|
Lostconfused posted:They say bleed air, but it's seems to be pretty clear that the F-35 is just not as good as it's was promised to be and in part it's because of the engine not being able to handle everything that the F-35 is expected to do. Correct.
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 03:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 17:59 |
|
|
i always thought blowing hot air was a rare strong suit of the f35 program. shows what i know!
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 03:24
|
|
|
Funny how the vtol version has the least powerful engine
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 05:21
|
|
|
The problem in a more immediate sense is that it is going to affect availability if the the engine can’t take the stress, and perhaps more importantly, it very likely will hamper any sort of intense combat duty. It doesn’t seem like replacements are on a quick timeline either. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 07:32 on Apr 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 05:48
|
|
|
I'm sorry you have this engine with space for a giant loving drive-shaft for the Marines lift fan garbage right in front of it and you can't run a generator off that to power your onboard systems Like, you know, a modern passenger airliner
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 07:29
|
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:I'm sorry you have this engine with space for a giant loving drive-shaft for the Marines lift fan garbage right in front of it and you can't run a generator off that to power your onboard systems They do run generators for power, the problem is pulling cold air from the engine makes the engine run hotter
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 11:12
|
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:I'm sorry you have this engine with space for a giant loving drive-shaft for the Marines lift fan garbage right in front of it and you can't run a generator off that to power your onboard systems I think you should reread the article. Adding more weight and more internal component heat isn’t the solution they are looking for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 11:14
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:What can you even say at this point? They signed off on engine that was under spec, and I have to suspect that everyone involved knew that down the line Pratt and Whitney and Lockheed would benefit from entirely new engines being purchased and installed in the aircraft. I don't know what % of the cost of an aircraft the engine is, but for a warship propulsion can be like 50% of the cost or more, which is why total refits and modernizations are so rare. And we have to take this fucker about the arctic circle.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 16:47
|
|
|
500excf type r posted:They do run generators for power, the problem is pulling cold air from the engine makes the engine run hotter it's not pulling "cold" air from the engine it's pulling compressed air that's very hot but can be used to cool some components. it's also used to de-ice wings and stuff, cause it's hot planes can pull cold air from the atmosphere but it's not done through the engine and idk if it's used on fighter jets. probably is actually to keep the cabin cool
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 16:53
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:And we have to take this fucker about the arctic circle. Canada had a requirement for 2 engined interceptors based at home since the earliest days of jet aviation, even if that meant operating multiple types. Wings at home flew CF-100 Canucks and CF-101 Voodoos while wings in Germany had Sabres, Starfighters, and CF-5 Freedom Fighters, all the way though the acquisition of CF-18s. The argument for the F-35 was that engines now are so reliable that the requirement was no longer needed. It turns out that the F-35 specifically has an underpowered and unreliable engine. Add to that Canadair is dead now, so this does not help the domestic aviation industry, all of the money is leaving the country. Previous aircraft were all built under licence and the deal with the CF-18, which was an exception, was that the next one would be built here, just like the Sabres, Freedom Fighters and Starfighters were. Well, it turns out we got played, just like all of the European countries that bought the F-16 and had the same thing happen to their aviation industries. This loving country.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 17:13
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:What can you even say at this point? They signed off on engine that was under spec, and I have to suspect that everyone involved knew that down the line Pratt and Whitney and Lockheed would benefit from entirely new engines being purchased and installed in the aircraft. I don't know what % of the cost of an aircraft the engine is, Depending on model, the engine is about 11-13% of the cost of an F-35. In the oughts, the engine was priced at round 20-25% the cost of a whole jet, but they were able to significantly reduce the engine unit cost with economies of scale as the program went on. It is harder to find what percentage of cpfh is from the engine; I'm sure it's a significant portion. Frosted Flake posted:The argument for the F-35 was that engines now are so reliable that the requirement was no longer needed. It turns out that the F-35 specifically has an underpowered and unreliable engine. I think you are confused about increased cost of maintenance on the ground, which is a different problem from engine failure in flight. To date, 2 F-35 has had a flight mishap due to engine control failure. It was in test and had not yet been accepted for delivery into any military service. As a result, the government halted engine acceptance from the manufacturer until all new-build engines could be inspected and fitted with a fix. Deliveries have resumed after finding a problem that causes that F-35B mishap during testing. The other was a fuel tube issue, which is since fixed (5 years ago or so). It's not 100% clear that the fuel tube was part of the engine system, but I'm including it to give the engine a lack of benefit of the doubt. Doesn't much matter if it was a fuel system tube vs an engine tube, I guess. E: fixed typo - meant to say "2" F-35s had engine problems, and the typo put it at "12" To put it in artillery terms, this would be like a gun that needs more expensive and more frequent maintenance than intended, but detectable and predictable maintenance. It is not like a gun that just catastrophically fails and kills the crew at random. mlmp08 has issued a correction as of 17:33 on Apr 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 17:28
|
|
|
I take your point, though I would say neither is ideal for defence of the continent. Not that F-102 and F-106 were perfect either, I believe both had some significant problems. CF-100 and F-101 seem like perfect fits for the Canadian requirements though, being basically flying bricks without too much to worry about. I don't know much about the the P&W J57 but the Avro Canada Orenda was boring, conventional and reliable, so far as I know. Not an aviation guy, so I could be wrong but big plane + 2 engines seems like a winning formula. Idk, put Airbus engines on for all it matters, and use the F-35 in Europe just like our previous mix of interceptors at home and fighter bombers away.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 17:52
|
|
|
The F-35A was the frontrunner, but a move for the F/A-18E would have made sense IMO. Canada's air defense mission is much more about getting to and shooting down missiles, which an AESA-equipped F/A-18E can do. Some speculate this was also linked to a Boeing airliner dispute with Canada, but I don't know. Once it was down to the Gripen or F-35A, RIP Gripen. The other major two-engine offerings (Rafale and Eurofighter) both dropped out on their own, because they found Canada too difficult to work with and thought the whole competition was stacked to make a US choice the only real choice. F-15EX could do the mission as well, but jet for jet costs even more than an F-35A to both buy and to fly, and it wasn't around when Canada kicked this project off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 18:07
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:The other major two-engine offerings (Rafale and Eurofighter) both dropped out on their own, because they found Canada too difficult to work with and thought the whole competition was stacked to make a US choice the only real choice. They were correct.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 18:12
|
|
|
they should of just made more F22s imo. that plane seems pretty cool except that there's so few of them and they can't make more spare parts
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:They were correct. lol that the US competitors for India's next big fighterplane bonanza were actually shocked when they lost to european designs and queen secretary hillary tried to offer us the F-35 if we cancelled the competition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 23:50
|
|
|
indigi posted:they should of just made more F22s imo. that plane seems pretty cool except that there's so few of them and they can't make more spare parts Its hilarious how back in the 90s the F-22 was going to be this great big super plane of the future this shining beacon of America's military might and its only publicly known combat misson is shooting down a weather ballon off of South Carolina
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 00:02
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I think you should reread the article. Adding more weight and more internal component heat isn’t the solution they are looking for. you're right the solution they're looking for is planned early failure on national defense hardware so they can steal from the public trust even faster than planned
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 00:04
|
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:you're right the solution they're looking for is planned early failure on national defense hardware so they can steal from the public trust even faster than planned look, this huge scam isn't a scam because we had a even bigger scam lined up impeccable logic
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 00:06
|
|
|
Palladium posted:look, this huge scam isn't a scam because we had a even bigger scam lined up then when they get their trillion dollars and the plane is a useless dog anyway they can get another two trillion for !SIXTH GEN!!~
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 00:11
|
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:then when they get their trillion dollars and the plane is a useless dog anyway they can get another two trillion for !SIXTH GEN!!~ clearly, the body of MIC beneficiaries called the congress and senate will be very patriotic enough to stop this corruption
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 00:16
|
|
|
what a difference ten years makesquote:One major directive of the development of the F135 engine was to drastically improve engine reliability and ease of maintenance over previous aircraft, keeping downtime at a minimum. One such method was to use far fewer parts in comparison to similar engines, theoretically reducing parts failures, and ensuring that all line-replaceable components can be changed using a standard set of six common tools.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 00:43
|
|
|
"This software will help us find what the problem is with the engine" "It turned out that the problem is that the engine is poo poo. We didn't need the software for this either."
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 01:06
|
|
|
Lostconfused posted:"This software will help us find what the problem is with the engine" *pointing to F35 integrated maintenance management terminal that has a flashing warning message "please insert 500 billion dollars"* "see there's the problem"
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 02:43
|
|
|
let’s see it says the engine problem is, huh, “too much entitlement spending” and “the perfidious Chinese, who must be confronted with force if necessary.” wow, this diagnostic is brilliant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 02:56
|
|
|
indigi posted:it's not pulling "cold" air from the engine it's pulling compressed air that's very hot but can be used to cool some components. it's also used to de-ice wings and stuff, cause it's hot 500f is cold as gently caress for a jet engine
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 07:50
|
|
|
500excf type r posted:500f is cold as gently caress for a jet engine Wrong. Most jet engines are colder than that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 08:03
|
|
|
The f35 engine is ambient temperature most of the time because it's turned off for maintenance
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 08:55
|
|
|
If I recall correctly the reason why the VTOL model has the weaker engine is that any stronger and it'd destroy the runway it'd be trying to take off from. The naval version, which does short takeoffs, can afford a more powerful engine and is better off for it
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 09:01
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:The f35 engine is ambient temperature most of the time because it's turned off for maintenance It can provide shade if you crawl up into it to take a nap
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 09:26
|
|
|
Weka posted:Wrong. Most jet engines are colder than that. Im sure this is a joke but "hot" and "cold" are relative terms and the "cold" section of an engine is still hitting like 1100+ degrees in the final compressor stages before the combustor. Idk what that other dude was on about because the original article talked about all the things he pondered re: cabin air (it is bleed air cooled down) The whole engine is designed around the bleed air / cooling air, it's a balancing act to get as much power as possible while removing that heat from the components. When you add or remove it in one area, it affects everything else
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 20:26
|
|
|
500excf type r posted:Im sure this is a joke but "hot" and "cold" are relative terms and the "cold" section of an engine is still hitting like 1100+ degrees in the final compressor stages before the combustor. Idk what that other dude was on about because the original article talked about all the things he pondered re: cabin air (it is bleed air cooled down) To the extent to where some of the newer high power turbine rotor sections are being milled from solid blocks of titanium to try and scrape out a couple extra degrees of operating temperature.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 20:47
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:If I recall correctly the reason why the VTOL model has the weaker engine is that any stronger and it'd destroy the runway it'd be trying to take off from. The naval version, which does short takeoffs, can afford a more powerful engine and is better off for it here's an article about that from 2010: https://theaviationist.com/2010/11/24/the-f-35b-heating-problems/ 1700 degree downwash, that can't be easy on an aircraft carrier's deck
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 22:59
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:If I recall correctly the reason why the VTOL model has the weaker engine is that any stronger and it'd destroy the runway it'd be trying to take off from. The naval version, which does short takeoffs, can afford a more powerful engine and is better off for it The marines should have just retrofitted ski jumps on the amphibious assault ships rather than deal with the F-35B. I guess they really need the deck space for more helicopters, or maybe some dingus in the USMC is still obsessed with jets ~operating from FOBs~ like they were with the Harrier, Falklands, etc. but can you imagine the delicate little flower that is the F-35 operating out of a dusty rear end FOB? Of course the real reason they committed to a VTOL F-35 is for grifting neoliberally, but still it's funny to think about. edit: reminds me of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=814kuAcpemY&t=218s Top Gun Reference has issued a correction as of 23:51 on Apr 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 23:38
|
|
|
Top Gun Reference posted:The marines should have just retrofitted ski jumps on the amphibious assault ships rather than deal with the F-35B. I guess they really need the deck space for more helicopters, or maybe some dingus in the USMC is still obsessed with jets ~operating from FOBs~ like they were with the Harrier, Falklands, etc. but can you imagine the delicate little flower that is the F-35 operating out of a dusty rear end FOB? Of course the real reason they committed to a VTOL F-35 is for grifting neoliberally, but still it's funny to think about. After decades of the US military making fun of nations with skijump aircraft carriers the US would never do something practical and cheap
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 23:59
|
|
|
500excf type r posted:Im sure this is a joke Somebody even helpfully explained it. Slavvy posted:The f35 engine is ambient temperature most of the time because it's turned off for maintenance
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 00:25
|
|
|
Top Gun Reference posted:The marines should have just retrofitted ski jumps on the amphibious assault ships rather than deal with the F-35B. I guess they really need the deck space for more helicopters, or maybe some dingus in the USMC is still obsessed with jets ~operating from FOBs~ like they were with the Harrier, Falklands, etc. but can you imagine the delicate little flower that is the F-35 operating out of a dusty rear end FOB? Of course the real reason they committed to a VTOL F-35 is for grifting neoliberally, but still it's funny to think about. The marines ahould retrofit themselves out of existence
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 00:45
|
|
|
Palladium posted:The marines ahould retrofit themselves out of existence I read that they're getting repurposed as an occupational force to hold islands and make it a slog for China to take over the rest of Asia, relying on the Navy to get them there I guess they never heard of MacArthur's island hopping
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 00:57
|
|
|
It's halfway to an acknowledgement that landing on the Chinese mainland is beyond the capabilities of any branch of the US military, and so there's no mission for the USMC in that sort of war.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 01:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 17:59 |
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:It's halfway to an acknowledgement that landing on the Chinese mainland is beyond the capabilities of any branch of the US military, and so there's no mission for the USMC in that sort of war. Is there a way to take and occupy a megacity, anywhere but especially China? Kiev has like 3 million people and Shanghai has 27. The Russians didn't even get to Kiev
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 01:43
|
|
