F35B

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Goodwinch95, Aug 30, 2015.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I see that we are still going ahead with the purchase of the F35B even though it can be detected by the same radar that was used in WW2 using VHF. By the time it is in service it will be the elephant in the sky, over budget, over weight and over here. It will turn out to be one of the most useless piece of equipment ever purchased. However, the MOD are happy with it, that must tell us something!!!
     
    • Braindead Braindead x 4
    • Bullshit Bullshit x 3
  2. Go and read up on some basic radar theory: Stimson's book is good, so is Skolnik's. Then perhaps you'll understand why low-observable aircraft "being detected by VHF radar" is not particularly unusual, scary or problematic.

    Or just pat yourself on the back and join the crowd of bleating buffoons who for many years have been insisting that whatever the military is buying must be rubbish (the Spitfire had too few wings and would be slaughtered by more agile biplanes, aircraft carriers would be shot to scrap by enemy battleships, submarines were worthless deathtraps, and so on and so forth.

    A favourite of mine was the contemptuous dismissal of a new rifle for the Army by the gravelbellies of Bisley: "The rifle was always bad, its defects always notorious, and the propagation of badness will doubtless continue for several generations to come". Yes, the Lee-Enfield was probably the worst rifle ever inflicted on the Army, wasn't it?
     
  3. Why bother with radar? You will probably be able to see an F-35 with the naked eyeball at about the same range, if not for long. Stealth, eh?

    (You do know that VHF radar is short-range, too big to mount in an aircraft, too inaccurate to provide a firing solution and can easily be jammed or even homed on by supporting EW, don't you?)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Nonsense. Just take one of these:-

    [​IMG]

    and weld it into the nose of any fighter aircraft, and Stealth is rendered obsolete and useless.

    (There are a number of reasons why we moved out of A-band for radars...)
     
  5. Aww. Does that mean putting it in the nose of an anti-F-35 missile might be a bit tricky too?
     
  6. A vertical yagi???? :cool:
     
  7. Contender for most ill-informed post of the year right here. Wonderful.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. You missed out the bit where the British Generals turned down submachine guns before WW2 as they'd "encourage the soldiers to waste ammunition".
     
  9. Nope, that was a different cockup: SMGs were seen as good things to have, trials were done, and we chose the Finnish Suomi as the best in breed; but there were issues about whether we'd import from them (their capacity only a few hundred a year) or licence-produce, which were abruptly ended by the Soviet invasion and the Winter War.

    We then copied the German MP28 as the Lanchester, mostly going to the RN for boarding work; bought in Thompsons from the US; and developed the Sten for indigenous mass-production.
     
  10. I personally liked the one where the RAF VSO told Frank Whittle, after a demonstration of his new fangled 'Jet Engine', "Its an interesting idea Whittle but it'll never catch on".
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Or the alleged comment by a VSO that there was no place for the telephone in an Army headquarters, because the ringing bell would startle the horses...

    And yet the Gloster Meteor was chasing V1s by 1944, and the RAF was ahead of the USAAC in getting a usable jet fighter fielded (their P-80 turned out decent, but was too late even for Japan let alone Europe). The Meteor may have lagged behind the Me262 a little, but it didn't burst into flames if you moved the throttles too fast...
     
  12. You didn't need to change the Derwent donks so often either.
     

Share This Page