A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

2D thrust vectoring for the F-35A and F-35C?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 4th 04, 10:01 PM
Scott Ferrin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:26:12 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .

I agree. On the other hand China has close to 300 Flankers and
counting, have intriduce the AA-12 into service, and are working on
acquiring the J-10. I have no doubts that Russia would offer the
KS-172 to China if they asked. I wouldn't want to face a Su-30 with
THAT thing in an F-15. Again, I'm not saying it's impossible I'm just
saying that the cost in pilots and airframes lost would be higher.
This is a rhetorical question but is it worth losing F-15s, F-35s, and
their pilots to save a few bucks by not buying the F-22?


You make an excellent case for the reliable airborn weapons platform
designated F/A-18E. The USAF could do well by tabbing to USN's application
of AFRL's parts and software reliability technology. I wonder if the
pirates at China Lake could make the F/A-18x weapons data port USAF
compatable rapidly.


The F/A-18E is a reliable platform true, but I'd be surprised if there
is a pilot out there who wouldn't rather be in an F-15K or I if they
had to go air to air.
  #2  
Old March 4th 04, 10:02 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:26:12 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .

I agree. On the other hand China has close to 300 Flankers and
counting, have intriduce the AA-12 into service, and are working on
acquiring the J-10. I have no doubts that Russia would offer the
KS-172 to China if they asked. I wouldn't want to face a Su-30 with
THAT thing in an F-15. Again, I'm not saying it's impossible I'm just
saying that the cost in pilots and airframes lost would be higher.
This is a rhetorical question but is it worth losing F-15s, F-35s, and
their pilots to save a few bucks by not buying the F-22?


You make an excellent case for the reliable airborn weapons platform
designated F/A-18E. The USAF could do well by tabbing to USN's

application
of AFRL's parts and software reliability technology. I wonder if the
pirates at China Lake could make the F/A-18x weapons data port USAF
compatable rapidly.


The F/A-18E is a reliable platform true, but I'd be surprised if there
is a pilot out there who wouldn't rather be in an F-15K or I if they
had to go air to air.


The F-15's politics have taken a serious turn for the worse.


  #3  
Old March 4th 04, 10:16 PM
Scott Ferrin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:02:52 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:26:12 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .

I agree. On the other hand China has close to 300 Flankers and
counting, have intriduce the AA-12 into service, and are working on
acquiring the J-10. I have no doubts that Russia would offer the
KS-172 to China if they asked. I wouldn't want to face a Su-30 with
THAT thing in an F-15. Again, I'm not saying it's impossible I'm just
saying that the cost in pilots and airframes lost would be higher.
This is a rhetorical question but is it worth losing F-15s, F-35s, and
their pilots to save a few bucks by not buying the F-22?

You make an excellent case for the reliable airborn weapons platform
designated F/A-18E. The USAF could do well by tabbing to USN's

application
of AFRL's parts and software reliability technology. I wonder if the
pirates at China Lake could make the F/A-18x weapons data port USAF
compatable rapidly.


The F/A-18E is a reliable platform true, but I'd be surprised if there
is a pilot out there who wouldn't rather be in an F-15K or I if they
had to go air to air.


The F-15's politics have taken a serious turn for the worse.


I know I bitch about political stupidity a lot myself, but fortunatley
politics aren't the be-all and end-all.
  #4  
Old March 4th 04, 10:34 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 14:02:52 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:26:12 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .

I agree. On the other hand China has close to 300 Flankers and
counting, have intriduce the AA-12 into service, and are working on
acquiring the J-10. I have no doubts that Russia would offer the
KS-172 to China if they asked. I wouldn't want to face a Su-30 with
THAT thing in an F-15. Again, I'm not saying it's impossible I'm

just
saying that the cost in pilots and airframes lost would be higher.
This is a rhetorical question but is it worth losing F-15s, F-35s,

and
their pilots to save a few bucks by not buying the F-22?

You make an excellent case for the reliable airborn weapons platform
designated F/A-18E. The USAF could do well by tabbing to USN's

application
of AFRL's parts and software reliability technology. I wonder if the
pirates at China Lake could make the F/A-18x weapons data port USAF
compatable rapidly.

The F/A-18E is a reliable platform true, but I'd be surprised if there
is a pilot out there who wouldn't rather be in an F-15K or I if they
had to go air to air.


The F-15's politics have taken a serious turn for the worse.


I know I bitch about political stupidity a lot myself, but fortunatley
politics aren't the be-all and end-all.


All aviation is politics and the F-15 survives on Gephardt's vote. The USAF
has less options than they did last Summer. I personally believe an F/A-18x
buy would be symbolic of why dishonest management leads to humble pie.


  #5  
Old March 4th 04, 10:49 PM
Michael Zaharis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Tarver Engineering wrote:

All aviation is politics and the F-15 survives on Gephardt's vote. The USAF
has less options than they did last Summer. I personally believe an F/A-18x
buy would be symbolic of why dishonest management leads to humble pie.



Pardon my ignorance, but isn't he F/A-18E/F managed by the same people
that manage the F-15? Aren't they both built in St. Louis?

  #6  
Old March 4th 04, 11:01 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Michael Zaharis" wrote in message
...


Tarver Engineering wrote:

All aviation is politics and the F-15 survives on Gephardt's vote. The

USAF
has less options than they did last Summer. I personally believe an

F/A-18x
buy would be symbolic of why dishonest management leads to humble pie.


Pardon my ignorance, but isn't he F/A-18E/F managed by the same people
that manage the F-15? Aren't they both built in St. Louis?


I am not claiming there is any ethical problem with the F-15's management.


  #7  
Old March 4th 04, 11:22 PM
Michael Zaharis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Tarver Engineering wrote:
"Michael Zaharis" wrote in message
...


Tarver Engineering wrote:


All aviation is politics and the F-15 survives on Gephardt's vote. The


USAF

has less options than they did last Summer. I personally believe an


F/A-18x

buy would be symbolic of why dishonest management leads to humble pie.



Pardon my ignorance, but isn't he F/A-18E/F managed by the same people
that manage the F-15? Aren't they both built in St. Louis?



I am not claiming there is any ethical problem with the F-15's management.



Then why is the F-15 in worse shape, politically, as mentioned in your
earlier post? Not disagreeing, just trying to understand.

  #8  
Old March 4th 04, 11:23 PM
Michael Zaharis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Tarver Engineering wrote:

"Michael Zaharis" wrote in message
...


Tarver Engineering wrote:


All aviation is politics and the F-15 survives on Gephardt's vote. The


USAF

has less options than they did last Summer. I personally believe an


F/A-18x

buy would be symbolic of why dishonest management leads to humble pie.



Pardon my ignorance, but isn't he F/A-18E/F managed by the same people
that manage the F-15? Aren't they both built in St. Louis?



I am not claiming there is any ethical problem with the F-15's management.




Then why is the F-15 in worse shape, politically, than the F/A-18, as
mentioned in your earlier post? Not disagreeing, just trying to
understand.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.