Yeah, we are talking about the same thing. I took pains to make sure I mentioned cracks, as they seem to be one of the most common issues in the earliest F-35s.
And a cracked structure is no longer the same shape as an intact structure. Its structure has failed.
Fortunately the plane will likely land if it has only suffered hairline cracks! And fly again! A crack could go unnoticed for a while I imagine.
I see the B as an excellent replacement for the Harrier on UK carriers.
I am still trying to figure out what role it will really play in the USMC (Harrier replacement there, too… but…).
Without seeing it combat tested, it is tough for me to say.
I really think part of it is just psychological. The impact on the enemy seeing a jet flying like a UFO over them has to be demoralizing and terrifying. Like, who can compete with THAT?
I mostly fly the B in sim. I mean, like you said, it is terribly fun to fly. But it is a gas guzzler when doing its coolest tricks, and you need less than half a tank to do everything it can do.
Terribly fun to fly but how can it be useful in combat other than intimidate or “freak out” the enemy for a short while?
A powerful 5th gen fighter extremely manueverable like the Felon can take it out easily… At least that how it played out in my head!
Hope I haven’t opened a can of worms here…
Any 4th Gen fighter can take out a 5th Gen fighter in the right conditions.
But I am as confounded as you. I like peace, and yet if will take wartime experience to really see what the USMC has planned for these UFOs they’ve bought.
In a real world situation I doubt the enemy would ever see the F-35 hovering like a UFO over them. Even though its stealthy it would still be a sitting duck if it was hovering anywhere near the enemy. The hovering capability of the F-35B is a neat trick at air shows but as you know if you’ve flown it in the sim it guzzles gas like nothing else and it can’t do it at all with much fuel on board, let alone armaments.
The STOL of the F-35B is more applicable to useful real world scenarios but even then I know people in the military question how useful it really is, especially going forward into future warfare. It uses a lot of fuel in an aircraft that already has very limited fuel range.
F-22 would disagree
The F-22 doesn’t carry 2000 lb bombs internally (like the F35A and F-35C), only 1000 lb bombs.
The F-35B (STOVL variant) is designed to replace the Harrier.
The F-35A (CTOL or conventional variant) is designed to replace the F-16, A-10 and F-117.
The F-35C (CV or carrier variant) is designed to replace the F/A-18 (legacy) Hornet.
The F-35 with full fuel may not be as manoeuvrable as for example a clean F-16 or F/A-18 because the F-35 carries more fuel and has more range than these aircraft with external fuel tanks and as such it’s heavier even taking into account that it has the most powerful engine ever placed inside a fighter aircraft.
But a F-35 with 50% fuel will be even more agile than clean F-16 or F/A-18 and still has somehow better range than the other aircraft.
If you want to make a fair comparison between aircraft like the F-16 or F/A-18 and the F-35 with full internal fuel and weapons, you must put external tanks and weapons on the F-16 or F/A-18.
Did you know that if you put on a F-16 a loadout of 2 x AMRAAMs and 2 x 2000lb bombs and external fuel tanks in order to give a similar (but not as quite) range as the F-35 with full internal fuel and the same weapon loadout that the F-16 will only attain 5.5Gs and is Subsonic only? As opposed in this same configuration the F-35A (which is designed to replace the F-16) reaches its top speed of Mach 1.6 and attains 9Gs.
Agreed. Let’s not forget that on paper, the Harrier should’ve been a dismal failure against other combat aircraft of the day - pretty much every other nation had aircraft that could intercept it because they were faster… But then the Harrier pilots came up with “viffing”, using vectored thrust during flight, causing the intercepting aircraft to overfly the Harrier and finding they were now at a disadvantage. Came in very handy during the Falklands.
Likewise, I’m sure the F35 pilots are more than capable of using the aircraft’s “disadvantages” to their advantage during combat situations.
The ability to supercruise and keep weapons inside is a huge step up from the F 16.
Think the main (theoretical) value of the B variant to the USMC is the ability to use STOVL to base and operate close to the front lines, including from mostly unprepared fields.
Though as @wombleway - an F-35B version of viffing could come in handy in combat.
Agree that we’d have to see it in action to find out what it’s really capable of - but like you, I hope we don’t.
I just keep wondering if it is better at ground attacks than I initially thought. I mean, I get how it replaces the F-16 which could easily do ground strikes. But the A-10? That thing goes low, slow, and can take a HIT. The F-35 is SO heavy and perhaps I underestimate how well armored it is.
I know the US Marines are often closer to the front lines, traditionally with outdated equipment and often at short or imperfect airfields.
Heh. Perhaps I am just used to them using older, battle tested aircraft. Not these shiny new toys.
Oh, I agree. I’m just describing the USMC case for the F-35B, not arguing for it. I’d much rather be flying those missions in the A-10 or the Harrier (but especially the A-10). And in general I think we were better off when each branch of service specced and designed its own aircraft. Happy to be surprised, but I can’t see how one-size-fits-all will be as effective.
Noice! No matter what I do though, I can’t get it to hit 9 Gs! The max it will do is just over 8 Gs… A variant.
Falcon, strike eagle, Hornet and Tomcat all the way, baybay, any day! 
I get that. I like these new 5th generation planes in sim.
But WWII era warbirds are my favorite.
Can you recommend a few apart from the spitfire to f course? How is the Yak by Deimos?
I think I might move on to wwII planes once I’ve completed my fighter jet collection.
Are you on Xbox or PC?
I’m on Xbox
I’m not hearing great things about Deimos planes so I haven’t yet bought any.
The Flying Iron planes are all great. Beautiful models, too. The Spit might be their best, but I like their Hellcat most of all. Not as maneuverable and not as squirrelly but it is a beast and it has that Wasp radial sound. The model is so good. You see rivet dents and oily hand prints. The P-38 is also excellent. You can’t go wrong with any of them.
The Big Radials Goose is also one of my favorites although it is more of an adventure plane. Military but not a fighter.
I love that era.
If you enable failures in your options, these planes will sputter and fail if you fly them wrong. Engines can blow. But some of the sounds when they do… so good!
There’s a couple winners over on PC as well, but like you I mostly fly on Xbox.
Those birds are SO different compared to these jets. But these old warbirds are often more accurately modeled because folks have access to them, and their secrets are all declassified. Often with these jets, devs just have to make their most educated guess because they can’t get real info about systems and whatnot.
Brilliant! Looks like I might be getting them later down the line.
There was a simulator of the Hellcat on Apple’s PowerPC computers from the 1990s… Don’t remember what it was called but I enjoyed the heck out of it.
Thanks a lot! 