F-35 cannot fly near thunderstorms

C

cancel2 2022

Canceled
It's considered to be the world's most sophisticated superfighter jet, but Britain's new £150million combat aircraft has been banned from flying in bad weather for fears it could explode. Engineers working on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter have found the jet's fuel tank could explode if hit by lightning.

According to reports, the aircraft, which is hoped to enter service for both the RAF and the Royal Navy in five years' time, has also been made more vulnerable to enemy attack than the aircraft it is set to replace, after its weight was reduced in an attempt to increase fuel efficiency.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...flying-bad-weather-EXPLODE.html#ixzz2IeQTxj8R
 
cue rune and grind....why are you loyal monarchist...

that out of the way

holy plane batman...for all that money and they screwed that up
 
Sativa said:
cue rune and grind....why are you loyal monarchist...

that out of the way

holy plane batman...for all that money and they screwed that up
Click to expand...

Last year they were expressing grave doubts about its ability to land on an aircraft carrier. Our wonderful government sold off the Harrier for peanuts to the US Navy who couldn't believe their luck!! The US military plans to spend 300 billion on the F-35 although I daresay that will double before it goes into service. The main problem stems from trying to make one plane do everything.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ent-unable-to-land-on-aircraft-carriers.html#
 
Last edited:
Sinn Fein said:
At this point all I can do is laugh. The air force is just....god the army should have just held on to it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that would have made it all better... LOL. Just give it up entirely and use the Air Force we have on the carriers. This one is all an RAF thing though. Their carriers need a bit of work.
 
Damocles said:
Yeah, that would have made it all better... LOL. Just give it up entirely and use the Air Force we have on the carriers. This one is all an RAF thing though. Their carriers need a bit of work.
Click to expand...

We pretty much do just use the Navy for the fighters anyways. The AF is more logistical/heavy bombers.

And yeah, the RN is rather...well it's great for their home waters.
 
Sinn Fein said:
We pretty much do just use the Navy for the fighters anyways. The AF is more logistical/heavy bombers.

And yeah, the RN is rather...well it's great for their home waters.
Click to expand...

Well, these days, most fighter missions are typically going to originate offshore, placing the Navy carriers in prime position. AF strikes, as you point out, are generally pre-planned missions, such as the retaliatory strike on Libya for the terrorist bombings back in the day. On the other hand, the actual homeland defense mission from the air is all AF...
 
Sinn Fein said:
We pretty much do just use the Navy for the fighters anyways. The AF is more logistical/heavy bombers.

And yeah, the RN is rather...well it's great for their home waters.
Click to expand...

We got rid of our existing carriers and now the new ones won't be ready until 2018 at the earliest. The worst thing is we are supposed to call on the French in the meantime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top