater is in relation to, for reference, the inlets.
That eliminates that idea then --- ;D back to Plan B Evan ;)
-
Rear seat occupies the space reserved for the lift fan, perhaps?
It might, but that's fuel tankage in the other variants and, really, that's a major bulkhead between the LM-Aero-Ft. Worth forward section and the Northrop-Grumman center section.
-
Rear seat occupies the space reserved for the lift fan, perhaps?
It might, but that's fuel tankage in the other variants and, really, that's a major bulkhead between the LM-Aero-Ft. Worth forward section and the Northrop-Grumman center section.
Yeah, I know there is a fuel tank there. If it is a major structural bulkhead then it makes sense to put it in front. Designing a completely new nose section makes considerably more sense than trying to stuff the cockpits either side.
-
(http://atlanticsentinel.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/F-35-Joint-Strike-Fighter.jpg)
-
I remember reading somewhere that the B model was seen to be particularly suited for use in the future for special models due to the volume and weight of the lift fan. Remove that and fit a ctol f-135 and you have lots of space and weight for all sorts of goodies. The was mention of a laser :icon_ninja:
Although an astromech Droid would be interesting too!
-
I remember reading somewhere that the B model was seen to be particularly suited for use in the future for special models due to the volume and weight of the lift fan. Remove that and fit a ctol f-135 and you have lots of space and weight for all sorts of goodies. The was mention of a laser :icon_ninja:
Although an astromech Droid would be interesting too!
Yeah, there has been talk of using the turbofan clutch to power a laser firing out of a turret top or bottom.
I'd still go with a C wing. Better fuel and CTOL take off/landing handling.
-
([url]http://atlanticsentinel.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/F-35-Joint-Strike-Fighter.jpg[/url])
It's been nigh unto six years since I've worked on the F-35 and I can still identify most of those panels on the forward section.
-
(http://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/F-35-armed.jpg)
-
Is that the centreline gun pod?
-
Am I really seeing a purple canopy frame?
-
Is that the centreline gun pod?
Yes.
-
Am I really seeing a purple canopy frame?
that's seen through the tinted canopy, so I doubt the actual color is purple. I'd hazard a guess that it's some shade of gray.
-
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/2014_F35A_6GBU12_Load_14J00011_18_1267828237_5213.jpg)
-
Hmmm....judging from that photo, the best way to show off a F-35 model may be gender side up.
-
What are the tubes out the back of the stores pylons for?
-
What are the tubes out the back of the stores pylons for?
Not sure, but the stores use pneumatic ejection rather than electro-explosive and they may be related to that.
-
What are the tubes out the back of the stores pylons for?
Not sure, but the stores use pneumatic ejection rather than electro-explosive and they may be related to that.
Flare dispenser perhaps, or chaff ----
-
What are the tubes out the back of the stores pylons for?
Which tubes?
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/F-35BweaponUnder_zps0b118a3f.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/F-35-pylons-closeup_zps29aaf3a4.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/f_35weaponexternalunderzoom2_119_zpsf04778a2.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/f_35weaponexternalunderzoom_321_zpscb8b885b.jpg)
-
The little holes right at the end of the pylon Greg, only in these pics we can see they're not tubes --- :-X
They actually look like the location hole for the rear support sprag on a fuel tank
-
Correct me if I am wrong. I suspect the little holes you are referring to at the tail end of each stores pylon is for the pivot point on the drop tanks that can be carried on those four stations. By pivot point I am referring to the part of the fuel tank that has a device that insures the tank fully pivots away from the airframe when the fuel tanks are jettisoned. Same devices are used on the F-15, F-4 (with F-15 centerline tank), and the F-18 for good examples of this feature.
-
So, an optical illusion, hey? Obviously part of the stealth features? ;D
-
Correct me if I am wrong. I suspect the little holes you are referring to at the tail end of each stores pylon is for the pivot point on the drop tanks that can be carried on those four stations. By pivot point I am referring to the part of the fuel tank that has a device that insures the tank fully pivots away from the airframe when the fuel tanks are jettisoned. Same devices are used on the F-15, F-4 (with F-15 centerline tank), and the F-18 for good examples of this feature.
My thought as well. ;)
This drawing seems to confirm that idea.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HOlLLVx2yIM/URl6FftMkbI/AAAAAAAAB9E/-x2cd6NJ3Co/s1600/f_35externalfueltank_177.jpg)
SOURCE (http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot.de/2013/02/combat-air-situation-f35.html)
Although I find it interesting that they didn't go the F-22 route and developed a tank with its own integral pylon that comes off with the tank.
Then again, with all the internal fuel, maybe the thinking is that these tanks will be used for ferry flights only. In case of which developing and testing (especially separation) such a tank/pylon combo that would leave a clean wing would be a waste of money.
Speaking of F-22 and drop tanks, here's a nice sequence of shots:
(http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/4846/04e0130006qm0.jpg)
(http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/1518/04e0130007pu4.jpg)
(http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/9716/04e0130008uk8.jpg)
SOURCE (http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=141015&sid=df079257dbb8923cd0346b436f3dfcf8#p141015)
-
I think part of it is that the two aircraft use different stores ejection systems and the pneumatic one for the F-35 needs to retain the pylons (pneumatic vs. electro-explosive reduces potential hazards; EED's come with some real concerns about both static electricity and other sources).
-
Robert asked me about the F-35 landing gear retraction sequence - I figured others might also be curious so am posting this here:
Lockheed Martin F-35 JSF gears up (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfD63we7Ptw#ws)
Note that the main wheels do twist as they retract:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v699/xu-an/f-35_af3_low.jpg)
I also understand that the legs shorten during retraction but perhaps Evan can confirm this.
-
Thanks Greg, and that's really interesting. The forward diagonal strut points in the other direction to an F-14 or A-6, but the wheel still turns upwards --- hmm! think about this I will ---- :icon_meditation:
Unless the strut folds away above the leg instead of along side the leg --- hmm! maybe that's how it's done ---
-
I also understand that the legs shorten during retraction but perhaps Evan can confirm this.
Sorry, didn't have much to do with the landing gear. I was mainly involved with the forward fuselage, especially the equipment bays.
-
Don't you just love the low viz RAF markings... ;)
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/04/01/article-2594439-1CBE758900000578-223_964x685.jpg)
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/04/01/article-2594439-1CBE773600000578-808_964x601.jpg)
-
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7343/11820126394_4ed3201147_c.jpg)
-
Are there any good photos of the cockpit anywhere, just need to see what colours the cockpit is ---
-
Are there any good photos of the cockpit anywhere, just need to see what colours the cockpit is ---
Plenty of photos if you do a Google image search on "F-35 Cockpit" - it is mostly black and grey (almost TIE Fighter like) though as seen here:
(http://www.darkgovernment.com/images/f35-interface.jpg)
-
Thanks Greg, I'll do a search. The Fujimi kit has 'all' the cockpit flat black and also the instrument panel decals are mostly black too. I had a thought the tub etc, would have been a grey of some sort which your pic seems to show.
-
Looks like the standard US military cockpit combo of FS's 36231 (standard interior gray) and 17038 ("interior black"/"cockpit black") to my eye... then again, my eye ain't perfect. LOL
-
Looking at my Humbrol 'Colour System' book Diamondback, FS 17038 converts to H21 which is Gloss Black. The photo of the cockpit doesn't really show gloss black, maybe satin black but I really suspect it's flat black
-
(http://nickdwyer.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/f-35d.jpg)
-
OOPS! Said 17038 which is Gloss, was thinking 37031, which is a little more gray than 37038 but even less reflective. Brainfart on my end.
*eats humble pie*
-
i hope it works but its still fugly!
-
([url]http://nickdwyer.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/f-35d.jpg[/url])
Looks nice but won't work as depicted. Given the way the aircraft breaks down, you need to move the front cockpit and nose forward to allow the second cockpit to be in front of the major break frame between the LM-Fort Worth-built forward section and the Northrop-Grumman-built intake section. Seriously, though, I'd love to see them do a two-seater but if they go with a single-piece canopy like the single-seater aircraft, the mechanism is really going to be beefy for the longer canopy.
-
Yeah, I know. I didn't actually do the image - I simply found and posted for inspiration. ;)
-
Reality be damned! That two seater looks damned good! :)
-
Hmmm…maybe we need to do one using the forthcoming KittyHawk F-35C kit.
-
Yeah, I know. I didn't actually do the image - I simply found and posted for inspiration. ;)
Oh, I agree and the prelim. concepts I saw while there looked even better.
-
Yeah, I know. I didn't actually do the image - I simply found and posted for inspiration. ;)
Oh, I agree and the prelim. concepts I saw while there looked even better.
You sir, are a cruel tease
-
Who is also bound, beyond a certain point, by security oaths. I will point out, though, that the "hump" contours of the F-35B could give you a good start toward the aft cockpit, even if you have a fuel cell in place of the lift fan. Also, consider the "swoop" of the cockpits of the F-5F as a guide to a suitable configuration that would maintain the chine line. The two-seater doesn't necessarily need to have the back seat higher (I don't think the Hawk back seat is much higher than the front and the MB.326 is the same way).
-
Why not simply graft a longer nose on the F-35, in front of the bulkhead. You'd have your lift-fan and the "hump" would be similar to the F/A-18s.
-
Something I've been trying to do Brian, but there's a lot of compound curves which means a total new forward fuselage to get it right.
To add to Evan's comment about two-seaters not having to have a raised rear seat --- F-14, F-15, F-18, Tornado, Typhoon, Jaguar, Gripen -----
-
Who is also bound, beyond a certain point, by security oaths. I will point out, though, that the "hump" contours of the F-35B could give you a good start toward the aft cockpit, even if you have a fuel cell in place of the lift fan. Also, consider the "swoop" of the cockpits of the F-5F as a guide to a suitable configuration that would maintain the chine line. The two-seater doesn't necessarily need to have the back seat higher (I don't think the Hawk back seat is much higher than the front and the MB.326 is the same way).
Oh I understand :) And thank you for the ideas
-
Jump jets on Defence radar
NICK BUTTERLY CANBERRA
The West Australian
May 17, 2014, 2:10 am
Australia could buy "jump-jet" Joint Strike Fighters to base aboard new landing ships, giving the nation its first aircraft carrier since the early 1980s.
Defence Minister David Johnston told The Weekend West _the Government was considering buying the "B" model of the F-35 - a specialised variant of the stealth jet being built to operate from aircraft carriers.
Last month, Australia committed to buying 72 of the conventional model F-35s from US aircraft manufacturer Lockheed Martin at a cost of almost $20 billion.
But the Government has left the door open to buying more F-35s and the minister says the F-35B will be considered.
"Now that aircraft is more expensive, does not have the range but it's an option that has been considered from day one," Senator Johnston said.
The F-35B has a shortened take-off distance and can land vertically, just like the legendary Harrier jump jet.
The British Navy and the US Marines are buying the F-35B to station aboard aircraft carriers.
Australia is soon to bring into service two large ships called landing helicopter docks. Though they resemble small aircraft carriers, the Government has maintained until now they would be used only to deploy helicopters and troops.
Senator Johnston said stationing the F-35 aboard an LHD would be costly and technically challenging, but it could be done.
"The deck strength is there for such an aircraft," he said.
The Hawke government mothballed Australia's last aircraft carrier, HMAS Melbourne, in 1982.
Commissioning an aircraft carrier is considered a significant strategic statement of military might by a country.
China recently launched its first aircraft carrier. The sea trials are being watched closely.
The F-35B has less range than the conventional F-35 owing to the complex systems of jets used to allow it to land vertically.
The B variant has been the most trouble-plagued of the three F-35 models. Testing was stalled this year after cracks were discovered in the aircrafts' bulkheads.
The F-35 will replace Australia's fleet of F/A-18A/B Classic Hornet aircraft, due to be withdrawn in 2022.
Damn! Maybe that KittyHawk F-35B I have will become a real world build after all...;)
-
Very interesting and considering Chinas sabre rattling of late. Maybe my postulations that Australia should look at a couple of Hyuga type DDHs as replacements for the Adelaide Class FFGs or some of the ANZAC Class FFGHs will get up next.
-
(http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/4648/f35eda.jpg)
;)
-
(http://fsbrasil.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/fab_iris_f-35_poster-b.jpg)
-
http://media.dma.mil/2013/Sep/16/2000711569/-1/-1/0/130620-D-FW736-029.JPG (http://media.dma.mil/2013/Sep/16/2000711569/-1/-1/0/130620-D-FW736-029.JPG)
http://media.dma.mil/2014/May/30/2000798432/-1/-1/0/140521-F-SG137-060.JPG (http://media.dma.mil/2014/May/30/2000798432/-1/-1/0/140521-F-SG137-060.JPG)
-
Not a plane but a car painted to match:
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/dmm6ucislpbor8ol7nw0.jpg)
(http://www.aviationnews.eu/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/F-35C-Navy.jpg)
-
Smallest model of F-35C?
(https://images2.sw-cdn.net/model/picture/625x465_359725_143473_1401123082.jpg)
1/285 scale, printed at shapeways. :D
-
Nope! 1/350 I think is the smallest
Model 1/350 QE built by Davecov on The Airfix Tribute Forum
-
they look like cgi
-
Here's the Lockheed Martin YF-45A Starbolt, a small fighter derived from the F-35...
([url]http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2011/081/3/3/lockheed_martin_f_45_starbolt_by_bispro-d3c7g5h.jpg[/url])
Where is the intake/s on this?
-
I knew we forgot something... ;D
-
they look like cgi
It does too, but I assure you it isn't. This model was on the table in the VIP room when the Queen named the ship last week (or was that the week before)
link to the build:
http://airfixtributeforum.myfastforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=331&t=25252 (http://airfixtributeforum.myfastforum.org/viewtopic.php?f=331&t=25252)
1/350 F-35C:
http://www.freetimehobbies.com/1-350-orange-hobby-lockheed-martin-f-35c-2-groups/ (http://www.freetimehobbies.com/1-350-orange-hobby-lockheed-martin-f-35c-2-groups/)
-
I knew we forgot something... ;D
Lol OK so it's a modified picture, rather realistic though as I thought it was a real aircraft to be whiffed, with hidden intakes ;D
-
(http://th07.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/f/2012/220/9/c/f_35a_splinter_1_by_agnott-d5abith.jpg)
WMD scheme found on Deviantart
(http://th07.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/f/2012/227/7/e/f_35c_tomcatters_1_by_agnott-d5b6r7n.jpg)
(http://th01.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/f/2012/225/3/3/f_35c_jolly_rogers_1_by_agnott-d5ayfvb.jpg)
more from the same person
-
RAAF F-35 previewed ahead of AU-1 rollout
Lockheed Martin has previewed the second F-35A for the RAAF a day ahead of a formal rollout of Australia’s first aircraft in a ceremony due to take place at the company’s Fort Worth facility on Thursday.
The second jet, AU-2, was previewed to media on Wednesday ahead of the formal rollout of aircraft AU-1, and wears the standard F-35 grey paint scheme with ‘low vis’ RAAF roundels, serial number A35-002 and tail markings for the RAAF’s 2 Operational Conversion Unit (2OCU).
AU-1, meanwhile, will be formally unveiled on Thursday in a ceremony due to be attended by Chief of Air Force Air Marshal Geoff Brown, F-35 program executive officer LtGen Chris Bogdan, US Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Frank Kendall and Lockheed Martin’s executive vice president and general manager of the F-35 program, Lorraine Martin.
(http://australianaviation.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/IMG_1919-crop.jpg)
(http://australianaviation.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/IMG_1906-crop.jpg)
(http://australianaviation.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/IMG_1903-crop.jpg)
http://australianaviation.com.au/2014/07/raaf-f-35-previewed-ahead-of-au-1-rollout/ (http://australianaviation.com.au/2014/07/raaf-f-35-previewed-ahead-of-au-1-rollout/)
-
:-* Gorgeous :-*
(http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/F_35_RAF_Engine_Burn_Wide.jpg)
-
Cool photo:
(http://alert5.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/F-35A-Weapons-Carriage.jpg)
-
Those aren't cluster bombs, are they? :o
-
Those aren't cluster bombs, are they? :o
Looks like GBUs, JDAMs and SDBs. Cluster bombs have fallen out of favor by the west at least. They are a monster to clean up
(http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/2015_F35C_15P00124_08_1267828237_5866.jpg)
-
is the stealth instantly buggered when they hang stuff off it externally?
-
For the umpteenth time, the all internal weapons 'stealth-mode' was only ever intended for the
opening phases of a conflict, once 'the balloon is up' the aircraft switches to standard eternal
weapons heavy hauler mode. The Low Observability aka 'stealth' features/capability being
built in eliminates the need for a specialized, and otherwise basically useless, 'pure stealth' machine
like the F-117.
This is old info that has been repeatedly stated going back to the original JAST and
JSF concept stages well over twenty years ago.
:-X
-
is the stealth instantly buggered when they hang stuff off it externally?
Depends on what they hang off, while JCF is correct, the F-35 and the F-22 were never intended to be stealthy all the time, they were intended to be stealthy at least part of the time. The more facets the object hanging below the wing has, the less stealthy the object (ie F-35) will be. Hanging a single AIM-9X off the wing will make it still semi-stealthy compared to a JDAM. Which is why it will be stealthy on day one and by day three, it won't. ;)
-
Hmm, wonder if you could develop LO pylons for carrying JASSM rounds which are already somewhat stealthy themselves (not as much as the cancelled TSSAM, but reasonably so, from the front and sides).
-
is the stealth instantly buggered when they hang stuff off it externally?
Its flexibility. :) F-35 can do both, few other fighters have the option at all
-
A couple of close up shots in case anyone wants to super detail:
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-u4bhbb-I5qA/VSu8kLBAvvI/AAAAAAAAFI0/wX-5RMX6EgY/s1600/1625988.jpg)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YLmjbNES4-M/VPeSfKDd0hI/AAAAAAAAFBY/imXCliJWC2Q/s1600/573raytheon-sdb-ii-pic-1.jpg)
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FzjITIrpyaY/VMERGPdF6SI/AAAAAAAAE4k/MHms3-HX_D4/s1600/fuel%2Bimpressed.jpg)
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-O8Yh22jRvSk/VOtAQwTZChI/AAAAAAAAE_Q/HIf8ME30ig0/s1600/F-35A-Front.jpg)
-
:-* Gorgeous :-*
([url]http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/F_35_RAF_Engine_Burn_Wide.jpg[/url])
I have this one on a poster on the wall of my office at work. ;)
-
In case anyone is wondering, the access panel in front of the inlet and under the cockpit canopy is the boarding ladder. There are panels forward of that which give access to the forward equipment bays.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ2uqgpTIC0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ2uqgpTIC0)
-
(http://www.janetairlines.com/vlb2/data/images2/f35_vx9_cu.jpg)
-
:)
-
F-35C carrier trials:
https://youtu.be/STWQh4NTurg
https://youtu.be/QA4vpvQR_m0
-
http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=21510&t=1 (http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=21510&t=1)
-
How about skyhook and f-35 or did I miss that already
-
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yrtMkdMGiYA/Veh-lVaXtPI/AAAAAAAABb4/_L7nXF7Z-t0/s1600/Lightning%2BII.bmp)
-
Cool image, the numbers on the plane don't match up though. The nose numbers should be the final 3 of the tail numbers, anything beginning with 100 is a CF-100, and we'd likely just call it the CF-35, like we call the CF-188s "CF-18s" and the CF-116 the "F-5" or "CF-5"
Other than that though, it's great!
:D
Alvis 3.1
-
Looks pretty sharp indeed (other than those little details you noted Alvis)
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5614/15771424831_f37682b9d9_c.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/287/19472915425_04cd37bccf_b.jpg)
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3882/18850514114_f2f84a3565_b.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/513/19477527641_e4e0d05fd8_b.jpg)
-
Anyone want to super detail their F-35 kit? If so, check out these: http://www.shop2000.com.tw/KASLHOBBY/product/p12540286 (http://www.shop2000.com.tw/KASLHOBBY/product/p12540286)
As an example, here is their 1/48 weapons bay:
(http://61.63.55.131/54143/product_10651257_o_5.jpg)
-
The rumour is that the Canadian F-35A's will be cancelled, and the money spent on new ships for the Navy. But it might not be as simple as what the new Government thinks it is, so what-if the Government bought ships like Australia did, the new aircraft carriers (I know they're not really aircraft carriers, just look like one). Then Canada would get the F-35B -------------
-
The rumour is that the Canadian F-35A's will be cancelled, and the money spent on new ships for the Navy. But it might not be as simple as what the new Government thinks it is, so what-if the Government bought ships like Australia did, the new aircraft carriers (I know they're not really aircraft carriers, just look like one). Then Canada would get the F-35B -------------
Ha! I like that
Italeri has announced a 1/32 F-35A!!
(http://londonist-static.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/A-Lot-of-Hot-Air-by-Roy-Huxley-GAvA-496x500.jpg)
(http://digital-art-gallery.com/oid/120/1600x860_20602_F_35_Ulix_2d_sci_fi_spaceship_aircraft_picture_image_digital_art.jpg)
-
:-\ ???
-
New kit coming for those who like to play big:
(http://data6.primeportal.net/models/thomas_voigt10/italeri/images/italeri_02_of_12.jpg)
-
The rumour is that the Canadian F-35A's will be cancelled, and the money spent on new ships for the Navy. But it might not be as simple as what the new Government thinks it is, so what-if the Government bought ships like Australia did, the new aircraft carriers (I know they're not really aircraft carriers, just look like one). Then Canada would get the F-35B -------------
([url]http://digital-art-gallery.com/oid/120/1600x860_20602_F_35_Ulix_2d_sci_fi_spaceship_aircraft_picture_image_digital_art.jpg[/url])
What is this butt ugly beast with F-18 and TSR.2 landing gear?
-
One to drive some people crazy...
(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTYwMFgxNjAw/z/tKQAAOSwmmxW2kAY/$_57.JPG)
Available here (http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Custom-Made-RCN-Royal-Canadian-Navy-Lockheed-F-35-HMCS-Bonaventure-Resin-1-200-/172122976775?hash=item2813543207:g:tKQAAOSwmmxW2kAY)
-
Saw my second F-35B last Saturday while down in Yuma AZ. Not flying but on static display as the base had an open day. It looked 'well-used' too, judging by the grime on the u/c legs and any of the bay doors that were open.
-
Italeri has announced a 1/32 F-35A!!
([url]http://londonist-static.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/A-Lot-of-Hot-Air-by-Roy-Huxley-GAvA-496x500.jpg[/url])
But that is a F-35B ???
-
Italeri has announced a 1/32 F-35A!!
([url]http://londonist-static.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/A-Lot-of-Hot-Air-by-Roy-Huxley-GAvA-496x500.jpg[/url])
But that is a F-35B ???
unrelated! ;D
Figured someone else would post the box art
-
Gratuitous gun firing shot...
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p110/GTX_Christmas/F35%20firing%20gun.jpg~original)
-
Wicked!!!
-
A pair for you Zac:
(http://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_06_2014/post-59028-0-01092800-1403326555.jpg)
(http://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_06_2014/post-59028-0-24335600-1403326560.jpg)
-
A different scheme - somewhat retro:
(http://pre14.deviantart.net/5cef/th/pre/f/2012/225/a/c/f_35b_raf_2_sqn_cammo_by_agnott-d5ayfqv.jpg)
-
(http://orig09.deviantart.net/94cc/f/2012/123/4/6/red_arrows_fly_f_35_lightening_ii_by_ghufranali-d4yh14w.jpg)
-
Some more retro ones:
(http://pre14.deviantart.net/b7eb/th/pre/f/2012/225/9/a/f_35c_jolly_rogers_2_by_agnott-d5ayfxu.jpg)
(http://pre13.deviantart.net/c0ae/th/pre/f/2012/227/7/e/f_35c_tomcatters_1_by_agnott-d5b6r7n.jpg)
(http://pre12.deviantart.net/085f/th/pre/f/2012/225/0/3/f_35c_sundowners_1_by_agnott-d5ayg11.jpg)
(http://pre03.deviantart.net/9492/th/pre/f/2012/223/9/4/f_35a_faa_899sqn_by_agnott-d5apzoz.jpg)
(http://pre06.deviantart.net/bfa6/th/pre/f/2012/224/2/d/f_35a_idf_by_agnott-d5at70h.jpg)
(http://pre10.deviantart.net/ca30/th/pre/f/2012/224/4/4/f_35a_idf_by_agnott-d5at6yp.jpg)
(http://pre10.deviantart.net/3928/th/pre/f/2012/220/9/c/f_35a_splinter_1_by_agnott-d5abith.jpg)
(http://pre11.deviantart.net/1693/th/pre/f/2012/223/7/9/f_35a_jasdf_aggressor_blue_by_agnott-d5apzlu.jpg)
-
Some of those are deja vu all over again. ;D
http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=273.msg75196#msg75196 (http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=273.msg75196#msg75196)
-
:-[
-
"Fields & Meadows" looks particularly good on the F-35 :)
Then again, it looks particularly good on anything... :P
-
(https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/F-16-Thunderbirds-F-35.jpg) (https://youtu.be/Wwne-CM4sf4)
Click on image to see video of same. The ending is quite inspiring.
-
First Israeli F-35
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p110/GTX_Christmas/image.jpg1_2.jpg)
-
Whenever I see a upper 3/4 view from slightly behind, I think this should be Bruce Wayne's new Batplane!
-
(http://www.iaf.org.il/SIP_STORAGE/FILES/1/71201.jpg)
IDFAF tail design, by Ra'anan Weiss
Stealth Tail
The "Adir" will be the first stealth fighter in the IAF and upon its landing it will bring new abilities to the force. In order to design a tail for a stealth fighter, while considering its different characteristics and without damaging its unique abilities, careful work with suitable means is necessary.
Ra'anan Weiss, a graphic designer that has been working with the IAF for many years and that has designed many squadron symbols and aircraft tails in the past 25 years, explains the story behind the design of the "Adir" tails. "The squadron approached me to design a new symbol for them in preparation for the arrival of the jets and afterwards it was decided that I would design the jets' tail as well", Weiss shared. "Because it is a stealth fighter, it cannot be painted in regular colors that are usually used. The Americans defined one hue of grey, which doesn't damage the jet's stealth, with which we will paint all of the markings. They are currently developing more hues which will be usable on the jets".
The background of the "Golden Eagle" Squadron's symbol is colored in black and in the center of the symbol there is a yellow bird and behind it green lines that create a 3-D sensation, so it looks like the bird is coming closer. The frame of the symbol is grey and indicates the color of the "Adir" jets. "The artistic background for the tail design was the squadron symbol that I designed. The bird in the symbol is the same bird from the squadron's old symbol, which we modernized. I kept its general guidelines but sharpened the wings and feathers and created ‘shoulders', so it would look like the F-35I. The new bird has elements that imply to fighter jets and attack".
http://m.iaf.org.il/2392-46855-en/IAF.aspx (http://m.iaf.org.il/2392-46855-en/IAF.aspx)
-
Just a nice photo:
(http://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2016/S20161721/20160710raaf8485160_0092.t578303e6.m2400.x6aedd880.jpg)
-
(http://home.bt.com/images/dambusters-136406127847103901-160516152159.jpg)
-
(http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/s750x750/sh0.08/e35/13721141_1752220831726774_914561713_n.jpg?ig_cache_key=MTI5MzY3Nzg2OTQ0NDM5MDE3MQ%3D%3D.2)
(http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/s750x750/sh0.08/e35/13694716_317738391895045_1708560311_n.jpg?ig_cache_key=MTMwMzExNTA2Nzg5ODA0NjQ5MA%3D%3D.2)
(http://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/s750x750/sh0.08/e35/13744072_1746795938920553_234520776_n.jpg?ig_cache_key=MTMwNTExODkxNzY1NTYxNzMzMQ%3D%3D.2)
-
I see that top pic is the Brit one, I wondered when they would use the weapons bay doors as a down thrust deflector strake ----
-
Despite the dreams of some that Israeli F-35s might look like this:
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p110/GTX_Christmas/image.jpg1_5.jpg)
The Israelis have stuck to the mantra of "you can have any colour you like so long as it is grey":
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p110/GTX_Christmas/image.jpg2.jpg)
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p110/GTX_Christmas/image.jpg3.jpg)
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p110/GTX_Christmas/image.jpg4.jpg)
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p110/GTX_Christmas/image.jpg5.jpg)
-
Despite the dreams of some that Israeli F-35s might look like this:
The Israelis have stuck to the mantra of "you can have any colour you like so long as it is grey":
I BAKED YOU A PIE (https://youtu.be/hgV8mB-M9po)
-
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8354/28412573513_f8418d99f9_b.jpg)
3 of the 6 F-35s out on ship trials for DT III
-
It'll never work. ;)
Cheers,
Logan
-
It'll never work. ;)
Cheers,
Logan
LOL :) its pretty cool with that many aircraft in frame and all the sailors mulling around, it already looks like its in regular service ;D
-
Damn glue got everywhere... ;)
(http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/lockheed/us/news/features/2015/f-35-climatic-testing.image.1170.400.high.jpg)
-
3 of the 6 F-35s out on ship trials for DT III
Here's 5:
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p110/GTX_Christmas/28431774153_3bcd7954dd_o.jpg)
And a video showing some of the operations:
http://c.brightcove.com/services/mobile/streaming/index/master.m3u8?videoId=5085121044001&pubId=77374810001 (http://c.brightcove.com/services/mobile/streaming/index/master.m3u8?videoId=5085121044001&pubId=77374810001)
More pictures here (https://www.flickr.com/photos/lockheedmartin/sets/72157669446446264)
-
First Japanese F-35:
(http://www.janes.com/images/assets/957/62957/1684106_-_main.jpg)
Yep, all grey again...
-
"Ugh, guys? I'm tryna land here! Do you wanna get out of the way?"
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8354/28412573513_f8418d99f9_b.jpg)
-
I seem to recall an early painting of the JSF looking exactly like that photo
-
More video:
https://youtu.be/t98FRkIRFks
-
The more I look at the F-35A from the top, the more I see an anime crustacean of sorts. :icon_surprised: ;D ;D
-
And yet another - much longer and more detailed this time.
https://youtu.be/aBP1wU6lHE4
I really like the appearance of the F-35C. :)
-
More of the first Japanese F-35:
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p110/GTX_Christmas/Japans%20first%20F35.jpg)
(http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p110/GTX_Christmas/Japans%20first%20F35JASDF%20AX-1%20FF1.jpg)
Yep, still all grey! ;D
-
Last picture clearly taken in Fort Worth, I believe I recognize the area in the background.
Be interesting to see who else buys them; I'm wondering if re-organized Turkey will still be interested.
-
Be interesting to see who else buys them; I'm wondering if re-organized Turkey will still be interested.
Well Turkey is still a partner so I believe they will.
-
(https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5126bbb4e4b08c2e6d1cb6e4/t/584f2a53d482e97e9fe378a3/1481583204137/)
(http://www.trbimg.com/img-584f22af/turbine/hc-israel-f-35-20161212)
first F-35I's land in Israel
-
F-35 goes to Japan
(https://d2feh2mec89yza.cloudfront.net/media/thumbs/photos/1701/3092187/1000w_q95.jpg)
NORTH PACIFIC OCEAN – Marine Corps F-35Bs from Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 121, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing, transit the Pacific from Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Ariz., to Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, Jan. 9, 2017, with its final destination of Iwakuni, Japan. VMFA-121 is the first operational F-35B squadron assigned to the Fleet Marine Force, with its relocation to 1st Marine Aircraft Wing at Iwakuni.
-
I saw a video of them on the Secret Projects Forum, I noticed that they had the panel tape painted over ---
-
RAAF's first two F-35's last month:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C7f3-L0XwAA_S-x.jpg)
-
Would anyone know if the F-35 is using drop tanks right now ?
-
I believe it is planned though I have not seen an actual photo with such to date.
-
Of course, one could get silly:
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ljG1ebcyZc4/UYVFSLIS86I/AAAAAAAABUU/bFvyVXdNVA0/s1600/F-35+FSTs.jpg)
-
I didn't think they were using them, had some silly bugger on the Secret Project Forum complaining that the recent deployment they had to be refueled nine times to cross the Atlantic. I pointed out they came from Hill AFB and didn't have drop tanks.
I can get these 1/72 tanks for my models though, which seem to be what the current idea is for them.
-
Yeah, I saw that. Interesting how some people take anything they can to twist a negative story related to the F-35...whilst ignoring what the alternatives offer (or don't offer). Moreover, the F-35 is very early in its service life. Obviously Air Forces are more conservative at this stage - just witness a F-35 air show display compared to other platforms. This isn't that the other platforms are more manoeuvrable bit that they are just not fully cleared re envelope and that the pilots are still earlier on in their experience with said aircraft.
-
I didn't think they were using them, had some silly bugger on the Secret Project Forum complaining that the recent deployment they had to be refueled nine times to cross the Atlantic. I pointed out they came from Hill AFB and didn't have drop tanks.
sigh,
http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=23482 (http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=23482)
Ignorant people, say ignorant things. It wasn't a "straight shot" and they are topped off when they are "half empty" in order to maintain options in case of diversion...
cool drop tanks though :)
-
F-35 hating is a meme by now. Funny thing is, the former punching bag F-22 is now seen by as perfection itself (probably by the very same folks that loved to hate it), even though it had its share of problems as well.
People just find it difficult to accept that the more systems one integrates with an aircraft, the longer the development will take. It might have taken 15 months from the flight of the first prototype to becoming operational back in WW2, but already by 1970's it easily took 5+ years, by 1990's 10+ years (and this is not counting preceding development time!), so ~15 years is not that unreasonable especially since F-35 tries to do several things never attempted before (like virtual 360 degree field of vision, total sensor fusion, using the radar as an ECM and ELINT device, potentially being a controller for a swarm of UCAV's, and so forth).
-
Amen brother. :icon_meditation:
The same is true of new airliners, the average punter just doesn't
understand what it takes to incorporate all the crap they now expect
to entertain their asses on the flight and make the damned things
economically viable.
-
Kelmola and JCF, true on both counts. Whats galling with the F-22 comparison is they are making the same arguments, falling into the same lies and BS and red herrings with the F-22 a few years ago (they got what they wanted, there were F-22s in the end) yet calling for more F-22s that are now perfect to be built after campaigning against them for years!!
(http://i.imgur.com/Myg38RZ.jpg)
In other very topical F-35 news, F-35 schemes just got a lot easier:
(http://i.imgur.com/j98hikP.jpg)
There is a new look coming to the F-35 later in the year! With a sleeker, more uniform coating system, F-35s are saving time in Aircraft Final Finishes (AFF) and saving dollars. The design and new look didn’t happen overnight, but rather was the effort of many people over the last five years.
In 2012, James Thistle came to Fort Worth from F-22 in Marietta as the Production Operations Senior Manager in AFF. He quickly recognized the need for improving the throughput of AFF, which at the time was operating at almost double the scheduled span and cost budgeted for the area. After pitching a potentially significant opportunity to his then-director, Tom Carrubba, now vice president of Aeronautics Quality Transformation and Enterprise Integration, he was able to gain the initial support for changing the engineering design, coatings material and the application process used in AFF.
“What resulted in the end was several days of span time saved in AFF and one of the most positively impactful affordability projects on the F-35 to date. It saves significant hours per unit, defects and rework and improves the aircraft sustainability in the field. It also changes the exterior look of the aircraft to a more uniform coating,” said Carrubba.
“The Aircraft Finishes configuration required the preparation and applications of various materials, which aesthetically appear as jig saw panes of various shades of gray across doors, panels and control surface edges. The manufacturing process to yield a complying product are extremely labor intensive and requires unique skill sets and more so concentrated attention to detail, which meant more labor and processing span in AFF," said Thistle. "Despite the immense efforts amongst the F-35 Finishes organizations, the process often yielded escapes and as a result contributed towards the organizations number one driver for quality defects."
The idea to optimize the process by eliminating multiple masking operations and the need to manually hand spray various top coats by using robotic application during the final top coat application; or “Z13” overcoat as it is more commonly known, was conceived. The project will reduce the cost of an F-35A by $16,000 per aircraft and will save $49 million in the total life of the program.
Chad Wemyss, Delivery Operations Manufacturing Engineering (ME) manager, has been working on the project since picking it up as AFF ME Lead in 2012. “This has been one of the most intense collaboration efforts I’ve taken part in. It has involved several years of testing by the Signature Integration and Materials and Processes (M&P) teams, as well as close teamwork with Production Operations, Finishes Engineering, Sustainment, the Affordability team, the F-35 Program Office and the customer, Joint Program Office (JPO). There have been a lot of stakeholders with different aspects of project inputs and requirements and keeping the whole thing moving forward has been challenging, but also extremely rewarding,” he said. The team kept with it and the results were evident when AF-104, the test aircraft for this project, finished its final coatings in AFF. Implementation of the change is expected in the 2nd quarter of 2017.
-
Actually, to tell the honest truth the change in scheme had nothing to do with cost or enhanced performance. It was simply done to make the life of the modelling community easier... ;)
-
Actually, to tell the honest truth the change in scheme had nothing to do with cost or enhanced performance. It was simply done to make the life of the modelling community easier... ;)
I knew it would pay to have modelers on the inside of the program ;D
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txooHvssic4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txooHvssic4)
-
Menancing...
(https://pix.avaxnews.com/avaxnews/7f/6b/00046b7f.jpeg)
-
Wow, what an image!
-
F-35 style fuel tanks are available at Shapes in 1:144th and 1:72nd scale:
1/144 F-35 Drop Tanks Made By Napping Man's Flying things and stuff (http://shpws.me/ODX2)
1/72 F-35 Drop Tanks Made By Napping Man's Flying things and stuff (http://shpws.me/MPz0)
You can contact the maker about scaling the tanks up to 1:48th scale.
-
Full video of the F-35 demo at the 2017 Paris Air Show.
Looks like the afterburner/reheat was engaged for most of the demo. You can see black smoke when it is dis-engaged. Also keep and eye on the elevators. Lots of pilot input and movement.
http://youtu.be/93NdwZAeXhI (http://youtu.be/93NdwZAeXhI)
Are you at the show Greg?
-
Are you at the show Greg?
Not this year.
-
Interesting to see a slow speed demo
-
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/221F35BAIM-132%20ASRAAM_zpsavbxgzyx.jpg)
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/f8koqZ21_zpsjnwfy8t6.jpg)
-
Something different: Some F135 engines on their production line (click on images to see close up):
(http://www.pw.utc.com/Content/Photos/Feed/Stories/F35-07/F135s-on-production-line3.jpg)
(http://www.pw.utc.com/Content/Photos/Feed/Stories/F35-05/F135s-on-production-line1.jpg)
-
"Powering Freedom" Blergh. :-X
-
Cool, though fictional scheme:
(https://southfront.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/1-258-1280x720.jpg)
-
First RAAF 3SQN F-35, A35-003:
(https://i.imgur.com/AXHXb8g.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/FmblGu8.jpg)
-
Cool, though fictional scheme:
(https://southfront.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/1-258-1280x720.jpg)
Interesting thing is, those are F-35B's which I don't believe Israel is going to be buying. Given the size of their country, though, dispersed F-35B's would make sense for them (does suggest surplus Harriers being similarly used).
-
There has been some talk of Israel getting some Bs though nothing has been confirmed to date. Singapore is another to also look at Bs.
-
Israeli Bs - F-35IBs? - sound very cool, and that camo is spectacular. Maybe I need to add another to my shopping list.
I'm not a fan of lo-viz schemes today but the RAAF F-35s look fantastic. I'm a big fan and very envious of my neighbours across The Ditch.
-
Don't worryZac. I the whiff verse New Zealand can have F-35Bs
-
https://youtu.be/d9HqVXGRJL0
-
Oh! look at that --- the USA has a 'Mach Loop' >:D
-
Cool Aviazione Navale F-35B
(http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/8/8/4813883.jpg?v=v423e4846bfa)
-
Oh! look at that --- the USA has a 'Mach Loop' >:D
Yeah, Rainbow Canyon aka Star Wars Canyon in Death Valley, it's been used for high-speed
flight training and aircraft testing since WWII.
Edwards AFB, Nellis AFB, NAS LeMoore, MCAS Miramar, Fresno ANG, Plant 42 (Palmdale), and various
testing outfits use it today.
-
Cool Aviazione Navale F-35B
([url]http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/8/8/4813883.jpg?v=v423e4846bfa[/url])
Wow! :smiley:
-
RAAF's 4th & 5th F-35s:
(https://image-store.slidesharecdn.com/fff93454-574d-497c-a45e-9463c3ef2aa7-original.jpeg)
-
Both pictures taken at Fort Worth? I believe I recognize the area in the background of the top one and I doubt you would find a F-16 flying chase in Australia.
-
Correct
-
And no gaudy squiggly panel tape ------
-
Images of what a Boeing F-32 might have looked like:
(http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foundry/image/?q=70&w=1920&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftimedotcom.files.wordpress.com%2F2018%2F05%2Fjja911x.jpg%3Fquality%3D85)
(http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foundry/image/?q=60&url=https%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fthe-drive-staging%2Fmessage-editor%252F1526772718431-jja91xc.jpg)
(http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foundry/image/?q=60&url=https%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fthe-drive-staging%2Fmessage-editor%252F1526772733907-jjd9131.jpg)
(http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foundry/image/?q=60&url=https%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fthe-drive-staging%2Fmessage-editor%252F1526772759308-jdj91cx.jpg)
(http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foundry/image/?q=60&url=https%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fthe-drive-staging%2Fmessage-editor%252F1526772776817-jjd01c.jpg)
Source (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20971/this-is-what-a-boeing-f-32-wouldve-looked-like-if-lockheed-lost-the-jsf-competition)
-
"Monica" was so much cuter than the F-35 :-*
Still, I would have kept the protruding lower lip of the intake, that adds character. Though, this variant is distinctive and pleasant enough too (and they both scream "Vought" anyway, and that is a good thing).
-
I think the first pic has a “21st century F-86 Sabre” look to it.
-
Those are a great find!
-
I coulda sworn I posted this stuff previously:
(http://photos.smugmug.com/OLDPB/i-2tFX4MZ/0/02709319/O/jsf.jpg)
(http://photos.smugmug.com/OLDPB/i-XD4gz9s/0/9603f2a5/O/USAF_markings.jpg)
(http://photos.smugmug.com/OLDPB/i-rMsJp4t/0/7b431d6a/O/USMC_guide.png)
(http://photos.smugmug.com/OLDPB/i-HRjcbSW/0/3cf395df/O/USNavy_guide.jpg)
(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS/i-hW7whWX/0/e4593aa0/O/CHARLIE_F-32_01.jpg)
1/40th modelshop casting in Swedish splinter that Charlie Sorenson was working on before
his untimely death way too young. He worked in the Boeing modelshop for a number of years.
He was going to pass on a casting to me, unfortunately that never happened. :icon_crap:
-
For some reason I like this version of the F-32, not the delta version I've got in 1/72. Does anyone know if there's a 1/72 version of this one ?
-
I looked everywhere Robert and the only mold was the Italeri/Revell/Tamiya one.
The only other place which might have one is the Area 51 Tuck Shop. ;)
-
Images of what a Boeing F-32 might have looked like:
Well Gee whiz if it had looked liked that from the start! :-*
-
I looked everywhere Robert and the only mold was the Italeri/Revell/Tamiya one.
The only other place which might have one is the Area 51 Tuck Shop. ;)
Me too Carl, but my google search for Area 51 Tuck Shop turned up only fast-food restaurants ----- ???
Now if I could only find a new link to Muroc Models ---
-
Not sure if this will inspire you...or drive you to take up knitting:
https://youtu.be/bs8zy9vXd7s (https://youtu.be/bs8zy9vXd7s)
Needles and balls of wool available to the left if you want them:
(https://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/knitting.jpg)
-
Someone's got a cool office:
(https://image-store.slidesharecdn.com/fc5a03dc-0d5d-4ad4-a1ef-9cb9b574db84-original.jpeg)
-
And just the image:
(https://image-store.slidesharecdn.com/fc246720-960c-4ad2-a96b-1d47122c9c90-original.jpeg)
-
Anyone know when the F-35C will be available in kit form?
-
Anyone know when the F-35C will be available in kit form?
Errr...already:
(https://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/kits/kh/images/kh_80132_title.jpg)
-
If memory serves me correctly, Orange Hobby did one in 1/72.
-
Anyone know when the F-35C will be available in kit form?
Errr...already:
(https://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/kits/kh/images/kh_80132_title.jpg)
Thanks Greg, don't know how or why I missed that. Have to keep an eye out for that kit at a decent price. Already have he A and B models and neither kit really does much for boosting my enthusiasm for the subject. :))
-
I'll need to research the kits, but I want to do a nominal "F-35D" (D for Dual Refueling Modes), basically a F-35A with the addition of the refueling probe installation from the F-35B and -35C to allow refueling from any tanker out there. It would look good in the markings of users who otherwise use only probe and drogue refueling but who don't need the extra goodies of the F-35B or F-35C and don't want to buy boom-equipped tankers.
-
Anyone know when the F-35C will be available in kit form?
Errr...already:
(https://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/kits/kh/images/kh_80132_title.jpg)
Thanks Greg, don't know how or why I missed that. Have to keep an eye out for that kit at a decent price. Already have he A and B models and neither kit really does much for boosting my enthusiasm for the subject. :))
I got the Kitty Hawk 1/48 F-35B ---- I'm not to impressed with all the massive ""raised"" panel tape lines, it's worse than the Italeri 1/72 kit.
-
I got the Kitty Hawk 1/48 F-35B ---- I'm not to impressed with all the massive ""raised"" panel tape lines, it's worse than the Italeri 1/72 kit.
The F-35A kit has the same features. Almost makes the old Panda kit look like the better choice :)
-
Random idea: F-35 in Aggressor scheme.
-
Even better idea: QF-35 with orange panels on the wings and tail...
-
That works too... ;)
-
Extend the wing of the F-35C, turn it into a UAV as a dedicated Reecebird for the USN, IDF.
-
The F-35 general arrangement is very similar to one of GD's LWF/ADF proposed layouts (Upper left here). In fact, if it won instead of the F-16 arrangement we know today, the F-35 might be considered a "silent eagle" LO version! (Although since it's much fatter it would only passingly resemble it and in reality be a completely different aircraft, kind of like Superhornet vs Hornet)
(https://i.imgur.com/tOlW5mF.jpg)
Quick reference comparison between F-35A and F-16C Block 50 (quick wiki)
F-35A Length/Wingspan: 15.67m / 10.7m
F-16C Length/Wingspan: 15.06m / 9.96m
F-35 Empty Weight: 29,000 lbs
F-16C Empty Weight: 18,900 lbs
F-35 Internal Fuel: 18,498 lbs
F-16C Internal Fuel: 7,000 lbs
F-35 Thrust (Dry/AB): 28,000 lbf / 43,000 lbf
F-16C Thrust (Dry/AB): 17,155 lbf / 28,600 lbf
The F-35 is nearly the same length and span, but carries ~2.5 times the internal fuel (plus room for ordnance) making it very thick and ~10,000 pounds heavier empty, completely negating the advantage of the significantly better engine. This is akin to the military obtaining new lightweight gear to shave 10 pounds off a soldier's load, only to go ahead and add 11 pounds worth of other crap. It's little wonder it's a dog, but it's defended by those saying it's system oriented rather than performance oriented (like the F-22). The US can get away with this and just say the F-22 will always support operations, but some nations are intending to use these as their primary combat aircraft, so it would be nice if it could perform.
IMO, a more conservative approach with a reduced internal fuel load requirement of 11,000 lbs (equivalent to F-16C with CFT, plus 10% to help offset the difference in SFC) would allow for a lighter (even when considering the naval requirements) less draggy airframe, and if you kept the 2D thrust vectoring of the F119 when designing the derivative you'd end up with an aircraft that can deliver 2x PGMs like the F-35, but generally outfight other 4 / 4.5 gen aircraft. You'd be a bit heavier empty than an F-16 with CFTs, but would be cleaner and have a much better T:W. The end result would be better instantaneous turn rate / nose pointing (with the ability to more rapidly regain lost energy), as well as superior sustained turn rate.
To compensate for the reduction of internal fuel, plan for LO drop-tank assemblies under the wings as options (2x 4,000 lbs or so) that, when jettisoned, takes the pylons with it. This would surpass the F-35A's internal fuel, but likely not much extra range since the arrangement is draggier.
I found a picture with a rough idea of what this could look like (guess from some video game fantasy...)
(https://i.imgur.com/c2qrTQQ.png)
Keep EOTS as a combined IRST / targeting pod, but get rid of the rest of the DAS and revolutionary systems (KISS), just a basic matured HMD.
-
Yep, here's a photo comparison of my two models
-
Actually, DAS is worth keeping as it has matured considerably. I think I'd also want to keep the MADL system with all the antennas (antennae?) because that greatly eases stealthy communication.
-
F-35 a dog? No one who flies it seems to think so.
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DsY53gAUcAAt0CW.jpg:large)
(http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foundry/image/?q=60&url=https%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Fthe-drive-staging%2Fmessage-editor%252F1542671483400-4914657.jpg)
-
So where was this taken? I'm pretty certain it was not Carswell Field in Fort Worth.
-
I think it's Hill AFB Evan, at least the photo accompanies a video on the Secret Project Forum thread about Belgium getting the F-35 says Hill. The video shows eight finger four flights of F-35's, one flight of three F-35's and one lone F-35 off to the side doing a fly-past.
-
US Air Force conducts first ever F-35 fighter jet 'elephant walk'
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/politics/us-air-force-f-35-elephant-walk/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/politics/us-air-force-f-35-elephant-walk/index.html)
It's Hill AFB. I think it should be called Flat AFB.
-
US Air Force conducts first ever F-35 fighter jet 'elephant walk'
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/politics/us-air-force-f-35-elephant-walk/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/politics/us-air-force-f-35-elephant-walk/index.html)
It's Hill AFB. I think it should be called Flat AFB.
Tactical hiding of location. The base is actually named for a person with the last name of Hill rather than the terrain. I don't remember his exact name, though I suspect the base is too far south to be named for James G. Hill since he was active mainly from Minnesota to Oregon and Washington (Great Northern Railroad was his primary legacy).
-
From Wikipedia > Hill AFB, UT history (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_Air_Force_Base)
-
(http://warnesysworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/VMFA-122-F-35B-800x445.jpg)
getting some color :smiley:
-
Here's a very interesting bit about the F-35 that I had not known: https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairw/20181027.aspx (https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairw/20181027.aspx). Given that HIMARS has also shown to be able to function from the flight deck of various amphibious ships, it appears that the USMC's reach has just been nicely extended and their F-35B's amplified. This should work equally well with other F-35 variants, too. In the meantime, it makes one suspect that more and more neighbors buying the F-35 is a bit worrying for power like China and North Korea, particularly with the amplification this aircraft gives to targeting data for other systems.
-
It appears that each F-35 is a very capable recon and targeting platform. This is a major change in how we do business. This will take time to filter through other military systems to reveal other major capabilities
-
Here's a very interesting bit about the F-35 that I had not known: https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairw/20181027.aspx (https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairw/20181027.aspx). Given that HIMARS has also shown to be able to function from the flight deck of various amphibious ships, it appears that the USMC's reach has just been nicely extended and their F-35B's amplified. This should work equally well with other F-35 variants, too. In the meantime, it makes one suspect that more and more neighbors buying the F-35 is a bit worrying for power like China and North Korea, particularly with the amplification this aircraft gives to targeting data for other systems.
I've read that in one of the threads on the F-35 over at the SP Forum that they have been testing this, certainly changes how things can be done now doesn't it ?
-
Welcome to network centric warfare.
-
Welcome to network centric warfare.
Add in larger numbers of LO affordable UCAVs each with a couple of SDBs, AMRAAMs etc. flying along side the F-35 and it gets even more interesting.
-
Welcome to network centric warfare.
As long as enemy hackers can be kept out of our networks. And that's a real worry.
-
Welcome to network centric warfare.
As long as enemy hackers can be kept out of our networks. And that's a real worry.
A risk though one recognised. BTW, when we are talking about network centric warfare we're not just loading systems and weapons onto the general internet. Rather, we are talking about connecting via secure military databanks etc.
-
I suspect a lot of the interconnectivity will be via the F-35's MADL or systems capable of interfacing with it (F-22 will need an upgrade but it is doable). That's a very LO data link.
-
I suspect a lot of the interconnectivity will be via the F-35's MADL or systems capable of interfacing with it (F-22 will need an upgrade but it is doable). That's a very LO data link.
Exactly.
-
I suspect a lot of the interconnectivity will be via the F-35's MADL or systems capable of interfacing with it (F-22 will need an upgrade but it is doable). That's a very LO data link.
Exactly.
Yes, all true. Any yet there are a lot of interfaces between the real/unsecured world and the comprehensive combat and maintenance systems of the F-35. So many that securing them all is a real worry.
Paul
-
F-35A walk around:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=hmnkcP-sJHk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=hmnkcP-sJHk)
Note that you can control the view just by dragging the image.
-
F-35A walk around:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=hmnkcP-sJHk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=hmnkcP-sJHk)
Note that you can control the view just by dragging the image.
I suddenly felt like I was living in the future :o
-
"Diana: Goddess of the Hunt" - painted on a Dutch F-35:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D97agdFXoAIIQG0.jpg)
-
Just some cool Australian F-35 photos:
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2019/S20190850/20190411raaf8165233_080.t5cb54dd3.m2400.xTUNfoz9c.jpg)
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2019/S20190850/20190411raaf8185068_0007.t5cb54dd0.m2400.xIY_sBXu3.jpg)
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2019/S20190850/20190411raaf8185068_0053.t5cb54dc9.m2400.xzctvrL62.jpg)
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2018/S20184677/20181210raaf8227810_261.t5c0db55d.m2400.xOlrk_bpX.jpg)
-
The station lights on the intake, how are they illuminated? Are they lit or are they self-luminous?
-
The station lights on the intake, how are they illuminated? Are they lit or are they self-luminous?
The Formation Lights are Electroluminescent and as such require a electric current to emit light. They are made by a company called Astronics Luminescent Systems Inc. - you can see more here: https://www.astronics.com/product?productgroup=Lighting%20Systems&subproduct=exterior%20lighting#Formation%20Lights (https://www.astronics.com/product?productgroup=Lighting%20Systems&subproduct=exterior%20lighting#Formation%20Lights)
-
The station lights on the intake, how are they illuminated? Are they lit or are they self-luminous?
The Formation Lights are Electroluminescent and as such require a electric current to emit light. They are made by a company called Astronics Luminescent Systems Inc. - you can see more here: https://www.astronics.com/product?productgroup=Lighting%20Systems&subproduct=exterior%20lighting#Formation%20Lights (https://www.astronics.com/product?productgroup=Lighting%20Systems&subproduct=exterior%20lighting#Formation%20Lights)
Thanks. Interesting.
-
The old “slime lights”. Trying to remember when these first came out. Was it the 80s or before? I’m sure the ones today are a bit different in design.
-
(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cdc77cc37e7ebf42315716a0fbd1bc5dd54686c632a8ab2a46897c9b0c68d349.jpg)
-
Poland – F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Aircraft
WASHINGTON, September 11, 2019 - The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to Poland of thirty-two (32) F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft with support for an estimated cost of $6.5 billion. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale on September 10, 2019.
Poland has requested to buy thirty-two (32) F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL) Aircraft and thirty-three (33) Pratt & Whitney F-135 Engines. Also included are Electronic Warfare Systems; Command, Control, Communications, Computer, and Intelligence/Communications, Navigational, and Identification (C4I/CNI); Autonomic Logistics Global Support System (ALGS); Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS); Full Mission Trainer; Weapons Employment Capability, and other Subsystems, Features, and Capabilities; F-35 unique infrared flares; reprogramming center; F-35 Performance Based Logistics; software development/integration; aircraft ferry and tanker support; support equipment; tools and test equipment; communications equipment; spares and repair parts; personnel training and training equipment; publications and technical documents; U.S. Government and contractor engineering, logistics, and personnel services; and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated cost is $6.5 billion.
Read more here:
Source: https://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/poland-f-35-joint-strike-fighter-aircraft (https://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/poland-f-35-joint-strike-fighter-aircraft)
-
Maybe they will finally retire their SU-22M4s! Maybe not.......
-
Another customer to the list. :smiley:
-
Friends went to the Gatineau airshow and were nice enough to get me this hat.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48739931123_0b00660970_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hfYTs4)
F-35-hat-01 (https://flic.kr/p/2hfYTs4) by Big Gimper (https://www.flickr.com/photos/21812089@N02/), on Flickr
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48740442937_ef6f291a99_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hg2vAr)
F-35-hat-02 (https://flic.kr/p/2hg2vAr) by Big Gimper (https://www.flickr.com/photos/21812089@N02/), on Flickr
-
:smiley:
-
Apparently sales efforts to Greece, Romania, and Spain are in the works. All of those could make for interesting markings if they went through.
-
Spain is probably the most likely there but all 3 will need to sort out budget issues first.
-
Random idea: Spanish F-35B in this scheme:
(https://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/GTwiner086/48694766627_b9f68b1d34_b_zps0r2s2xnz.jpg)
-
(https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E22AQFr_h3arTnr7Q/feedshare-shrink_2048_1536/0?e=1576713600&v=beta&t=xLagxI_Xm_4atnb0xao_NEylmMchBSZzHGM2ClhaVyM)
-
Two seater F-35C where the aft cockpit is for a drone controller operating multiple unmanned F-35C’s in strike missions, one of which is a Prowler/Growler successor. Standoff positioning for people but quickly available for actual eyes on should circumstances require.
-
Two-seat F-35C would more likely be side-by-side seating, given how the structure breaks down. A tandem-seat configuration is possible, but it would take major redesign of the forward fuselage, both in structure and in equipment installation.
-
Two-seat F-35C would more likely be side-by-side seating, given how the structure breaks down. A tandem-seat configuration is possible, but it would take major redesign of the forward fuselage, both in structure and in equipment installation.
Or put the poor back seater in a coal hole in place of the F-35Bs lift fan :(
-
Two-seat F-35C would more likely be side-by-side seating, given how the structure breaks down.
That's the conclusion I came to as well Evan. And now I've got hold of some more casting supplies -----
Or put the poor back seater in a coal hole in place of the F-35Bs lift fan :(
My opinion is a trainer would be more likely for the F-35B than the other variants.
-
Two-seat F-35C would more likely be side-by-side seating, given how the structure breaks down. A tandem-seat configuration is possible, but it would take major redesign of the forward fuselage, both in structure and in equipment installation.
Or put the poor back seater in a coal hole in place of the F-35Bs lift fan :(
That would wipe out major fuel tankage on the F-35A and F-35C airframes; I can't really see that. Seriously, manufacturing breaks being where they are on the F-35, I stand by my earlier comment.
-
Two-seat F-35C would more likely be side-by-side seating, given how the structure breaks down. A tandem-seat configuration is possible, but it would take major redesign of the forward fuselage, both in structure and in equipment installation.
Or put the poor back seater in a coal hole in place of the F-35Bs lift fan :(
But that's where R2D2 goes...
-
Two-seat F-35C would more likely be side-by-side seating,
Hmmm...me liking idea.
-
Two-seat F-35C would more likely be side-by-side seating,
Hmmm...me liking idea.
Doing some part comparisons, I've found the major bulkhead behind the cockpit is wider than most side-by-side trainers we've seen to date. The only one that seems to be close to the width of this bulkhead is a cockpit/forward fuselage from an TF-102. At least that's with working with the kits I have -- Another thing about the TF-102 forward fuselage, the cross-section through it is very similar in shape to the F-35's forward fuselage. Which is convenient ;)
This might interest people though, a 1/48 F-35B canopy on the 1/72 TF-102 forward fuselage and a comparison of parts.
-
Australia's fleet is increasing...
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2019/S20193282/20191211raaf8164101_0530.t5df162b1.m2400.xntDspZux.jpg)
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2019/S20193282/20191211raaf8164101_0617.t5df162b1.m2400.xprdPn0pM.jpg)
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2019/S20193282/20191211raaf8185068_0406.t5df162b1.m2400.xXu43aMdy.jpg)
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2019/S20192901/20191101raaf8185068_0013.t5de07e6f.m2400.xYoyR42zd.jpg)
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2019/S20192901/20191105raaf8185068_0196.t5de07e6f.m1600.x6xwWm2J_.jpg)
(https://images.defence.gov.au/fotoweb/cache/5003/DefenceImagery/2019/S20192742/20191029raaf8185068_0059.t5ddf3bfb.m2400.xhABc-HkD.jpg)
-
Video showing a bunch of F-35 weapon trials, especially of the gun and gun pod: https://youtu.be/jay_9y0d5m8
-
Recently in Singapore:
https://youtu.be/vUrG6OCZyXk
-
(https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E22AQHy28gZZFEJYw/feedshare-shrink_2048_1536/0?e=1586390400&v=beta&t=4BADRWa1x3VHsBJcgnIQPCi-eS_tENZT0sqH4BdY81U)
Not bad for a program many claim to be in a constant death spiral...
-
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESNMghAW4AAHNMr?format=jpg&name=large)
-
Not bad for a program many claim to be in a constant death spiral...
That's make a lot of prototype and pre-series airframe for a single program :P
Sorry the joke, I'm already far far away ;D
-
Not bad for a program many claim to be in a constant death spiral...
That's make a lot of prototype and pre-series airframe for a single program :P
Sorry the joke, I'm already far far away ;D
Not even in full rate production yet. Still just "warming up" ;)
The number of B's is a surprise I knew 500 was close but I didn't realise B's were in triple digits already.
-
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49639587933_641a78680b_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iCtS5n)Norway sends F-35s to Iceland for NATO Air Policing (https://flic.kr/p/2iCtS5n) by NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization (https://www.flickr.com/photos/nato/) on Flickr
-
Back to being a whiff:
(https://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/GTwiner124/216600_zpsiillcxlp.jpg)
-
The way things used to be done is the first couple of production variants were still far from full operational standard and often ended up in bone yards or requiring extensive upgrades within their first decade or even five years of service. The vast majority of F-35s being delivered are at a minimum fitted for but not with full capability but will be much easier and cheaper to upgrade to full capability.
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/0_17.jpeg)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/0_19.jpeg)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/0_18.jpeg)
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/6110345.jpg)
-
https://theaviationist.com/2020/09/10/these-are-some-of-the-designs-submitted-for-the-new-aggressors-f-35-color-scheme/
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/Arctic_Splinter_full.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/Wraith.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/Splinter.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/Shark.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/Ghost.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/Blue_Splinter.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/BDU_Splinter.png?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
Click on each to see a bigger version.
I wonder how long before someone creates some decals/masks...
-
Finally, this What-If. Though I think the author might have misdrawn the F-35C instead.
Full version HERE (https://twitter.com/SanaeLacus/status/1446893976288587781?t=MdnzGxGmjyaNamT1_apvnw&s=19&fbclid=IwAR0aEXdRLGYs6X7L-WxMYo8yi-6OMixEC8sfNb6DPRNXeBknHaP572MZnoM)!
-
As of today:
(https://d2j6dbq0eux0bg.cloudfront.net/images/34914079/2830643002.jpg)
CFBV
-
Wow. That's very cool. And eye-opening - I didn't realise there were so many already.
-
How many actual aircraft per squadron at the moment Greg ?
-
It will vary from operator to operator. There are over 730 f-35s delivered to date though.
-
730 :o
all operational or some working up ?
-
Define operational vs working up? The aircraft may be fully operational though used in a training role due to the crew needing to work up...
As of 1st December there were:
- 730+ delivered
- 11 services declared IOC
- 9 operating F-35s from their home soil
- 14 services operating F-35s
- Over 267,000 operational missions flown
- 463,000+ flying hours accrued
- 1535+ qualified pilots
- 11,500+ trained maintainers
- 29 operational F-35 bases
The numbers are higher now...
-
I meant full squadrons versus squadrons still in training
-
As of 1st December there were:
- 730+ delivered
- 11 services declared IOC
- 9 operating F-35s from their home soil
- 14 services operating F-35s
- Over 267,000 operational missions flown
- 463,000+ flying hours accrued
- 1535+ qualified pilots
- 11,500+ trained maintainers
- 29 operational F-35 bases
The numbers are higher now...
Incredible. Again, I had no idea things were so far along. That's brilliant.
-
I meant full squadrons versus squadrons still in training
I believe all of the Squadrons on that poster are full.
-
I meant full squadrons versus squadrons still in training
I believe all of the Squadrons on that poster are full.
Whoa!
Reading some reports over on SPF about how a couple of F-35's can enhance the 4/4.5 generation fighters capabilities when used together, what will 730 do :o :o :o
-
But, but, but it's a trillion dollar waste that "doesn't work". :-\
-
The Fighter Pilot Podcast did a great show on the F-35 with LtCol Billie Flynn RCAF (Retired), it's well worth a listen: https://www.fighterpilotpodcast.com/episodes/121-whats-up-with-the-f-35/ (https://www.fighterpilotpodcast.com/episodes/121-whats-up-with-the-f-35/)
-
But, but, but it's a trillion dollar waste that "doesn't work". :-\
;D
Yeah, over 750 not working now... (https://www.f35.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/aero/f35/documents/F-35%20Program%20Fast%20Facts%20-%20January%202022.pdf) ;)
-
On their way:
(https://cdn.flightsim.to/images/21/f-35a-german-air-force-wing-33-nuclear-mission-2jDVU.jpg?width=1400&auto_optimize=medium)
(https://cdn.flightsim.to/images/21/f-35a-swiss-air-force-j-6018-DFkMa.jpg?width=1400&auto_optimize=medium)
Probable future:
(https://cdn.flightsim.to/images/21/f-35a-canadian-air-force-409-sqn-rcaf-jgpo1.jpg?width=1400&auto_optimize=medium)
Well...maybe...some day:
(https://cdn.flightsim.to/images/22/tudm-liveries-for-ife-f-35-lightning-ii-1mQ7q.jpg?width=1400&auto_optimize=medium)
(https://cdn.flightsim.to/images/21/f-35b-lightning-ii-rocaf-low-rcXTg.jpg?width=1400&auto_optimize=medium)
-
While I know they will go the the F-35A and it will be in grey, I would love to see this:
(https://cdn.flightsim.to/images/22/lockheed-martin-f-35b-libery-redbaron-tiger-9tjF2.jpg?width=1400&auto_optimize=medium)
(https://cdn.flightsim.to/images/22/lockheed-martin-f-35b-libery-redbaron-tiger-1bgYE.jpg?width=1400&auto_optimize=medium)
(https://cdn.flightsim.to/images/22/lockheed-martin-f-35b-libery-redbaron-tiger-8f5UT.jpg?width=1400&auto_optimize=medium)
(https://cdn.flightsim.to/images/22/lockheed-martin-f-35b-libery-redbaron-tiger-8dI5O.jpg?width=1400&auto_optimize=medium)
-
Seems the Canadian purchase is now back on ----- so buying this below years ago wasn't just wishful thinking ;)
-
Nice mug Robert. I hope we can get at least one for the RCAF 100 Year Anniversary in 2024.
Greg, can you pull some strings here?
-
(https://assets.change.org/photos/6/fc/nw/hzfCNWosWNxQCEH-1600x900-noPad.jpg?1526147116)
-
:smiley:
-
Greg, can you pull some strings here?
As in influencing the inclusion of the GB or potentially the mug as a prize?
-
Seems the Canadian purchase is now back on ----- so buying this below years ago wasn't just wishful thinking ;)
If Canada holds off on the F-35 acquisition for a couple of more years they might get a great deal on a fleet of second hand Australian F-35s when the RAAF upgrades to the next version of the F-35 or its replacement...
-
Despite the ADF arming up, it will be about 30yrs before there are any RAAF F-35 hand me downs.
-
Nice mug Robert. I hope we can get at least one for the RCAF 100 Year Anniversary in 2024.
Greg, can you pull some strings here?
Where would you get one from, like I said, I bought it years ago.
-
I'm sure Greg could organise an F-35 mug for the RCAF for its Centenary, he may even be generous enough to source a case of them by 2024. ;D
-
There are options (see here (https://www.cafepress.com/+royal-canadian-air-force+mugs) for example) though I am not sure about that exact one.
-
Can anyone tell me what the "official" designation for the F-35 is, in RAF/RN service? Is it like Lightning II F (A).1 or FRS.1
-
Can anyone tell me what the "official" designation for the F-35 is, in RAF/RN service? Is it like Lightning II F (A).1 or FRS.1
https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/lightning-f35b/ (https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/lightning-f35b/)
-
Can anyone tell me what the "official" designation for the F-35 is, in RAF/RN service? Is it like Lightning II F (A).1 or FRS.1
https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/lightning-f35b/ (https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/lightning-f35b/)
Thanks Greg, so it doesn't have a British designation, just F-35B
-
Well that's what the RAF says.
-
Yeah!, I'm a bit surprised that's all ---
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/F-35A301EsqTiger.png)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/F-35A310EsqPoAF.png)
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/F-35A347MHAF.png)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/F-35A346MHAF.png)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/F-35A336Mspecial.png)
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/F-35DVFA154linebird.png)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/F-35DVFA154OldCAGbird.png)
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/F-35DVFA154154bird.png)
-
Like the D model!
-
(https://media-exp1.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E22AQEsXYFzqXDPJg/feedshare-shrink_800/0/1667554346277?e=1670457600&v=beta&t=JH79--qYJl5xNg3SpkM8-oJy6Jo_OiRArDBsY2yoLeM)
-
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/e68/GTwiner/Image_15-12-2022_at_5.24_am.jpeg)
CFBV
-
Given the overall lines and the way the airframe goes together, I would be more inclined to expect a two-seatF-35 to be side-by-side seating rather than tandem. Other than that quibble, I loved the F-35D art. One thing I'd love to see would be a single-seat F-35 with dual IFR capability, both flying boom and hose and drogue. It would add cost and software complexity, but I could see it simplifying deplolyments.
-
Given the overall lines and the way the airframe goes together, I would be more inclined to expect a two-seatF-35 to be side-by-side seating rather than tandem.
That would be interesting...and challenging to model.
-
Given the overall lines and the way the airframe goes together, I would be more inclined to expect a two-seatF-35 to be side-by-side seating rather than tandem.
That would be interesting...and challenging to model.
Well, not really ---- I found that a TF-102 cockpit has a very close cross-section to the F-35B cross-section at that type' bulkhead, but more importantly, about the same size. I also found that a 1/48 F-35B canopy happens to be roughly the same size as the TF-102' canopy. It didn't take all that imagineering to come up with a plan ------ Which is to try and build it before I can't ----
But another thing about the TF-102 cockpit, it's much wider where the seats are than any of the Brit side-by-side trainers that I've matched it too ---
-
Hmmm...ok...interesting.
-
My idea is that the RAF would eventually need a new trainer, the T.4 Harriers are not going to last forever. So the mod would be for a F-35B but it could be a trainer for all of the F-35 variants.
There is still a bit of work to do, for instance, the TF-102 cockpit could actually be a bit smaller so I could fit the modified 1/48 F-35B canopy. The TF-102 cockpit is 1/72 scale too. My plan is to use the 1/48 F-35B canopy, but it needs a bit of trimming to bring the height down to size, whereas the width once trimmed is about right. So what I would do with the styrene is to cut the rear decking behind the canopy off, I would then cut the top on the fuselage off along that line you can see running along the chine. Then I would sand the center mating faces of the fuselage join until it matched what I had trimmed off the canopy. I would then cut off the remainder of the rear end of the fuselage bits where I've shaded it.. This then would be mounted to where the existing bulkhead is at the rear of the cockpit.
Interestingly, not only does the TF-102 cockpit bits have a close cross-section, I found the nose wheel bay is right where the F-35 wheel bay is, I would then graft a F-35B wheel bay instead of the conversions wheel bay.
I had talked to Evan about this as I was thinking it out, I said to him I would extend the rear fuselage from just behind the wing trailing edge by adding in one more fuselage frame, to counter any cg problems. I studied a couple of photos of F-35's in production and guestimated the frames were about 3 feet apart, so adding the extra frame in the section where the fuselage profile seems to run parallel wouldn't be that much of a problem structural wise. What this would do is move the engine, tail planes and fin/rudders back 3 feet to counter the weight of the larger cockpit section. This also allowed me to use the bomb bay of the F-35A.
I would move the roll puffers back one frame space too, but leave the main gear where they are.
The pics below are what the link said was F-35 structure
-
It occurred to me that the cost of what would be a very expensive trainer, would restrict who would be buying it. My thoughts around this, is the aircraft could be used to do something completely different to just training.
I talked this over with Evan too, I had asked that if the aircraft is all fly-by-wire, and all electrical everything else, you could have a very clever bit of software where you could change what the right-seater does, at a flick of a switch. The right side could be made to do SEAD work, using all the controls and switches doing another job, with the instruments showing different on the screens etc.
-
I have considered combining a F-35A kit with bits from a F-35B or F-35C to do the dual-refueling version. Since the bay where the refueling probe retracts is kept to the same layout on the F-35A, that part of such a change shouldn't be difficult.
-
Italian F-35Bs:
(https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E22AQEMCB6wEGAatQ/feedshare-shrink_2048_1536/0/1671650601670?e=1674691200&v=beta&t=2oZxfvaKrXHiSCkcDQ2xzs-IwEHYqA8Rst_IyCEZBAA)(https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E22AQF2odE-5LtfrQ/feedshare-shrink_2048_1536/0/1671650604737?e=1674691200&v=beta&t=yBQnbCUVx0qq28DQdVgjTGz7gVpC41t5k4BQeqsi1eY)
(https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/C4E22AQGVZ7FzyNMInw/feedshare-shrink_2048_1536/0/1671650604630?e=1674691200&v=beta&t=JaE0q0Y3b8nvcXlAloi4BkJ3yjorjChZbrCcsalv_Fg)
-
(https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/C4D22AQGTVVzyk56aBQ/feedshare-shrink_1280/0/1675933611266?e=1678924800&v=beta&t=joCCkCM-u2On8b9AxkTmYGadIiE4Hkhc-hVdvRRnOMg)
Norwegian F-35 Lightning II
-
(https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-4ed324dfc36f98b9afcfee6868c729be)
-
Dumping this here, but the display notion could work for any 4th or 5th or 6th gen VTOL/chopper ;)
(https://i.imgur.com/kEwv8Il.jpg)
-
Clever,,, turned regular F-35B model into a STEM learning build.
-
(https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/D4E22AQExViijKnAbMg/feedshare-shrink_1280/0/1705748369687?e=1708560000&v=beta&t=Sq19vtRrnPA7AqAccgMDRhH7NIEI20ob-OuxfzFbeHA)
CFBV
-
Fictional...but perhaps inspirational:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKDwU49WYAAqTju?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKEmNeHWkAE4fMt?format=jpg&name=900x900)