Like so many other aircraft- and missile-related topics, you are repetitiously clueless on this one as well.  There was a thread maybe a year or two ago in which we were beating you senseless about something to do with IRSTs, MICA IR, or both.  I know that so far this describes probably a dozen different threads; but in the thread I'm remembering there was an awesome post or two by someone (Leroy?  Phaid?  Someone like them who as always was right on target) that really described some significant details about the F-35s IR signature management and how what was important and what was special about the F-35 was the reduction of hot spots, and how the F-35 manages this in particular by dissipating the heat across the airframe by using the fuel system.  I await the details of any other fighter that does this.

 

While Herald is learning stuff on the Net about heat transfer (good to him but it will be of no use regarding the F-35) , my answer will be to Warpig . You said :

I've forgotten more about heat dissipation and CPT cooling than you have ever learned about anything.

 

 

How about you trying to describe how you carry heat out of the hot zone of a turbofan so that it doesn't melt the engine combustion pot walls, cretin?

 

This is what I want to read from you, truck driver.

 

Put up or be silent.

 

Herald.

 

 

 

Feel free to explain to me what it is about the special cooling features of the F-35 that does not work.  If you don't know how or what to say, then go ahead and at least please cite whatever it is you read that lead you to this conclusion.

 

Herald , you made me laugh BIG time ! lol ! No bad intented , it is just how my sense of humour did put you down and made you go berserk , lol !

But I am right and correct Herald ;-) 

 

The same processes that keep an Ariane's ventiuris from melting are what is used to keep a jet engine combustion pot from melting. Now if you are too stupid to know that, that is not MY problem.

 

Now go play your ignorant games with the six year olds you so clearly resemble..

 

Herald

 

 

I, for one, think the F-35 is going to far-exceed requirements, a lot of analysts think similarly.

 

Delays have occurred on most major manned fighter programs in the last decade, the fundamental design of the F-35 is ambitious, but make no mistake, BW, I think you again lack specific knowledge relevant to this topic, I think this is one of those occasions where "press releases" and statements of difficulty (that have been repeated in every single fighter program ever, period) are not "proof that the concept won't work", rather, they are the anticipated result of a very ambitious project.

 

I know that some of the posters here have technical expertise in the subjects you are attempting to argue with, you are not using specific technical, engineering understanding, rather quite "loose" arguments that I can see are frustrating people. 

 

I respectfully ask you to at least consider whether you do honestly know enough about this subject to actually argue with engineers.

 

 "The culprit is the aircraft design itself , you should restart from scratch with a twin engine first ..."

 

And given you haven't ever professed to have worked in any area of aircraft design, I also (very respectfully) suggest that you are not the best judge of whether this is accurate. 

 

The F-35 is monumentally challenging to build, like many programs, and it will likely be delayed, but that is understandable, it's actually "the norm".

 

You clearly expect and believe it will fail, point taken, but please stop passing off your opinions as verified facts, at least acknowledge your own limitations in making a weighted analysis of a complete procurement program.

 

ReactivE

Care to SOURCE the idiot who said that?

Your complete lack of the ability to do any research is ASTOUNDING.

 

After all I 've read on the Net (pdfs , News , forums , official sites , Jane 's , etc) I believe that something is very wrong with the F-35 and I am not the only one , people who know far more than I do also think that the JSF is not worth it .

 

Reactive wrote a good post and I am pleased to give him my point od view .

 

Now provide the citation poster as I demanded once before so I can properly apologize to Phaid and properly call you a no good prevaricator which is what you appear to be.

 

Herald 

Obviously the solution is to rush the F-35 into production as quickly as possible, so that when it comes out, it can't do half of what the manufacturer promised it could and has to be continually revised for ten years until it can.

 

Or we could just buy Rafales.

 

 

 

I said it Herald. It was a direct reference to reports that the F35 has heat management issues. You are an idiot for posting about the F35 without having knowledge of those reports and the project's responses to them. If you had bothered to check you would have found that tests were delayed in Texas last summer because of vent and electronics issues brought on by stealth shells and big engines. These frequent rants don't make you appear knowledgeable about any topic you discuss here and your fraking ignorance is only matched by your witless arrogance. That sh*t gets old Herald. You will note from the Aviation Week article that the JSF program director says that thermal management is the greatest challenge in the project. This is because it is a tight shell that can not accomodate the release of heat in the way that other non stealthy platforms can. It is not a show stopper for the development potential of the F35 but it contributes to the cost and sophistication of the F35. The F35 ultimately will be killed by politics not overheated radios.

 

Just once I would love for you to know WTF you are talking about and maybe you could read the thread instead of yelling at a participant who you don't like. If you had bothered to read the thread you would have seen my comments and then you could have asked me directly why my opinion was as stated.

 

Herald, stop being an ass.

 

Check Six

 

Rocky

 

 

 

ht**tp://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/aw081108p2.xml&headline=Component%20Failures%20Impact%20F-35%20Flight%20Testing

By Graham Warwick

Lockheed Martin continues to struggle to gain momentum in flight testing of the Joint Strike Fighter, with the first F-35 again grounded by component failure and while the second aircraft heads toward a hiatus in flying that will last into early next year. The issues will not affect the overall schedule, says Lockheed, but they are preventing key risks being retired early. These include additional noise tests funded by the Australians at a time when the F-35's environmental impact has become an issue for some international partners. The first F-35, aircraft AA-1, is grounded awaiting the repair of nacelle vent fans designed to keep the engine bay cool on the ground. The situation has echoes of the overheating problems that dogged the F-22, but Lockheed says it is unique to AA-1. "The issues we are dealing with are independent of the thermal management system," says deputy program manager Bobby Williams. "Nothing is on the critical path, but the earlier we get the data the better." The problem involves repeated failures of the nacelle vent fans that force air through the space between engine and airframe to prevent heat from damaging the structure. While the fan failures may be unrelated, thermal management is the "biggest challenge" in the F-35, says Daniel Kunec, JSF program office director, air system integration. "It is the most limiting feature, and there are still some challenges to be overcome,"