India - France relations.

Ask him how fast it is with 2X 2,000lb bombs, 2 missiles and 3x 2000lt tanks? The F-35 is limited to M1.6 with that weapon and fuel load. It can go faster and higher, as this chart shows. See the straight line cutoff in 3F. It's limited to 50,000ft and M1.6
View attachment 22497
He likely doesn't know. He probably doesn't know its real mission profile combat radius in that configuration. The french plane is going to have to avoid being painted by early warning and IADS so its combat radius will be cut drastically flying below line of sight of these radars. F-35 doesn't have to worry about these pesky radars just flies high and true. Lol.
 
F-35 doesn't have to worry about these pesky radars just flies high and true. Lol

F 35 is no doubt the Best plane after F 22 , BUT it comes with too many conditions and Strings attached

ONLY " Treaty Allies " like UK , Japan and Israel can meet those conditions

That is why we have preferred
RAFALE and S 400 combination

In future we might buy SU 75 and S 500 too
 
F 35 is no doubt the Best plane after F 22 , BUT
The F-35, if it was in accordance with its specifications, would undoubtedly be a very good aircraft, but it is more than 10 years behind schedule, it costs at least twice as much as expected with program cost increases still to come, and it fails to function properly, having more than 800 anomalies, including a dozen Category 1. To compensate for all these problems, Lockheed Martin is obliged to lie through its teeth and to promise for tomorrow all the functions that are not yet available but that should be. As a result, the real F-35 (not the fantasy one) is far inferior to the Rafale, and if it is slightly cheaper to buy, it is artificial and compensated by a double ownership price during its operational life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amarante
The F-35, if it was in accordance with its specifications, would undoubtedly be a very good aircraft, but it is more than 10 years behind schedule, it costs at least twice as much as expected with program cost increases still to come, and it fails to function properly, having more than 800 anomalies, including a dozen Category 1. To compensate for all these problems, Lockheed Martin is obliged to lie through its teeth and to promise for tomorrow all the functions that are not yet available but that should be. As a result, the real F-35 (not the fantasy one) is far inferior to the Rafale, and if it is slightly cheaper to buy, it is artificial and compensated by a double ownership price during its operational life.

OK Sir , If you are saying , it might be true

But for us in India , F 35 is a
" Non Entity " because Neither China Nor Pakistan will ever Get it

And even if we wanted it , the
"Pre conditions " would be impossible to meet

We Cannot and will never break our friendship with RUSSIA

India America Relations are good because of 2 reasons

1 China is a common threat to Both of us and to all Asian countries

2 Pakistan has badly cheated and betrayed USA in Afghanistan
 
  • Like
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil
He likely doesn't know. He probably doesn't know its real mission profile combat radius in that configuration. The french plane is going to have to avoid being painted by early warning and IADS so its combat radius will be cut drastically flying below line of sight of these radars. F-35 doesn't have to worry about these pesky radars just flies high and true. Lol.
The F-35 is flight envelope is limited to M 1.6, ok. But with full load i'm dubious. Remember, load=weight=lift=drag. (i'm oversimplifying, but you get the idea). Simply assuming that its max speed is 1.6 (well, when it does not melt of course) with full load is at best adventurous. On the other hand, we have a video (yes, it is on F-16.net) where a Rafale with three 1250L tanks flies at M 1.7. For the sake of discussion, "subsonic" tanks were qualified to M1.3 during Afghanistan war.
 
OK Sir , If you are saying , it might be true

But for us in India , F 35 is a
" Non Entity " because Neither China Nor Pakistan will ever Get it

And even if we wanted it , the
"Pre conditions " would be impossible to meet

We Cannot and will never break our friendship with RUSSIA

India America Relations are good because of 2 reasons

1 China is a common threat to Both of us and to all Asian countries

2 Pakistan has badly cheated and betrayed USA in Afghanistan
1)America is common enemy to China & Russia , &china is packed with hell load of money.
2)Russia is slowly building its relationship with Pakistan
3)Russians even try to keep away India from Afghanistan initially, if tweets from some unknowns are true.
4) Russian equipments badly failed in each and every combat fought after Vietnam, even russian equipment in the hands if russians failed in Afghanistan.
5)Its the ideology & policy made uncle sam to goes against Pakistan. USA will not turn down india as long as we are a Democratic, as long as we are SECULAR country, as long as we gives freedom to our own people from all sector. If we screw the current constitutional setup, they will screw us. This what happened to Pakistan,

what else you expect from USA when its so called Allie harboured Osama bin laden for 10+ years?
Also, We dont need any more help from Russia who helps to develop a strong military by china. Even Top end Russian weaponry itself is a failure. Why would we risks our safety by going along with Russians?
 
The F-35 is flight envelope is limited to M 1.6, ok. But with full load i'm dubious. Remember, load=weight=lift=drag. (i'm oversimplifying, but you get the idea). Simply assuming that its max speed is 1.6 (well, when it does not melt of course) with full load is at best adventurous.


On the other hand, we have a video (yes, it is on F-16.net) where a Rafale with three 1250L tanks flies at M 1.7. For the sake of discussion, "subsonic" tanks were qualified to M1.3 during Afghanistan war.
Well congrats on a video nobody has seen of a worthless profile... Now add two 2,000lb bombs and two BVR missiles and lets see how fast it is, eh? I bet its combat radius won't be near the F-35 either.
 
OK Sir , If you are saying , it might be true

But for us in India , F 35 is a
" Non Entity " because Neither China Nor Pakistan will ever Get it

And even if we wanted it , the
"Pre conditions " would be impossible to meet

We Cannot and will never break our friendship with RUSSIA

India America Relations are good because of 2 reasons

1 China is a common threat to Both of us and to all Asian countries

2 Pakistan has badly cheated and betrayed USA in Afghanistan
Lol. What he's saying aint true. He's starting to suffer from a breakdown because his BS is being aggressively challenged and can't back up his claim with real sources. His sources are wiki which I just exposed to him how easily some yahoo can change the info and his other sources is himself. He "worked" for Dassault therefor you must believe what I claim.

I'm still waiting for a source he can easily obtain if he did actually worked for Dassault of a non-classified report of the date when his plane super cruised at mach 1.4 with 4 missiles and center tank and the type of french plane but he keeps ignoring it.
 

Well congrats on a video nobody has seen of a worthless profile... Now add two 2,000lb bombs and two BVR missiles and lets see how fast it is, eh? I bet its combat radius won't be near the F-35 either.
Rofl i was banned due to ric nunes nervous crisis when seeing that video. And you werent far behind... So much for the nobody have seen
Billie is a nice guy, met him at Le Bourget for the first airshow of F-35 in Europe. But he still is a LM employee ... And he says "full" that can mean several things from "many" "a lot" that YOU translate into a specific loading
 
Last edited:
Rofl i was banned due to ric nunes nervous crisis when seeing that video. And you werent far behind... So much for the nobody have seen
Billie is a nice guy, met him at Le Bourget for the first airshow of F-35 in Europe.

You were banned because you were trolling just like you do here.
But he still is a LM employee ...

So I guess Dassault french plane pilots are hacks too? Because that is what you're implying Flynn is because he worked for LM.
And he says "full" that can mean several things from "many" "a lot" that YOU translate into a specific loading


You make yourself look the fool when you do that no wonder you got banned. It only means several things to a person like you who is lazy. Flynn has said this in several interviews and so has Beesley. If those claims weren't true the opposition of the dozen plus nations that fly the F-35 would have leaked it by now.

It's pointless to post this since you've purposely decided to not take any information that contradicts you narrative but I guess as the saying goes, even a blind squirl....

-Beesley explained that the F-35 is different from legacy fourth generation fighters such as the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, or even more modern aircraft such as the Eurofighter, in that the primary weapons load is stored internally. This arrangement means that there is no added drag to the airframe from externally carried weapons, fuel tanks, or sensor pods as in older aircraft types. The outstanding handling, acceleration, and the maximum speed of the aircraft is useable in a combat configuration unlike in legacy fighters. Beesley said that recently he flew an F-35 test flight with a full internal load of two 2000 lbs JDAMs, and two AIM-120 missiles. The aircraft "felt like it had a few thousand pounds of extra fuel" but otherwise Beesley said there was practically no degradation in the aircrafts' performance.

Now you're going to have two reactions. You're either going to be mature and accept what he means which everyone here will do and understand what Beesley and Flynn mean or you will play dumb and claim it could mean anything which by then everyone here will now know that you're here to troll like you were at f16dotnet.


Good luck champ I'm rooting for you. :)
 
Lol. What he's saying aint true. He's starting to suffer from a breakdown because his BS is being aggressively challenged and can't back up his claim with real sources. His sources are wiki which I just exposed to him how easily some yahoo can change the info and his other sources is himself. He "worked" for Dassault therefor you must believe what I claim.

I'm still waiting for a source he can easily obtain if he did actually worked for Dassault of a non-classified report of the date when his plane super cruised at mach 1.4 with 4 missiles and center tank and the type of french plane but he keeps ignoring it.
Nervous? :D
 
Meanwhile, we have sad stories about the F35 : plane lost in Japan Air Force, and now grounded in South Corea after the belly landing.


It will be a good plane, but it seems it is still not ready to fly safely.
 
You were banned because you were trolling just like you do here.


So I guess Dassault french plane pilots are hacks too? Because that is what you're implying Flynn is because he worked for LM.



You make yourself look the fool when you do that no wonder you got banned. It only means several things to a person like you who is lazy. Flynn has said this in several interviews and so has Beesley. If those claims weren't true the opposition of the dozen plus nations that fly the F-35 would have leaked it by now.

It's pointless to post this since you've purposely decided to not take any information that contradicts you narrative but I guess as the saying goes, even a blind squirl....

-Beesley explained that the F-35 is different from legacy fourth generation fighters such as the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, or even more modern aircraft such as the Eurofighter, in that the primary weapons load is stored internally. This arrangement means that there is no added drag to the airframe from externally carried weapons, fuel tanks, or sensor pods as in older aircraft types. The outstanding handling, acceleration, and the maximum speed of the aircraft is useable in a combat configuration unlike in legacy fighters. Beesley said that recently he flew an F-35 test flight with a full internal load of two 2000 lbs JDAMs, and two AIM-120 missiles. The aircraft "felt like it had a few thousand pounds of extra fuel" but otherwise Beesley said there was practically no degradation in the aircrafts' performance.

Now you're going to have two reactions. You're either going to be mature and accept what he means which everyone here will do and understand what Beesley and Flynn mean or you will play dumb and claim it could mean anything which by then everyone here will now know that you're here to troll like you were at f16dotnet.


Good luck champ I'm rooting for you. :)
As usual, you take a broad assumption, we flew with full load, we flew with full fuel etc. Nowhere can I find a written chart/data proving your claims. BTW, it was where and which day? As you seem to know a lot, should know that as it is not classified shouldn't you? Basic physics will tell you that a plane can not have the same speed empty or fully loaded. Drag induced of external charges is much higher than drag induced by fatty shapes, that's true. But extra drag induced by weight do exist and is very significant. Why do you think weight is limited on commercial flights?
So find me a sentence where Flynn says that with that specific max load F-35 can fligh at M1. 6, I'll believe you which you didn't when I showed you a film with the very pilot saying 'we' ré at M1. 7 during the flight...
He is. Jarhead aren't renown for their temperance and intelligence, specially low grades. Cannon fodder...
 
Last edited:
Thanks for posting that video. I didn't know it went Mach 1 plus with that load. I'm surprised, I thought it would have been subsonic like the Rafale would be. Sorry, the Rafale can't even carry that weapon load and fuel, forget what I said.
Yes, better forget. Rafale is AFAIK the only fighter a able to carry 1.5 times its empty weight...
 
Last edited:
As usual, you take a broad assumption, we flew with full load, we flew with full fuel etc. Nowhere can I find a written chart/data proving your claims. BTW, it was where and which day? As you seem to know a lot, should know that as it is not classified shouldn't you? Basic physics will tell you that a plane can not have the same speed empty or fully loaded. Drag induced of external charges is much higher than drag induced by fatty shapes, that's true. But extra drag induced by weight do exist and is very significant. Why do you think weight is limited on commercial flights?
So find me a sentence where Flynn says that with that specific max load F-35 can fligh at M1. 6, I'll believe you which you didn't when I showed you a film with the very pilot saying 'we' ré at M1. 7 during the flight...

We now can all see you have chosen troll.

Your post was nothing but Le blah! blah! blah! Monsieur... blah! blah! blah!

My claim/sources come directly from F-35 pilots themselves while your opinion comes straight out of your butt.

But hey we're not surprised you can't rebut Flynn and Beesley's claim with actual sources instead you rebut them with what YOU think. Typical french plane fanboy move. Now we know why you got banned at f16.

He is. Jarhead aren't renown for their temperance and intelligence, specially low grades. Cannon fodder...

You hurt mein feelings!! I'm telling on you that you're not being civil and nice. :rolleyes:

It wasn't hard to expose you to the fine people on this forum what a troll you are and that nobody should take you serious. You fit perfectly at airdefense.
 
It is an ECO engine which is why in clean configuration it can only reach mach 1.8 and the M model mach 1.6.
M88 ECO is the variant of the engine with the same thrust but greater life time.
Safran has the ability to increase the thrust (not choosen by our air forces) or increase the time between overhaul.

No, there is no mach1.6 limitation of M variant. Or give us some source not coming from a yahoo.
 
Thanks for posting that video. I didn't know it went Mach 1 plus with that load. I'm surprised, I thought it would have been subsonic like the Rafale would be. Sorry, the Rafale can't even carry that weapon load and fuel, forget what I said.
It is not supercruising even in clean config. It can do so but il slight descent, so for a limited range.
Just have a look to the aero of the bird : much more a sugar piece than an arrow. Just because it was primarly designed for CAS, and not air superiority.
 
We now can all see you have chosen troll.

Your post was nothing but Le blah! blah! blah! Monsieur... blah! blah! blah!

My claim/sources come directly from F-35 pilots themselves while your opinion comes straight out of your butt.

But hey we're not surprised you can't rebut Flynn and Beesley's claim with actual sources instead you rebut them with what YOU think. Typical french plane fanboy move. Now we know why you got banned at f16.



You hurt mein feelings!! I'm telling on you that you're not being civil and nice. :rolleyes:

It wasn't hard to expose you to the fine people on this forum what a troll you are and that nobody should take you serious. You fit perfectly at airdefense.
Thanks, didnt i have to come here yet to get my daily laughter. If i am a troll you are an ogre lol. Hurt your feelings? Saying Marines are pussies?
Well i do apologize before you faint. Did ANYWHERE Flint say F-35 can fly at M1.6 with max load ans max fuel ? Not in this video...
And do not worry for exposing me as a troll, ppl here know me from a long time and do know who i am.
So when a pilot says one thing full of fuel, or full of load, i should uncerstand with MAX load AND MAX fuel. Sry i dont understand the same thng as you do. And i do not believe he lies, i believe he says the truth in a way that is right for LM. Btw, your double standard concerning credibility of pilots is funny (sorry i use that word again, but i cant help doing it when talking about you) ? So when Flynn says something it is God's truth (well... In fact YOUR interpretation of what he says) but when Pappalardo extensively describes active cancellation it is because he is a fan of a journalist?
 
Last edited:
M88 ECO is the variant of the engine with the same thrust but greater life time.
Safran has the ability to increase the thrust (not choosen by our air forces) or increase the time between overhaul.

No, there is no mach1.6 limitation of M variant. Or give us some source not coming from a yahoo.
That you don't know that your own plane (french plane M) is limited to mach 1.6 in clean configuration tells us how little you know and shouldn't be demanding anything. That source is there but you're too lazy to look for it because it will contradict your narrative that you have had in your head.

Luckily for you I'm in the mood to make you look foolish so here ya go!

Scroll down when you click the link since it seems you need all the help you can get.