f-35 willdie

[Er Presidente]

I speak of ships, indeed of submarines, because I have some extra title than if I spoke of planes, but I think I do not miss translating a concept from "my" environment to that air.
There is no "universal" ship, good for everything.
or use compromises or "specialize".
a submarine can never replace a cruiser and vice versa.
when he tried to create the "submersible carrier" he went to meet some horny whistles.
I am surprised that such a simple concept has been ignored by those who, on the other hand, should have clear what it means in a field of high specialization such as that of weapons.

the problem lies there, the belief that a modern technology could "build" a real multi-role, the dream of always that "cozza" every time against a harsh reality.
Unfortunately the mcnamara thought, just philosophically, continues to reap victims among those who "decline" without a minimum of humble pragmatism.

 

[numero1]

I'm sorry, I'm praying I don't understand a bunch of planes and aviation, and in fact I discovered this 3ad by chance.
However, since it was (and it will be) a topic that has been discussed a lot on the media, in various ways, I wanted to know if my interpretation is correct.
Then I read all previous posts and, if I understood correctly, it decided to design/build this plane trying to make the perfect plane, thus exceeding on certain technical/structural characteristics that are leading to certain problems.
physiological problems during a project which, however, have been engulfed by the media (or part of them).
And why?
because in the meantime the crisis broke out and nobody wants to, at this point, really build this plane, since it has little money to spend.
but no one can or wants to say it openly, and then the game of the cerino was started to refer to at the beginning.
Is that correct what I wrote?
Can experts confirm and/or correct me?
Hello and thank you.

 

[Er Presidente]

physiological problems during a project which, however, have been engulfed by the media (or part of them).
And why?

"until"? And who says they're tricked? I think they're understated.

because in the meantime the crisis broke out and nobody wants to, at this point, really build this plane, since it has little money to spend.

the renunciation does so because the costs have increased exponentially and the performance does not guarantee the purchase of a really "excellent" plane, that is that it is higher than what will be produced in the next 40 years.

but no one can or wants to say it openly, and then the game of the cerino was started to refer to at the beginning.

There are contracts, giving up can cost a lot of salt, depends on what's written. the "game" as you call it is nothing but a strong insufficiency of the media (Americans) towards a Pharaonic project, with epochal costs and with dubious performance if not even insufficient.

Is that correct what I wrote?
Can experts confirm and/or correct me?
Hello and thank you.

I am not an expert, I read what is published and I try to translate it.

 

[numero1]

ok now it is + clear, and thank you for the answer, I only have one more question.

"until"? And who says they're tricked? I think they're understated.

If it is as you write, then I assume that there have been some design errors well + serious than the physiological ones I thought of.
and therefore it is better not to build it.
Agreed that there are contracts, and in fact I assume that those who have wrong pay and will pay .......... But if I do, it must work well.
so much + in time of lean cows.......
Where am I wrong?

 

[Er Presidente]

ok now it is + clear, and thank you for the answer, I only have one more question.



If it is as you write, then I assume that there have been some design errors well + serious than the physiological ones I thought of.
and therefore it is better not to build it.
Agreed that there are contracts, and in fact I assume that those who have wrong pay and will pay .......... But if I do, it must work well.
so much + in time of lean cows.......
Where am I wrong?

It's not the first time that happens, then everything solves with time and so much money (that's gone).
Also for the same f-22 raptor has an astronomical cost that is unknown (top secret), it was so.
all projects have begun underestimating the problems and costs and overestimating the possibilities of solving them, so much so then "in progress" the costs and the related funds "adjust".
the programmes of this type are twenty years and fury of revising and disbursing funds then, in the end you get somewhere.
But with the f-35, the game got too big and it's getting embarrassing, nobody wants to afford the costs that are comparable to a national budget.
Sure with the cold war it was easier, it was enough to "discover" a new Russian fighter with miraculous performances and with the gap of technological inferiority they convinced the various governments to mislead to participate in the technological race.
only when you thought about doing things "in small" (a-4, f-5, f-16) projects declaredly "inferior", to sell to the nations of "series b", having to hold the costs, you managed to do what you had without Pindaric flights in roaring performances and far from reality.
the f-35 is revealing a "mediocre" plane, not in absolute, but as far as promised and cost.
It would be absurd to be risked to be found with a plane more expensive than a f-22, but with performances just higher than a harrier (in the vertical takeoff version) and abundantly lower than the "specialized" fighters that should face.
now that the various nations begin to "feel", they begin to come out of its limits (reduced stealth capacity, insufficient autonomy) and to solve these problems they need more money, so much money, that no one has and no one wants to spend. who can 'be paraded' and opt for more 'traditional and much more 'economic (as well as immediate) solutions waiting for migior times.
in Italy it continues to move forward without but and without if, and we risk staying alone, which would be tragicomic.
The land scrapped its harriers and no longer knows what to do, and we gave up all the European developments of a sucessor of the tornado, amx, and with the sailor without future. today you could opt for an "ad interim" solution (fa-18, gripen) with a cost of a third "per piece" (if the cost of the f-35 does not increase).
We'd stay on foot with the marina (like the British), do you know how big this problem is? You are, you are operational harriers, and this is the problem? we have to spend 120 million "a piece" (knowing that they will certainly become 150 and beyond) to guarantee the marina its wings?
apart from the opportunity, with the times that run, to hold on a simple facade operation, it would be necessary to agree with the Marines (who with the caxxo who give up their av-8) Americans to give it a ten (less than 30 million a piece) to shoot to camp for another 10 years, and then see what happens (may the Chinese manage to make it one at a ragged price!)
Today, politically, operation f-35 is improposable, dangerous and expensive, it takes the paxxes to say alt! and change the way, if the Canadians and the Australians (and partly the English) have done so too. We risk finding ourselves a useless toy full of problems and without money to "repair".

 

[Exatem]

It's not the first time that happens, then everything solves with time and so much money (that's gone).
Also for the same f-22 raptor has an astronomical cost that is unknown (top secret), it was so.
all projects have begun underestimating the problems and costs and overestimating the possibilities of solving them, so much so then "in progress" the costs and the related funds "adjust".
the programmes of this type are twenty years and fury of revising and disbursing funds then, in the end you get somewhere.
But with the f-35, the game got too big and it's getting embarrassing, nobody wants to afford the costs that are comparable to a national budget.
Sure with the cold war it was easier, it was enough to "discover" a new Russian fighter with miraculous performances and with the gap of technological inferiority they convinced the various governments to mislead to participate in the technological race.
only when you thought about doing things "in small" (a-4, f-5, f-16) projects declaredly "inferior", to sell to the nations of "series b", having to hold the costs, you managed to do what you had without Pindaric flights in roaring performances and far from reality.
the f-35 is revealing a "mediocre" plane, not in absolute, but as far as promised and cost.
It would be absurd to be risked to be found with a plane more expensive than a f-22, but with performances just higher than a harrier (in the vertical takeoff version) and abundantly lower than the "specialized" fighters that should face.
now that the various nations begin to "feel", they begin to come out of its limits (reduced stealth capacity, insufficient autonomy) and to solve these problems they need more money, so much money, that no one has and no one wants to spend. who can 'be paraded' and opt for more 'traditional and much more 'economic (as well as immediate) solutions waiting for migior times.
in Italy it continues to move forward without but and without if, and we risk staying alone, which would be tragicomic.
The land scrapped its harriers and no longer knows what to do, and we gave up all the European developments of a sucessor of the tornado, amx, and with the sailor without future. today you could opt for an "ad interim" solution (fa-18, gripen) with a cost of a third "per piece" (if the cost of the f-35 does not increase).
We'd stay on foot with the marina (like the British), do you know how big this problem is? You are, you are operational harriers, and this is the problem? we have to spend 120 million "a piece" (knowing that they will certainly become 150 and beyond) to guarantee the marina its wings?
apart from the opportunity, with the times that run, to hold on a simple facade operation, it would be necessary to agree with the Marines (who with the caxxo who give up their av-8) Americans to give it a ten (less than 30 million a piece) to shoot to camp for another 10 years, and then see what happens (may the Chinese manage to make it one at a ragged price!)
Today, politically, operation f-35 is improposable, dangerous and expensive, it takes the paxxes to say alt! and change the way, if the Canadians and the Australians (and partly the English) have done so too. We risk finding ourselves a useless toy full of problems and without money to "repair".View attachment 32333

the option av8 perhaps with an update step, is not so peregrina... so far the harriers have always responded to what was asked and with a relatively modest expense you could upgrade the flying component of the marina without bleeding out.
I remember that we have two aircraft carriers capable of landing a fixed wing flight component, but only one aerial component to board alternatively then, with logical operational limitations.
rather it is the will to reduce to two the means available of the aircraft, eurofighter and f35 that is tarpando the wings.
typhoon is not an air superiority hunt and the f 35 is not the multi-role you wanted to get. I have already said, you cannot get the multipurpose medium that excels in everything.
you may have a sufficient means for various roles.
And that doesn't seem to be the f35...

 

[Er Presidente]

the option av8 perhaps with an update step, is not so peregrina... so far the harriers have always responded to what was asked and with a relatively modest expense you could upgrade the flying component of the marina without bleeding out.
I remember that we have two aircraft carriers capable of landing a fixed wing flight component, but only one aerial component to board alternatively then, with logical operational limitations.
rather it is the will to reduce to two the means available of the aircraft, eurofighter and f35 that is tarpando the wings.
typhoon is not an air superiority hunt and the f 35 is not the multi-role you wanted to get. I have already said, you cannot get the multipurpose medium that excels in everything.
you may have a sufficient means for various roles.
And that doesn't seem to be the f35...

if the Italians agreed with the British, with an order of 50 of av-8, the mdd reopens the assembly line, without counting that we could acquire the production license.
The Av-8 is already English, it's a harrier to all intents, the English (the sailors) can't wait to put their hands on it.

 

[Exatem]

if the Italians agreed with the British, with an order of 50 of av-8, the mdd reopens the assembly line, without counting that we could acquire the production license.
The Av-8 is already English, it's a harrier to all intents, the English (the sailors) can't wait to put their hands on it.

I believe that the brake is represented by contractual charges.
They gave us a little rope and we hanged well...

 

[Er Presidente]

I believe that the brake is represented by contractual charges.
They gave us a little rope and we hanged well...

Of course, if the contracts checked them out what they did with the india for the pirate war...

 

[Er Presidente]

http://www.repubblica.it/economia/2..._militari_pi_costosi_degli_usa-53058224/1/#11Now all the knots will come to the comb, what do you think will happen?

 

[tecnico_plast]

(shortly) the specialized press does not speak in these terms of the f-35 (I refer to a well-known Italian monthly), in each edition are illustrated the results of new tests, it is explained to those who will go the ninth and tenth sample of presets, we talk about the industrial aspects of the project, and so on.
of the F-22 instead some news "convenience" is reported, beginning with the fact that the usaf decided to stop to 187 specimens against the 750 of which had spoken at the beginning of the program, to end with the recent problems to the system of dispensing of oxygen.

 

[marcof]

(shortly) the specialized press does not speak in these terms of the f-35 (I refer to a well-known Italian monthly), in each edition are illustrated the results of new tests, it is explained to those who will go the ninth and tenth sample of presets, we talk about the industrial aspects of the project, and so on.

Well, the "specialized" press found in our newsstands is hardly considered by entities like the pentagon or the Canadian government who decided to give up the project. . .
on the problems of the f35 the most extensive dossier is drawn up by the pentagon. They're pissed like biscies.
that then the policy of the aircraft houses is that you pull to screw up deliberately underestimate the costs to grab the orders and then play the continuous rise is another speech.

but did someone see the iacona service I had indicated and of which mbt posted the link to the page where to see it streaming?http://www.presadiretta.rai.it/dl/r...03052556-4a49-4a6d-8249-7c59169b8890.html#p=0I have seen it, I did not like a great deal (the first part is on the f35) because a little too superficial, but still makes quite well the idea of what rough around that project, including the fact that for us industrial relapses in research and design will be equal to zero. We assemble the wings and stop.

 

[Er Presidente]

http://youtu.be/r-_owmdn64mI want to see a f-35 do it! This is an airplane, a non-healthy, brilliant project, which has taught the world to be by air the result of the thought of a genius as [h=1]jack northrop[/h]

 

[Er Presidente]

(shortly) the specialized press does not speak in these terms of the f-35 (I refer to a well-known Italian monthly), in each edition are illustrated the results of new tests, it is explained to those who will go the ninth and tenth sample of presets, we talk about the industrial aspects of the project, and so on.
of the F-22 instead some news "convenience" is reported, beginning with the fact that the usaf decided to stop to 187 specimens against the 750 of which had spoken at the beginning of the program, to end with the recent problems to the system of dispensing of oxygen.

Did you see the advertisement in these magazines?

 

[Exatem]

Did you see the advertisement in these magazines?

There is a question which I have been asking myself for a while and which the President can certainly give an answer.
notoriously the use navy predilige (if not demanded) bimotor planes for safety issues (in the middle of the sea there are no alternative routes and in case of avary or war damage you must still return on board), said this (which I think has already been told by the same president), considering that the same American navy is one of the greatest potential buyers of the f35, for what reason the lockheed martin has stubbornly intended to design
Why carry an idea born already old stubbornly?
I do not think that at this moment is so serious a microfraction in a turbine shovel (which if in flight could still have disastrous effects), we are still in the development phase and the tests serve precisely to this, but it is very serious that the medium is unsuitable to satisfy the (exaggerated) expectations despite the cost is mild to the inverosimile.

 

[Tequila]

Fortunately, speaking of crazy expenses and the ten most expensive military programs of the use, obama said no to the petition to build black death....
http://www.tempi.it/blog/vogliono-c...e-stellari-e-obama-risponde-pure#.utbna1egesz

 

[Tequila]

...poi da stamane.The f35s return to fly.
the pentagon: "no risk" (cast iron) www.repubblica.it)
http://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2013/03/01/news/f35_tornano_a_volare-53629159/

 

[PierArg]

I listened to her this morning on the radio.
It was said that the fracture on the turbine blade is not a risky element for the rest of the aircraft.

Does anyone know where to find "official" documents?

 

[tecnico_plast]

Did you see the advertisement in these magazines?

certain, consortium eurofighter, m-346 master (alenia aermacchi), oto melara, agusta westland, mbda, eads, selex elsag... (who misses the Finmeccanica group? )

 

[Tequila]

I listened to her this morning on the radio.
It was said that the fracture on the turbine blade is not a risky element for the rest of the aircraft.

Does anyone know where to find "official" documents?

try looking at the official website of pratt & whitney or lockheed martin if they put something official.
the engine builder however indicates that they operated at high temperatures four times longer than a typical f35 flight.
Will it be an excuse?? Mah!!!