Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

WHOHE said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1484904966800265224

I just love the excuse they are using for possible F-35 acquisition... "nuclear role"

Yeah right. They just want the F-35 because it is superior in ISR, AG, AA and anti-shipping. But I guess that is the excuse they must use to have F-35's then so be it I reckon.
Click to expand...
Let me get this right. Germany is purchasing the US made F-35 in order to use US made N weapons not German made ones (as it's is prohibited to do so under the NPT of which it's a signatory.) which it hosts inside it's territory as part of it's commitment to NATO & for it's own security . And you believed it?!?

If this much can't be determined from the conversation, I bet you can't even tell that she's bluffing regarding German interest in the Lightnings.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: suryakiran
  • Informative
Reactions: Amarante
_Anonymous_ said:
Let me get this right. Germany is purchasing the US made F-35 in order to use US made N weapons not German made ones (as it's is prohibited to do so under the NPT of which it's a signatory.) which it hosts inside it's territory as part of it's commitment to NATO & for it's own security . And you believed it?!?

If this much can't be determined from the conversation, I bet you can't even tell that she's bluffing regarding German interest in the Lightnings.
Click to expand...
lol, try again. google is your friend.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: _Anonymous_
Optimist said:
www.aviacionline.com

Germany is once again considering the F-35 as a replacement for the Panavia Tornado.

The newly elected German government is considering the Lockheed Martin F-35 as a potential replacement for the nuclear-powered Panavia Tornado. Germany has been looking for years for a successor for its aging fleet of Tornado attack aircraft, which were scheduled to be retired from active service as
www.aviacionline.com www.aviacionline.com
Click to expand...
Thanks for this. The fact that Germany & a few other NATO members can use their own air force to deliver N weapons of US make that it hosts is frankly news to me . While it makes a total mockery of the NPT , it also explains Russian paranoia.
 
Optimist said:

Germany

Germany has not yet signed or ratified the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
www.icanw.org www.icanw.org
Click to expand...
Of course , peak western hypocrisy. After all the NPT prohibits the production of N weapons or that of fissile material . It's silent on a 3rd party possessing NW that has been handed over to it as part of a treaty obligation.


By that token , theoretically China is totally justified were it to enter into a treaty with NK for mutual security & store N weapons there authorising NK to use it or a similar agreement can be reached between Iran & Russia.
 
In the event I wasn't wrong at all . It's just a conspiracy of silence among US rivals like China & Russia who'd now grit their teeth & keep quiet given the power of the US but when the time comes will emulate the US & if confronted will point out to the US that the latter's agreements with it's allies aren't above board too .

A good case in point is Chinese export of both N weapons & it's technology to Pakistan & NK , then overseeing an arrangement between the 2 whereby Pakistan received Ballistic Missile tech from NK & provided it with N weapons tech initially while China was mostly out of the picture.

Linked below are the NPT & the Wikipedia article on N weapons sharing including excerpts of the relevant article.



Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) – UNODA

www.un.org www.un.org




Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty considerationsEdit
Both the Non-Aligned Movement and critics within NATO believe that NATO's nuclear sharing violates Articles I and II of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which prohibit the transfer and the acceptance of direct or indirect control, respectively, over nuclear weapons.[citation needed]

The United States insists that its forces control the weapons and that no transfer of the nuclear bombs or control over them is intended "unless and until a decision were made to go to war, at which the NPT would no longer be controlling", so there is no breach of the NPT.[41][42] However, the pilots and other staff of the "non-nuclear" NATO countries practice handling and delivering the US nuclear bombs, and non-US warplanes have been adapted to deliver US nuclear bombs which involved the transfer of some technical nuclear weapons information. Even if the US argument is considered legally correct, some argue such peacetime operations appear to contravene both the objective and the spirit of the NPT.[40] Essentially, all preparations for waging nuclear war have already been made by supposedly non-nuclear weapon states.

There are concerns that this arrangement undermines, and possibly contravenes, Articles I and II of the NPT. According to US lawyers, the transfer of control is legal because, on the outbreak of "general war", the NPT has failed in its purpose and can be regarded as no longer in controlling force. This arrangement was conceived in the early to mid-1960s to contain proliferation. It is arguable that several European nations including Germany were persuaded not to become nuclear states themselves because of the NATO nuclear umbrella. However, a nuclear sharing arrangement that may have had some logic in the pre-NPT and cold war world is now a source of weakening for the NPT, as it offers a rationale to other states to pursue a similar programme. NATO's nuclear sharing programme could now be used as an excuse by China, Pakistan or any other nuclear-armed nation to establish a similar arrangement. Imagine if China were to offer such an arrangement to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions. Or if Pakistan were to undertake nuclear sharing with Saudi Arabia or Iran. Such developments would be perceived as a threat to security in North Asia or the Middle East, and even as a direct threat to NATO. Yet, while the NATO arrangements remain in place, NATO members would have few valid grounds for complaint. The Committee should recommend the immediate termination of NATO nuclear sharing arrangements.[40]
— House of Commons Defence Committee (UK Parliament), The future of NATO and European defence (4 March 2008) (p. Ev 80, paras. 50–51)
Click to expand...
At the time the NPT was being negotiated, the NATO nuclear sharing agreements were secret. These agreements were disclosed to some of the states, including the Soviet Union, negotiating the treaty along with the NATO arguments for not treating them as proliferation. Most of the states that signed the NPT in 1968 would not have known about these agreements and interpretations at that time.[43]

en.wikipedia.org

Nuclear sharing - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Bon Plan said:
Rumors in the USA the quantity for US armies could be cut to 1000....
Wait and see.

The cuckolds will be the export customers.
Click to expand...
Cucks are the nations buying 4th gen french planes at a higher cost than F-35s when 4th gen fighters are in their twilight years.

But then again you can't blame these nations for buying the frech plane at a higher cost than F-35 when the F-35 isn't offered.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Bon Plan
WHOHE said:
Cucks are the nations buying 4th gen french planes at a higher cost than F-35s when 4th gen fighters are in their twilight years.

But then again you can't blame these nations for buying the frech plane at a higher cost than F-35 when the F-35 isn't offered.
Click to expand...
You really want to know who the real cucks are ? Let me remind you since you seem to have forgotten in a few months .


FYI those goat *censored*ers *censored* anything on 2 & 4 legs as your people discovered which is why they scrammed out after being bummed for nearly 2 decades.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Ironhide and Bon Plan
1643186186620.png
 

China might claim salvage rights to crashed US F-35 stealth jet by calling it an 'environmental hazard':​

US recovery vessels are two weeks away from crash site in South China Sea and could take four MONTHS to retrieve it​

  • The USS Carl Vinson on Monday suffered a 'landing mishap' with F-35C warplane
  • The Navy said the stealth fighter 'subsequently fell to the water'
  • Recovery efforts could pose a problem if Beijing acts on its territorial claims to a vast majority of the South China sea
  • China could claim it was 'recovering a potential environmental hazard or foreign military equipment from its territorial waters,' a retired Navy officer said
  • One geopolitics expert doubted that Beijing would take the political risk to run afoul of the United States to recover the jet
  • DailyMail.com has reached out to the Navy for an update to the search on Weds
  • It is packed with the latest technology and advances in radar-deflecting design
  • The ship is currently in the South China Sea, taking part in exercises
A retired military official is warning on Wednesday that China could claim salvage rights to an F-35 stealth fighter jet that crashed into the South China Sea earlier this week.

Carl Schuster, former director of operations at the US Pacific Command's Joint Intelligence Center in Hawaii, told CNN that China's likely game plan will be to capitalize on its territorial claims in the South China Sea and claim it's salvaging the craft for environmental purposes.

'Salvaging the plane with commercial and coast guard assets will enable Beijing to claim it is recovering a potential environmental hazard or foreign military equipment from its territorial waters,' the former Navy captain said.

The U.S. faces a race to beat Beijing in recovering the military plane after it plunged into the South China Sea on Monday following what the Navy termed a 'landing mishap' aboard the USS Carl Vinson.

The pilot was forced to eject and seven military personnel in total were injured.

But as the U.S. military works to recover the craft, Schuster warned that China 'will try to locate and survey it thoroughly using submarines and one of its deep diving submersible' to find it first.

The timeline for search and recovery could stretch across months, the retired military commander said.

Salvage ships could take between 10 to 15 days to arrive at their destination, he explained, after which point recovery could take as long as 120 days.

The Navy has not revealed where the crash occurred, and a vast majority of the waters have been claimed by Beijing.

The Chinese government has yet to make an official comment on the matter. DailyMail.com has reached out to China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Chinese Embassy in the United States.


At least one geopolitics expert believes China will be more cautious, despite the potential boon of classified technology the wreckage could present.

'To overtly go about doing this may risk worsening tensions with the US. I don't believe Beijing has stomach for that,' Collin Koh, research fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, told CNN.

He added: 'However, we can expect the Chinese to shadow, hang around and keep tabs on any such American salvage and recovery operation.'

The $100m warplane, customized for naval operations, plunged overboard - making it the second time in three months that an F-35 has been lost at sea.

'The U.S. Navy is making recovery operations arrangements for the F-35C aircraft involved in the mishap aboard USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70) in the South China Sea, Jan. 24,' a spokesperson for the US 7th Fleet told DailyMail.com on Tuesday.

'We cannot speculate on what the PRC's intentions are on this matter.'

DailyMail.com has reached out to the 7th Fleet for an update to the search on Wednesday.

It leaves the Navy with a complex salvage operation if it is avoid its most sophisticated warplane, crammed with futuristic technology, falling into the hands of the People's Republic of China.

The F-35C is the only long-range stealth strike fighter designed to operate from aircraft carriers.

It carries an arrestor hook - to help it land on aircraft carriers - and the expanded wingspan needed to be launched by catapult.

As well as its radar-avoiding design, it is crammed with sensors that beam updates directly to the pilot's helmet.

The Navy has yet to offer an explanation of what went wrong.

'An F-35C Lightning II assigned to Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 2, embarked aboard USS (CVN 70) had a landing mishap and impacted the flight deck and subsequently fell to the water during routine flight operations,' it said in a statement to US Naval Institute News.

'Impact to the flight deck was superficial and all equipment for flight operations is operational.'

It added that the aircraft carrier had been able to resume normal flight operations shortly after.

Last year, Britain appealed to the US for help in finding an F-35B Lightning II that toppled from HMS Queen Elizabeth into the Mediterranean during a failed takeoff.

London asked for help amid fears that Russia would try to salvage the jet and copy the technology.

It was retrieved last month during a secret operation.

The US Navy jet was part of a deployment designed to bolster American presence near Taiwan after China had buzzed the island's airspace.

A Navy statement said the incident happened during 'routine flight operations' in the South China Sea.

'The pilot safely ejected from the aircraft and was recovered via U.S. military helicopter,' it said.

'The pilot is in stable condition. There were seven total sailors injured.'

The statement said three of personnel required evacuation to a medical facility in Manila and four were treated by on-board the carrier and released.

It said all the personnel evacuated were assessed as being in stable condition.

The Navy said the cause of the 'inflight mishap' on the nuclear-powered carrier was under investigation.

'The status of the aircraft is currently under investigation as are the factors involved in the mishap,' Brenda Way, a spokesperson for the U.S. Pacific Fleet, told The War Zone.

The F-35 jet is made by Lockheed Martin, and the USS Carl Vinson in August deployed from its San Diego base for the first time with F-35C Lightning II fighter jets and Navy CMV-22B Osprey aboard.

The F-35C is the carrier version of the Joint Strike Fighter being built in three versions for the Air Force, Marines and Navy.

The Navy version can fly 1.6 times the speed of sound and has a combat radius of 1200 nautical miles.

'Vinson is the first carrier to accommodate a mix of 4th- and 5th- generation strike fighters, providing unprecedented lethality and survivability and ensuring the Navy team can operate and win in contested battlespace now and well into the future,' said Capt. Tommy Locke, commander of Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 2, in August.

The Pentagon said two U.S. Navy Carrier Strike Groups, led by the Carl Vinson and USS Abraham Lincoln, began operations in the South China Sea on Sunday.

The carriers entered the disputed sea for training as Taiwan reported a new Chinese air force incursion at the top of the waterway.

The Carl Vinson is supported by more than 5,000 crew members and carries 65 fixed and rotary-wing aircraft.

This is only the second major mishap involving an F-35 of any kind operating from an aircraft carrier, following the loss of the British F-35B Joint Strike Fighter in the Mediterranean last year.

Earlier this month, a South Korean pilot was forced to make an emergency 'belly landing' in an F-35A after suffering a malfunction in the air.

Landing gear on the jet failed to extend but instead of ejecting, the pilot decided to land the US-made craft at an airbase on its belly.

The equipment failed due to electronic issues, a South Korean Air Force spokesman said, forcing the pilot to take the unprecedented action.

A military official refused to confirm if the jet suffered any damage in the incident but the pilot walked away uninjured.

The 'fifth generation' fighter aircraft is the world's most expensive weapons system. Costs finally stabilized at an eye-watering $406billion, but only after the intervention of President Donald Trump.

Manufacturer Lockheed-Martin agreed to cap costs after rump criticized the project and even tweeted support for a rival aircraft.

America enticed its NATO and other allies into sharing the cost of the aircraft by offering input into manufacture and 15 per cent of each one is comprised of parts from British companies while some of the jets will be made in Italy.

But developing and testing were bedevilled by technical issues.

In a mock air battle in 2015, the cutting edge plane was defeated by an older generation F-16, a plane designed in the 1970s.

In 2020 Pentagon tests found 276 different faults in jet's combat system.

They included the 25mm cannon vibrating excessively and problems with the the aircraft's 'virtual reality' helmet

Overheating, premature wear of components in the vertical tails and vulnerability to fire were also found to be issues.

The US Air Force temporarily grounded dozens its F-35 stealth fighters while it investigated an oxygen supply issue.

The Marine Corps, which operates the vertical take off and landing F-35B model, was forced to ground its planes after flaws were found in the computer system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom