Bye-bye F-35?

#452
#452
NorthDallas40 said:
The F-35 will get a new engine because they simply keep cramming more electronics in it requiring more power and cooling. It’s just a matter of whether it’s a P&W design iteration or a GE/RR alternate design.
Click to expand...
Oh yea. But I think the GE one that was scrapped had adaptive cycles? That tech will be back.
 
#454
#454
85SugarVol said:
They can’t build em fast enough. Line is around the block.
Click to expand...

And they can't keep the "operational" ones operational. I read something today that said the F-35 fleet has only something like 30% fully functional. Another article said the number of flying hours for USAF pilots is in the gutter. Lack of proficiency related to operability is not good at all.
 
#455
#455
Rasputin_Vol said:
Its one maintenance issue after another. $1.7 trillion. The F-35 and Boeing 737 MAX... American engineering.
Click to expand...

Chalk the 737Max up to bean counters. To do what Boeing wanted they needed a new plane - just not enough room under the wing for bigger engines. You just can't reposition engines without affecting parameters, so they tried to force software to mask the imbalance. Engineers can only do so much when bound by artificial constraints - refuse and you have no job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#458
#458
hog88 said:
Lots of neat stuff goes on at Arnold. Done a lot of work down there.
Click to expand...

I was one of three generations in my family to work at Arnold. For me, it was just a summer between my sophomore and junior year at UT. My dad worked there after retiring from the AF. My son worked there under the TN Tech coop program and had a full time job as soon as he graduated. Funny thing is the AF can never decide if it should be a base, a station, or a center. One of those military problems where the "operating" branches don't have as much respect for the support branches as they should. I really believe if the flying part of the AF was more closely integrated with the development "eggheads" the airplanes would be better. When I was working on an appointment to the AF Academy, the AF shut off the Academy to anyone not qualified to fly. I've always thought that was a huge mistake and drove a wedge between people who fly the planes and the people who develop new ones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85SugarVol and Orangeburst
#459
#459
AM64 said:
I was one of three generations in my family to work at Arnold. For me, it was just a summer between my sophomore and junior year at UT. My dad worked there after retiring from the AF. My son worked there under the TN Tech coop program and had a full time job as soon as he graduated. Funny thing is the AF can never decide if it should be a base, a station, or a center. One of those military problems where the "operating" branches don't have as much respect for the support branches as they should. I really believe if the flying part of the AF was more closely integrated with the development "eggheads" the airplanes would be better. When I was working on an appointment to the AF Academy, the AF shut off the Academy to anyone not qualified to fly. I've always thought that was a huge mistake and drove a wedge between people who fly the planes and the people who develop new ones.
Click to expand...

Prepping for Y2K we had the contract to clean the fuel tanks for all of the backup generators on base and there‘s a bunch of them. We had to have an escort everywhere we went, one morning after we got to the first location and our escort left us, said he be back in an hour. We sat there until about 4 that afternoon, couldn’t get anyone on the phone so I guess at some point someone said “oh ****”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#460
#460
hog88 said:
Prepping for Y2K we had the contract to clean the fuel tanks for all of the backup generators on base and there‘s a bunch of them. We had to have an escort everywhere we went, one morning after we got to the first location and our escort left us, said he be back in an hour. We sat there until about 4 that afternoon, couldn’t get anyone on the phone so I guess at some point someone said “oh ****”.
Click to expand...

Most of the work on base is done by contractors, so the workforce is predominantly civilian; the military mindset used to be pretty much missing. However, when just going through the gate to get to the commissary and exchange these days, it appears they have stepped up security. Somebody should have fried that escort.
 
#461
#461
AM64 said:
Most of the work on base is done by contractors, so the workforce is predominantly civilian; the military mindset used to be pretty much missing. However, when just going through the gate to get to the commissary and exchange these days, it appears they have stepped up security. Somebody should have fried that escort.
Click to expand...

Wish I had my fishing pole that day, it was the one at the dam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#462
#462
AM64 said:
Anybody notice the blurb under the picture of the engine under test. A lot of critical stuff goes on at Arnold, and most people probably don't even know it exists.
Click to expand...

I used to go there for business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#466
#466
Orangeburst said:
Major issues on the F-135 motor announced. Expected overhaul life is reduced by 25% for the motor due to excessive temp issues with the by pass air trying to cool all the electrics. Pentagon even admitted they missed design parameters.
TR-3 is pushed out a year and will require even more cooling air, much less TR-4. New engine core is planned but not till 2030. Not good.
This late in game.. I wasn't expecting such a serious design flaw.
Click to expand...

The initial versions of the F-14 would eject their turbine blades during rapid increases and decreases in power (like on final approach to the boat). It still went on to be a premier naval fighter. The F-35 has some great performance parameters, but it's all about its avionics and weapons systems. Keep hearing about its ability to "manage" other assets. This will still be a successful aircraft, simply because of the availability of a Naval variant..

But do you notice we don't sell Raptors? Partly the operational cost per hour to fly, but we keep that one to ourselves because it is the superior fighter, so much so that they use different tactics just for its capabilities that we want to keep secret. There are other planes with better thrust to weight ratios, but the Raptor is superior in so many other ways including stealth. F-35 is a great platform, the F-22 is a superior fighter.
 
#470
#470
AM64 said:
Chalk the 737Max up to bean counters. To do what Boeing wanted they needed a new plane - just not enough room under the wing for bigger engines. You just can't reposition engines without affecting parameters, so they tried to force software to mask the imbalance. Engineers can only do so much when bound by artificial constraints - refuse and you have no job.
Click to expand...
Now that is true. Really, the F-35 can be blamed on bean counters/administrators also. It was supposed to be a aircraft that was to be a mixed-use/hybrid under one platform. Instead of having various aircraft to address specific needs, they decided to go the cheap route (or so they thought).
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#472
#472
NorthDallas40 said:
I think there is an engine called ATEP or AETP that is the upgrade path for the F-22 and retro path for the F-15 and F-16?
Click to expand...
Could be?

The “adaptive engine technology” that I have seen referenced most is the GE XA100. Pratt has one too that it is developing.

Yes they are powerful
Yes they are efficient-er
But it’s the heat generated

They can cycle between modes based requirement, and keep thermal output limited.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#473
#473
WBO said:
The initial versions of the F-14 would eject their turbine blades during rapid increases and decreases in power (like on final approach to the boat). It still went on to be a premier naval fighter. The F-35 has some great performance parameters, but it's all about its avionics and weapons systems. Keep hearing about its ability to "manage" other assets. This will still be a successful aircraft, simply because of the availability of a Naval variant..

But do you notice we don't sell Raptors? Partly the operational cost per hour to fly, but we keep that one to ourselves because it is the superior fighter, so much so that they use different tactics just for its capabilities that we want to keep secret. There are other planes with better thrust to weight ratios, but the Raptor is superior in so many other ways including stealth. F-35 is a great platform, the F-22 is a superior fighter.
Click to expand...
The F-35 is the quarterback. Biggest disservice ever done to it was referring to it as a “fighter”. Probably should have gotten the clunky “F/A” pre-fix.
 
#474
#474
85SugarVol said:
Could be?

The “adaptive engine technology” that I have seen referenced most is the GE XA100. Pratt has one too that it is developing.

Yes they are powerful
Yes they are efficient-er
But it’s the heat generated

They can cycle between modes based requirement, and keep thermal output limited.
Click to expand...

Axed for now. What gets me is the demonstrators have been built, but takes another $6B and like 7 years to complete development
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#475
#475
Orangeburst said:
Axed for now. What gets me is the demonstrators have been built, but takes another $6B and like 7 years to complete development
Click to expand...
Yup.
But that tech will be back was all I was saying.

Too much heat management potential to handle the speeds and whiz-bangs we want incorporated into the next gen’s.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top