F-35 helmet

[slm]

Here's a video about some features of F-35 helmet.

Even better than padlocking targets in sims

 

[SharpeXB]

Apparently it's weight is a safety problem when ejecting

 

http://www.defensenews.com/story/breaking-news/2015/10/14/f-35s-heavier-helmet-complicates-ejection-risks/73922710/

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

Apparently it's weight is a safety problem when ejecting

 

http://www.defensenews.com/story/breaking-news/2015/10/14/f-35s-heavier-helmet-complicates-ejection-risks/73922710/

1 in 50,000 chance of hurting neck if below 136lbs

lessens to 1 in 200,000 chance of hurting neck if between 136-165lbs, according to General Bogdan

 

If you were an F-35 pilot, you are more likely to die of a car crash then break your neck ejecting.

 

Obviously not as bad as media presents, just that Lockheed/DoD want to reduce that risk even further.

Edited December 8, 2015 by RoflSeal

[Fortis_Leader]

So OP, plz nerf.

[Original_Uwe]

And then the Russians design an R77 with a localized emp burst, and the f35 falls out of the sky.

Seriously, how many medicines could have been created or hungry children fed with the cash from this boondoggle? It's offensive how much we're spending on this and I'm a freakin republican!

[SYN_Lt_Dan]

Don't worry the Royal Navy has ordered some F35's  we love crap   

[Feathered_IV]

Apparently it's weight is a safety problem when ejecting

 

http://www.defensenews.com/story/breaking-news/2015/10/14/f-35s-heavier-helmet-complicates-ejection-risks/73922710/

 

Fear not.  The F-35B ejector-helmet will solve this.  It is designed to fly off a split second before the pilot ejects and descends on its own parachute.

[Jaws2002]

Fear not.  The F-35B ejector-helmet will solve this.  It is designed to fly off a split second before the pilot ejects and descends on its own parachute.

...with the pilot's head stil inside.

[Ace_Pilto]

Cool helmet, shame they're wasting it on the "Silicon Spruce Goose". How many decades as a prototype now? 

 

Could have made enough Super Hornets to block out the sun for that budget.

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

Cool helmet, shame they're wasting it on the "Silicon Spruce Goose". How many decades as a prototype now? 

 

Could have made enough Super Hornets to block out the sun for that budget.

It's spent ~one decade as a prototype, like pretty much every other modern aircraft

 

 

 

F-22:

ATF program beginning: June 1981

YF-22 ('demonstrator') maiden: September 1990 (+9 years)

F-22 first flight: September 1997 (+16 years)

F-22 IOC: December 2005 (+24 years)

_________________________________________________________

Eurofighter Typhoon:

Future European Fighter Aircraft program beginning: 1983

BAE EAP demonstrator maiden: August 1986 (+3 years; note that work had been done prior for the ACA program)

Eurofighter Typhoon maiden: March 1994 (+11 years)

Eurofighter Typhoon IOC: 2003 (+20 years)

_________________________________________________________

Dassault Rafale:

ACX program beginning: October 1982

Rafale A tech demo maiden: July 1986 (+4 years)

Rafale C (arguable beginning of the test program) maiden: May 1991 (+9 years)

Rafale IOC: May 2001 (+19 years) (note that they rushed IOC and didn't even have any jets for training squadrons yet)

_________________________________________________________

JAS-39 Gripen:

IG JAS 'program' beginning: 1980

[No tech demo]

Gripen maiden: December 1988 (+8 years)

Gripen IOC: November 1997 (+17 years)

_________________________________________________________

T-50 PAK-FA

Program beginning: April 2002

Test aircraft first flight: January 2010 (+8 years)

First production fighter delivered: 2016 (+14 years)

PAK-FA IOC: 2017 (+15 years)

_________________________________________________________

F-35:

JSF program beginning: November 1996

X-35 tech demo maiden: October 2000 (+4 years)

F-35 maiden: December 2006 (+10 years)

F-35B IOC: July 2015 (+19 years)

F-35A IOC: August / late 2016 (+20 years)

F-35C IOC: December 2018 / early 2019 (+22 / +23 years)

 

 

 

And who will man those Hornets that can blot out the sky? Especially when its not that much cheaper at $74-77m currently for Legacy Hornets whilst F-35 costs are continuing to go down from $250m in LRIP 1 to $120m in LRIP 8  and expected to reach $80m then year $ by the final LRIP 15 in 2021 before it enters mass production.

 

Fact is Growlers + F-35C will work way better together then Growlers + SH/H

Edited December 10, 2015 by RoflSeal

[Ace_Pilto]

Your cost analysis ought to take into account the refitting of airbases, retraining of pilots and support staff (and support industries) as well as the time and money it will take to formulate tactics and logistics that enable it to be employed effectively if it's to be even vaguely credible.

 

I won't shame myself by pulling hastily googled numbers out of my backside but the costs of this idiotic aircraft greatly outweigh any benefits. Lockheed is shilling the Western military again, just like it did with the F-104.

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

Cost analysis has already been done.

 

Cost for the whole program (R&D, testing, production, training, maintenance from 2005 to 2065) will cost $1 trillion in then year dollars. Maintaining the current legacy fleet in the same time period will cost 4x more.

Edited December 10, 2015 by RoflSeal

[DD_Arthur]

 

 Lockheed is shilling the Western military again, just like it did with the F-104.

 

 Sorry Jimmy.  Can't let you get away with this outrageous slur against a well respected aircraft manufacturer.  Lets get this straight; Lockheed didn't shill anyone over the Starfighter.  From what we know now, their sales team simply went into every meeting carrying an enormous bag of cash which they emptied out on the table and invited everyone in the room to take as much as they wanted.

 

 The orders for the '104 simply rolled in!    

[6./ZG26_Emil]

 Sorry Jimmy.  Can't let you get away with this outrageous slur against a well respected aircraft manufacturer.  Lets get this straight; Lockheed didn't shill anyone over the Starfighter.  From what we know now, their sales team simply went into every meeting carrying an enormous bag of cash which they emptied out on the table and invited everyone in the room to take as much as they wanted.

 

 The orders for the '104 simply rolled in!    

 

 

You owe me a new monitor!

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Who knows how procurement works

 

[HippyDruid]

Apparently it's weight is a safety problem when ejecting

 

http://www.defensenews.com/story/breaking-news/2015/10/14/f-35s-heavier-helmet-complicates-ejection-risks/73922710/

 

Lol according to that link it would seem the "lightweights" have the most issues with ejection neck.

SO, we can expect a more robust bunch of pilots then?

[6./ZG26_Emil]

My father in law has ejected several times, sure it didn't kill him but the physical damage later in life is really really bad....

[indiaciki]

 

I love neoliberalism :D

 

The poor safety record of the Starfighter brought the aircraft into the public eye, especially in German Air Force service. Fighter ace Erich Hartmann famously was retired from the Luftwaffe because of his protests against having to deploy the unsafe F-104s. The F-104 was also at the center of the Lockheed bribery scandals, in which Lockheed had given bribes to a considerable number of political and military figures in various nations in order to influence their judgment and secure several purchase contracts; this caused considerable political controversy in Europe and Japan.

 

The F-104 was also called Witwenmacher ("Widowmaker"), or Erdnagel ("ground nail") – the official military term for a tent peg.^[86] The Pakistani AF name was Badmash ("Hooligan"), while among Italian pilots its spiky design earned it the nickname Spillone("Hatpin"), along with Bara volante ("Flying coffin"). In the Canadian Forces, the aircraft were sometimes referred to, in jest, as the Lawn Dart, the Aluminium Death Tube, and the Flying Phallus. It was not called by the press term Widowmaker or the Lockheed marketing term Missile With a Man in it.

 

Somebody will evetually kill lots of piots earning trillions of $....and it'll be Lockheed once again...

 

and eggs, I guess...

 

Edited December 11, 2015 by indiaciki

[Fortis_Leader]

Wow, that's a brilliant and stunning analysis! Lockheed Martin once made a bad plane; Ergo, all planes from Lockheed Martin are death traps!

 

Fact is that the only people in the world who actually know what they're talking about regarding the F-35 at this stage can not, and will not speak of it to the public.

Edited December 15, 2015 by 1./ZG1_AnthonyP

[indiaciki]

i'm talking corruption not one single company. Lockheed was caught in corruption. trillions of dolllars are not about engeneering aircraft. It's about swiss bank accounts.

Edited December 15, 2015 by indiaciki

[SharpeXB]

I'm an architect and years ago I remember drawing up a showroom for the F-35 here in Ft Worth at the Lockheed plant. I don't remember what happened with that design. I got to sit in the cockpit mockup though.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

is it that the plane that eject you downwards? thats just so mean

 

Cheaper than dropping expensive smart bombs 

[indiaciki]

[Ace_Pilto]

I'm an architect and years ago I remember drawing up a showroom for the F-35 here in Ft Worth at the Lockheed plant. I don't remember what happened with that design. I got to sit in the cockpit mockup though.

 Congrats Sharpe, you probably have more time on the F-35 than any pilot outside the test program. 

 

There are people in the USAF today who can claim that their grandfathers were B-52 pilots and that they are too. Soon there will be people claiming that they were test pilots for the F-35 and that their grandfathers were too.

Edited December 18, 2015 by JimmyBlonde

[SharpeXB]

Congrats Sharpe, you probably have more time on the F-35 than any pilot outside the test program. 

 

I wish selfies had existed back then ;-)

[wtornado]

Why spend so much money making helmets and weigh down

planes with cockpits and safety equipment when the planes will be

fully functional drones in 20-30 years with pilots being completely

obsolete?

 

All the same weapons with a faster response time.

 

Faster flying  drones who are able to withstand a lot more G's and fearless

against enemy human mortal pilots who psychologically need that parachute

or ejection seat as a mental safety net. 

[wtornado]

Ike seen things quite clearly and look at how everything

is based on an economy run by the military -industrial complex.

 

Good old Frank Zappa has the best quote.

 

 

[wtornado]

yeah but they can be hacked, a human cant be hacked

By today's standards yes with satellite and radio controls.

 

Engineers have thought of that already and are way

ahead of you what they want and are succeeding in is

fully independent and programmable drones that can

differentiate from friend or foe,defend themselves

and pick out specific targets.

 

AI is unreal today,imagine in 20 to 30 years

 

Spec ops and spies are already on the ground to designate

the targets anyways.

 

I will not even talk about human pilot misjudgments

and friendly fire incidents. 

 

 

It is just the beginning!

 

Formation flying in the video is beautiful and with no human

error mistakes just programming.

 

The Air force is not checking these break throughs or their progress.

 

https://www.ted.com/talks/vijay_kumar_robots_that_fly_and_cooperate?language=en

Edited December 18, 2015 by WTornado

[indiaciki]

scary...not kidding. AI will eventually evolve into suicide bombers and the mentality that comes with it. It's opening Pandora's box. Great video.

Edited December 19, 2015 by indiaciki

[SOLIDKREATE]

Who knows how procurement works

 

 

 

 

Exactly, welcome to my country, LOL!

[indiaciki]

Exactly, welcome to my country, LOL!

 

hiiarious :D

 

The F-35 is a flying iphone

 

[Fortis_Leader]

Why spend so much money making helmets and weigh down

planes with cockpits and safety equipment when the planes will be

fully functional drones in 20-30 years with pilots being completely

obsolete?

 

All the same weapons with a faster response time.

 

Faster flying  drones who are able to withstand a lot more G's and fearless

against enemy human mortal pilots who psychologically need that parachute

or ejection seat as a mental safety net. 

 

Remind me, what exactly are your qualifications on this? I get debating this on the basis of being an enthusiastic amateur and such, but really...

[GP*]

By today's standards yes with satellite and radio controls.

 

Engineers have thought of that already and are way

ahead of you what they want and are succeeding in is

fully independent and programmable drones that can

differentiate from friend or foe,defend themselves

and pick out specific targets.

 

AI is unreal today,imagine in 20 to 30 years

 

Spec ops and spies are already on the ground to designate

the targets anyways.

 

I will not even talk about human pilot misjudgments

and friendly fire incidents.

 

 

It is just the beginning!

 

Formation flying in the video is beautiful and with no human

error mistakes just programming.

 

The Air force is not checking these break throughs or their progress.

 

https://www.ted.com/talks/vijay_kumar_robots_that_fly_and_cooperate?language=en

You have no clue what you're taking about.

 

Fratricide is exactly the reason that fighters will never go drone-only. Fighter pilots of the future may be augmented by drones, at best.

 

Anyway, I flew the F-35 sim a few years back for an hour or so. Nice plane, pretty cool avionics.

[SOLIDKREATE]

The F-35 is a big waste of money but.......the helmet can live on in updated aircraft. It gives unprecedented situational awareness.

 

The F-35 can be scrapped and we can buy the Russian PAK FA (T-50). Our country is to concerned with lining pockets rather than giving America a fighter we can be proud of.

[Jaws2002]

The F-35 is a big waste of money but.......the helmet can live on in updated aircraft. It gives unprecedented situational awareness.

 

The F-35 can be scrapped and we can buy the Russian PAK FA (T-50). Our country is to concerned with lining pockets rather than giving America a fighter we can be proud of.

 

Sadly, it's not a country anymore. It became a cut-throat corporation.

[Jaws2002]

[GP*]

Sadly, it's not a country anymore. It became a cut-throat corporation.

 

 

I read this nonsense all the time. People seem to think platitudes like this are somehow original and insightful. 

 

"Anymore" ? When do you think that America was truly a city on a hill? The military industrial complex has been a boogieman since Eisenhower. What about before WWII, then? Oh yeah, incredible profit margins at the expense of overproduction, and wild speculation, brought the company into a depression just years before. How about the 1800s, things must have been better then, right? Too bad the Civil War was all about economic "tradition" and protecting the south's way of earning money, while the North simply fought to keep the union together. Emancipation was a nice afterthought. 

 

Ok, what about before then? Further back into little house on the prairie? The reason why most state's charters were even granted was, again, for trade and economic prosperity. How do you feel about Jeffrey Amherst giving blankets purposely infected with Smallpox to the Indians, so that we could grab more land? 

 

The further back you go, the uglier it gets. No matter how you cut it, the nation-state's use of controlled violence (i.e. the military) has always been about money, power, sex, or religion. 

 

The weapons have simply gotten more sophisticated and expensive over time. 

Edited December 22, 2015 by Prefontaine

[wtornado]

1.5 trillion for  55 years of flying service is a lot of money.

 

Canada spent 309.3 million so far on the F-35 project.

 

Canada woke up and is pulling out of that F-35 program that is 200 billion over budget.

 

With Canada pulling out it will cost other countries 1 million more per plane.

 

The U.S. can spend 400 billion on 2443 jets their interest rates just went up and the dollar is strong 

 

There is nothing wrong with the Super Hornet or the F-16.

 

250 million+ per jet is insane. 

 

Just maintain the nukes and sit back and do nothing as usual like in the South China sea.

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

1.5 trillion for  55 years of flying service is a lot of money.

 

Canada spent 309.3 million so far on the F-35 project.

 

Canada woke up and is pulling out of that F-35 program that is 200 billion over budget.

 

With Canada pulling out it will cost other countries 1 million more per plane.

 

The U.S. can spend 400 billion on 2443 jets their interest rates just went up and the dollar is strong 

 

There is nothing wrong with the Super Hornet or the F-16.

 

250 million+ per jet is insane. 

 

Just maintain the nukes and sit back and do nothing as usual like in the South China sea.

Firstly, costs are currently $1 trillion, $1.5trillion were expected cost in 2010. $1 trillion is peanuts considering that US is expected to have generated over $3 quadrillion at current rates of growth and inflation in the same time frame, F-35 program is 0.03% of that.

 

Superbug and Viper are inadequate in dealing with modern SAMs like S-400 while maintaining acceptable attrition rates.

 

Trudeau is just posturing. RCAF would be foolish to pull out of the JSF program. None of the other options are noticeably cheaper then what the F-35 is expected to be by the 2020s, nor will they have the same capabilities.

 

$250 million/jet, maybe 10 years ago.

 

Current LRIP are around $100m and expected to decrease further as production ramps up.

 

You can't project power with ICBMs.

Edited December 23, 2015 by RoflSeal

[Jaws2002]

I read this nonsense all the time. People seem to think platitudes like this are somehow original and insightful. 

 

"Anymore" ? When do you think that America was truly a city on a hill? The military industrial complex has been a boogieman since Eisenhower. What about before WWII, then? Oh yeah, incredible profit margins at the expense of overproduction, and wild speculation, brought the company into a depression just years before. How about the 1800s, things must have been better then, right? Too bad the Civil War was all about economic "tradition" and protecting the south's way of earning money, while the North simply fought to keep the union together. Emancipation was a nice afterthought. 

 

Ok, what about before then? Further back into little house on the prairie? The reason why most state's charters were even granted was, again, for trade and economic prosperity. How do you feel about Jeffrey Amherst giving blankets purposely infected with Smallpox to the Indians, so that we could grab more land? 

 

The further back you go, the uglier it gets. No matter how you cut it, the nation-state's use of controlled violence (i.e. the military) has always been about money, power, sex, or religion. 

 

The weapons have simply gotten more sophisticated and expensive over time.

Maybe I put it more from my perspective. I grew up in Romania, during the ugly communism and USA was like a country from dreams. While it was cut throat back then, the working man, (middle class), in USA, had a decent life, compared to us.

Now, that I moved in Canada, I see the middle class is almost wiped out and it's being exterminated as we speak.

 

I sometimes feel like we live in some sick dream, with the roles changing. Russia, the former evil empire, that ruined my childhood, stands for freedom and justice, and USA becomes the ugly evil empire, ready to abuse and destroy any country, if it gets their handlers a profit.

 

Sad times we live in.

 

Edited December 22, 2015 by Jaws2002