If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Everyone knows airplanes often get struck by lightning, and are designed so strikes will have minimal impact. Except the F-35 Lightning II, which can't fly within 25 miles of any storms because the fuel tank might explode   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 66
    More: Ironic, F-35, Lightening II, lightening, United States, fuel tank, Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Four Corners, military aircraft  
•       •       •

6894 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Feb 2013 at 8:23 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



66 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-19 08:24:25 AM
Lightning.
 
2013-02-19 08:24:56 AM
www.buzzle.com

^what 'being struck by lightening' might look like.
 
2013-02-19 08:26:59 AM
Maybe subby thinks the plane is losing weight?
 
2013-02-19 08:27:01 AM
www.zug.com
 
2013-02-19 08:27:11 AM
No e, subzo. Peeve of mine.
 
2013-02-19 08:27:22 AM
you had to know that was coming
the story could be how to win the lottery
but if there is a spelling mistake
 blammo!
 
2013-02-19 08:27:31 AM
www.gkhair.com
 
2013-02-19 08:28:11 AM

Raithun: Lightning.


Surely some planes the paint job gets bleached by the sun, and thus they have been struck by lightening, and it is a good design aim for this not to cause the plane problems.
 
2013-02-19 08:28:38 AM

JSieverts: Maybe subby thinks the plane is losing weight?


My guess is that if the gas tank explodes it will weigh considerably less
 
2013-02-19 08:29:04 AM
Also, isn't the F-22 enough to ensure our air superiority? Our enemies have decrepit aircraft generations old.
 
2013-02-19 08:29:47 AM
What about rear end collisions?
 
2013-02-19 08:31:14 AM
I'm on a diet where I only eat matzoh, lox, and latkes and drink Kedem grape juice.  I call it Jewish Lightening.
 
2013-02-19 08:32:14 AM

ransack.: Also, isn't the F-22 enough to ensure our air superiority? Our enemies have decrepit aircraft generations old.


difference is i never see the f22 flying around here, but i've often watched f35s flying around all over the place on my drive home, and sometimes while i'm out doing yard work.

also, a time or 2 i've seen some new helicopter flying around that looks incredible, but i don't know anything about it

joys of living in ft worth
 
2013-02-19 08:32:25 AM
Clearly we must stop funding PBS and Planned Parenthood to balance the budget.
 
2013-02-19 08:32:42 AM

ransack.: Also, isn't the F-22 enough to ensure our air superiority? Our enemies have decrepit aircraft generations old.


Do you know how difficult it is to spend $700 billion a year?
 
2013-02-19 08:37:20 AM
That's nothing. The Darkening VI can't fly after sunset.
 
2013-02-19 08:38:34 AM

ransack.: Also, isn't the F-22 enough to ensure our air superiority? Our enemies have decrepit aircraft generations old.


The F-22 is the Air Force's air superiority fighter ... the F-35 is not meant to supplant it.

The F-35 is meant to be the cheaper (smaller, single-engine), cross-force (air force, marines, navy, other countries), multi-role fighter. Needless to say, it is having some issues reaching these goals.

It is a similar relationship to that of the F-15 and F-16. The F-15 was the big (twin engine), advanced long range avionics air superiority fighter while the F-16 was the smaller, single-engine cost-down. As a fortunate turn of events, the F-16's revolutionary "unstable" design made it a fantastic in-close fighter which elevated it's status.
 
2013-02-19 08:39:31 AM
www.soap.com

Lightening in a bottle
 
2013-02-19 08:41:18 AM

JSieverts: Maybe subby thinks the plane

 plain is losingloosing weight wait?


/FTFY
 
2013-02-19 08:41:43 AM

ransack.: Also, isn't the F-22 enough to ensure our air superiority? Our enemies have decrepit aircraft generations old.


Well only if the F-22 can ensure that superiority from the ground.  Those oxygen not getting to the pilot problems are a tad tricky.

I'm not sure why this is a problem though, everyone knows a good thunderstorm stops all warfare.

Seriously our military industrial complex is either severely corrupt or severely inept.....either way is shiatty.
 
2013-02-19 08:44:49 AM
It looks good in photoshops, though.
 
2013-02-19 08:44:56 AM
We need to move on to the X-02 Wyvren:
images4.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-02-19 08:46:39 AM
DoBeDoBeDo:

Seriously our military industrial complex is either severely corrupt or severely inept.....either way is shiatty.

But don't you dare cut finding to it or you hate America!
 
2013-02-19 08:48:02 AM
How does the A-10 Warthog handle being struck by warthogs? I bet better than the F-35 Lightning handles being struck by lightning.

/Yes, I know 'warthog' isn't the official desgination.
 
2013-02-19 08:51:45 AM

ransack.: Also, isn't the F-22 enough to ensure our air superiority? Our enemies have decrepit aircraft generations old.


Considering who our enemies are now, a trebuchet would probably ensure our air superiority.
 
2013-02-19 08:51:48 AM

bungle_jr: ransack.: Also, isn't the F-22 enough to ensure our air superiority? Our enemies have decrepit aircraft generations old.

difference is i never see the f22 flying around here, but i've often watched f35s flying around all over the place on my drive home, and sometimes while i'm out doing yard work.

also, a time or 2 i've seen some new helicopter flying around that looks incredible, but i don't know anything about it

joys of living in ft worth


If it's small and looks kinda like a bug it's a Lakota.  I don't know of any other helicopter that the US Govt has bought recently.
 
2013-02-19 08:52:38 AM
Your headline sucks.
 
2013-02-19 08:53:43 AM
Didn't Michael Jackson get struck by lightening?
 
2013-02-19 08:54:37 AM

PanicMan: bungle_jr: ransack.: Also, isn't the F-22 enough to ensure our air superiority? Our enemies have decrepit aircraft generations old.

difference is i never see the f22 flying around here, but i've often watched f35s flying around all over the place on my drive home, and sometimes while i'm out doing yard work.

also, a time or 2 i've seen some new helicopter flying around that looks incredible, but i don't know anything about it

joys of living in ft worth

If it's small and looks kinda like a bug it's a Lakota.  I don't know of any other helicopter that the US Govt has bought recently.


opposite...quite large, think it has jets on it....? can't remember, it's been a few months. the one we saw wasn't painted like a military/govt aircraft
 
2013-02-19 08:55:18 AM

Farking Canuck: ransack.: Also, isn't the F-22 enough to ensure our air superiority? Our enemies have decrepit aircraft generations old.

The F-22 is the Air Force's air superiority fighter ... the F-35 is not meant to supplant it.

The F-35 is meant to be the cheaper (smaller, single-engine), cross-force (air force, marines, navy, other countries), multi-role fighter. Needless to say, it is having some issues reaching these goals.

It is a similar relationship to that of the F-15 and F-16. The F-15 was the big (twin engine), advanced long range avionics air superiority fighter while the F-16 was the smaller, single-engine cost-down. As a fortunate turn of events, the F-16's revolutionary "unstable" design made it a fantastic in-close fighter which elevated it's status.


F-14 or F-15?
 
2013-02-19 08:55:55 AM

bungle_jr: PanicMan: bungle_jr: ransack.: Also, isn't the F-22 enough to ensure our air superiority? Our enemies have decrepit aircraft generations old.

difference is i never see the f22 flying around here, but i've often watched f35s flying around all over the place on my drive home, and sometimes while i'm out doing yard work.

also, a time or 2 i've seen some new helicopter flying around that looks incredible, but i don't know anything about it

joys of living in ft worth

If it's small and looks kinda like a bug it's a Lakota.  I don't know of any other helicopter that the US Govt has bought recently.

opposite...quite large, think it has jets on it....? can't remember, it's been a few months. the one we saw wasn't painted like a military/govt aircraft


Osprey?
 
2013-02-19 09:00:26 AM
Hey, this fighter can fly anywhere.  Maybe we can buy a few copies.

static.guim.co.uk

/all we need is some fiberglass glue and someone who knows photoshop....
 
2013-02-19 09:11:07 AM
I live right around the area of McGuire AFB.  Considering the sheer size of that base, you'd expect to see a lot of these sorts of fighters fliying around.  As it is, about once or twice a week, I see a couple of those enormous cargo planes.  Maybe a chopper or two.  But that's about it.

Even when fighters do go by, they are most often F-18s.  I've seen a couple of pairs (they always fly in pairs) of F-22s.  I have yet to see the F-35 at all.
 
2013-02-19 09:16:55 AM

durbnpoisn: I live right around the area of McGuire AFB.  Considering the sheer size of that base, you'd expect to see a lot of these sorts of fighters fliying around.  As it is, about once or twice a week, I see a couple of those enormous cargo planes.  Maybe a chopper or two.  But that's about it.

Even when fighters do go by, they are most often F-18s.  I've seen a couple of pairs (they always fly in pairs) of F-22s.  I have yet to see the F-35 at all.


we live far north of ft worth, and we see a LOT of c130s (i get nostalgiac about my days of loading/unloading cargo on these, and hitching a ride to exotic locales such as kirkuk, iraq, when i see these), and a lot of helicopters, especially a good number of chinooks.

plus, since there are airports and airstrips EVERYWHERE around here (including aliance, dfw, meachum, and even an airport at a kenneth copeland megachurch about 6 miles from us), we see a lot of other types of aircraft as well
 
2013-02-19 09:29:43 AM
This country needs a new badass John Boyd 2.0 to go toe to toe with the Generals in 'The Building' and the military industrial complex. Boyd would have never let such a cluster frack happen. He was an officer who did stuff for the good of the country, no matter the personal cost (career or family).

/Go read about the guy who took fighter aviation from an art form to a series of provable formulas about Energy-Maneuverability of aircraft.
//Almost single handedly created the F-16 because he considered the original F-X (F-15) program a PoS, primarily because of its variable swept wing like the F-111 and F-14.
///OODA loop.
 
2013-02-19 09:31:22 AM

durbnpoisn: I live right around the area of McGuire AFB.  Considering the sheer size of that base, you'd expect to see a lot of these sorts of fighters fliying around.  As it is, about once or twice a week, I see a couple of those enormous cargo planes.  Maybe a chopper or two.  But that's about it.

Even when fighters do go by, they are most often F-18s.  I've seen a couple of pairs (they always fly in pairs) of F-22s.  I have yet to see the F-35 at all.


Well, since the F-35 is still largely in a testing phase, unless you live near a test facility you're not very likely to see one.
 
2013-02-19 09:38:23 AM
Could we please stop throwing good money after bad, and just cancel the F-35 program?
The plane has been nothing but one kludge after another.
 
2013-02-19 09:39:37 AM

bungle_jr: durbnpoisn: I live right around the area of McGuire AFB.  Considering the sheer size of that base, you'd expect to see a lot of these sorts of fighters fliying around.  As it is, about once or twice a week, I see a couple of those enormous cargo planes.  Maybe a chopper or two.  But that's about it.

Even when fighters do go by, they are most often F-18s.  I've seen a couple of pairs (they always fly in pairs) of F-22s.  I have yet to see the F-35 at all.

we live far north of ft worth, and we see a LOT of c130s (i get nostalgiac about my days of loading/unloading cargo on these, and hitching a ride to exotic locales such as kirkuk, iraq, when i see these), and a lot of helicopters, especially a good number of chinooks.

plus, since there are airports and airstrips EVERYWHERE around here (including aliance, dfw, meachum, and even an airport at a kenneth copeland megachurch about 6 miles from us), we see a lot of other types of aircraft as well


Yeah, the C130s are the ones I see the most.  It's amazing something that large can fly so slowly.  And for whatever reason, they tend to fly very low on final approach. The base is about 20 miles from where they turn around - right over my house.
 
2013-02-19 09:40:21 AM

MythDragon: We need to move on to the X-02 Wyvren:
[images4.wikia.nocookie.net image 750x420]


The Iranian "fighter plane" looks eerily similar to the X-02 Wyvern.
img.youtube.com

Coincidence?
 
2013-02-19 09:44:03 AM

gamempire: Almost single handedly created the F-16 because he considered the original F-X (F-15) program a PoS, primarily because of its variable swept wing like the F-111 and F-14.


The F-15 does not have a variable swept wing
 
2013-02-19 09:46:26 AM

Farking Canuck: gamempire: Almost single handedly created the F-16 because he considered the original F-X (F-15) program a PoS, primarily because of its variable swept wing like the F-111 and F-14.

The F-15 does not have a variable swept wing


It did in the original plans for it in the late 60s and early 70s when it was the F-X program. Boyd basically proved that if it did have a variable swept wing, it would be as useless if not more so than the F-111.
 
2013-02-19 09:51:48 AM

Farking Canuck: gamempire: Almost single handedly created the F-16 because he considered the original F-X (F-15) program a PoS, primarily because of its variable swept wing like the F-111 and F-14.

The F-15 does not have a variable swept wing


From the origin section of the F-15 on Wikipedia, becauss I'm on my phone and lazy:

Following studies in 1964-1965, the U.S. Air Force developed requirements for an air superiority fighter in October 1965. Then on 8 December 1965, the service issued a request for proposals (RFP) for the new fighter. The request called for both air-to-air and air-to-ground capabilities. Eight companies responded with proposals. In the following study phase, four of these companies developed some 500 design concepts. Typical designs featured variable-sweep wings, weighed over 60,000 lb (27,200 kg), included a top speed of Mach 2.7 and a thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.75. The designs were not accepted by the Air Force as they compromised fighter qualities for ground attack qualities. Acceptance of the Energy-Maneuverability (E-M) theory by the Air Force led to a change in requirements for improved maneuverability by the spring 1967.
 
2013-02-19 09:53:26 AM

durbnpoisn: bungle_jr: durbnpoisn: I live right around the area of McGuire AFB.  Considering the sheer size of that base, you'd expect to see a lot of these sorts of fighters fliying around.  As it is, about once or twice a week, I see a couple of those enormous cargo planes.  Maybe a chopper or two.  But that's about it.

Even when fighters do go by, they are most often F-18s.  I've seen a couple of pairs (they always fly in pairs) of F-22s.  I have yet to see the F-35 at all.

we live far north of ft worth, and we see a LOT of c130s (i get nostalgiac about my days of loading/unloading cargo on these, and hitching a ride to exotic locales such as kirkuk, iraq, when i see these), and a lot of helicopters, especially a good number of chinooks.

plus, since there are airports and airstrips EVERYWHERE around here (including aliance, dfw, meachum, and even an airport at a kenneth copeland megachurch about 6 miles from us), we see a lot of other types of aircraft as well

Yeah, the C130s are the ones I see the most.  It's amazing something that large can fly so slowly.  And for whatever reason, they tend to fly very low on final approach. The base is about 20 miles from where they turn around - right over my house.


c130s have nothing on c5s when it comes to very large slow-flying planes...if you see a fully loaded c5 take off, you can watch that for a good 5 minutes without any form of binoculars or anything. it's an engineering marvel that plane even gets off the ground, as huge and heavy as it is
 
2013-02-19 09:53:47 AM
I see the A-10's of the MD ANG flying all the time love those planes.
 
2013-02-19 09:55:06 AM
Nobody busts their asses in school and avoids the drug scene so the can fly PBS
 
2013-02-19 10:01:12 AM

maudibjr: I see the A-10's of the MD ANG flying all the time love those planes.


Best ever!

I love the A-10!
 
2013-02-19 10:06:59 AM

MythDragon: We need to move on to the X-02 Wyvren:
[images4.wikia.nocookie.net image 750x420]


www.eaudrey.com
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-02-19 10:14:45 AM
The Navy released photos of F-35C carrier trials.
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-02-19 10:31:06 AM

gamempire: It did in the original plans for it in the late 60s and early 70s when it was the F-X program.


I thought that might be where you were going but it was unclear.
 
2013-02-19 10:35:18 AM

ZAZ: The Navy released photos of F-35C carrier trials.
[upload.wikimedia.org image 800x600]



Well to be fair, the T-65 carrier trials didn't go so well either
encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com
 
Displayed 50 of 66 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report