bcj.
2020-05-09T09:35:52+00:00
美国防部确认，限制F-35作超音速飞行以避免破坏其机尾结构和隐身涂层，
WASHINGTON — An issue that risks damage to the F-35’s tail section if the aircraft needs to maintain supersonic speeds is not worth fixing and will instead be addressed by changing the operating parameters, the F-35 Joint Program Office told Defense News in a statement Friday.
F-35联合项目办公室(JPO)星期五在一份声明中对《国防新闻》说，如果只是出于F-35需要保持超音速飞行，那么它机尾损坏的风险就不值得修复，而是需要通过改变操作参数来解决。
The deficiency, first reported by Defense News in 2019, means that at extremely high altitudes, the U.S. Navy’s and Marine Corps’ versions of the F-35 jet can only fly at supersonic speeds for short bursts of time before there is a risk of structural damage and loss of stealth capability.
这一缺陷首次由《国防新闻》(Defense News)在2019年报道，这意味着在极高海拔区域，美国海军和海军陆战队版本的F-35战机只能在短时间内以超音速飞行，否则有结构损伤和隐形能力丧失的风险。
The problem may make it impossible for the Navy’s F-35C to conduct supersonic intercepts.
这个问题使海军的F-35C进行超音速拦截成为不可能的任务。
Victor Perry
''The deficiency, first reported by Defense News in 2019, means that at extremely high altitudes, the U.S. Navy’s and Marine Corps’ versions of the F-35 jet can only fly at supersonic speeds for short bursts of time before there is a risk of structural damage and loss of stealth capability.''
After FOURTEEN-YEARS and a TRILLION DOLLARS of tax-payer''''s money since first flight, and now this. WHAT HAVE WE DONE!
”这一缺陷首次由《国防新闻》(Defense News)在2019年报道，这意味着在极高海拔区域，美国海军和海军陆战队版本的F-35战机只能在短时间内以超音速飞行，否则有结构损伤和隐形能力丧失的风险。“
从第一次飞行到现在，已经花了14年，花了纳税人一万亿美元。我们做了什么!
Albert D. Kallal
Well, first this is old news.
Note how sneaky the headline is:
First reported by Defense news.
Yes, first reported by THIS news site!!!
NOT that the issue was FIRST reported or reported by the Pentagon in 2019!!!
The headline makes this sound like it is NEW NEWS!!
The issue is old had, was fixed, and is not a issue nor even a operational problem.
Talk about a spin headline!!!
As for the issue and fix?
Let’s take some real news quotes, shall we?
*_Vice Adm. Mat Winter, who leads the F-35 program on behalf of the Pentagon, told Defense News that the department has taken steps to mitigate the problem with an improved spray-on coating, but added that the government will not completely fix it — instead accepting additional risk_*
That coating is a new ceramic based paint that can withstand the higher temperatures.
And, NOTE very careful this statement:
Winter noted that the issue was documented while the jet was flying at the very edge of its flight envelope. He also said the phenomenon only occurred once for both the B and C models, despite numerous attempts to replicate the conditions that caused the problem.
Read above again:
*_ He also said the phenomenon only occurred once for both the B and C models, despite numerous attempts to replicate the conditions that caused the problem._*
Occured one time!!!
And NOTE WELL:
Despite numerous attempts to replicate the problem!
So, now if you go and ask and interview some other pilot and ask them how bad this is? Well, they do NOT know this issue was fixed 9 years ago!!
So, it is NOT a wide spread problem. And NOTE ALSO they NEVER saw the issue with the F35 “A” model.
So, no, this is not a big deal, or issue. And note that story and information is NINE YEARS old!!! from 2011.
So, no this is not an issue or problem with the F35.
And this:
*_Greg Ulmer, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 program head, said there have been no cases of this problem occurring in the operational fleet and that incidents have been limited to the “highest extremes of flight testing conditions that are unlikely replicated in operational scenarios.”_*
And Winter goes on to state this:
*_The new coating, which was introduced in Lot 8, allows the jet to withstand hotter temperatures caused by the afterburner, the documents stated. Winter characterized the material as able to withstand “what we call the thermal shock wave,”_*
So, you talking about an issue that cropped up 9 years ago, and has LONG been dealt with.
All jets have some opertational limits imposed. For example, a f16 flying at low altitudutes has restrictons on supersonice speeds since the heat builds up on spots on the canopy, and can cause weaking or even a failure.
Watch the F35 at airshows etc. The pilots use afterburners as they please.
The F35 flies faster, goes farther and yes will fly at supersonic speeds for LONGER times then the jets it replaces - include the f18 and f16 which have more problems and more limits when they attempt to fly at super sonic speeds.
This is a NINE YEAR old problem.
So yes, first reported here by defense news in 2019, but it was fixed and dealt with NINE years ago!!!
This is old news, but a VERY missleading heading is being used here!
首先，这是老新闻了。
注意标题是多么的狡猾:
首次由《国防新闻》报道。
是的，首次由这个新闻网站报道!!
这并不是五角大楼在2019年首次报道或报道的问题!!
标题让这听起来像是新的新闻!!
而且这个问题已经解决了，不是问题，甚至不是操作问题。
谈谈这个耸人听闻标题吧!!
关于问题和修复?
让我们引用一些真实的新闻，好吗?
代表五角大楼领导F-35项目的海军中将马特·温特在接受《国防新闻》采访时表示，国防部已经采取措施，通过改进喷涂层来缓解这一问题，但他补充说，政府不会完全解决这一问题，而是会接受额外的风险。
这种涂层是一种新的陶瓷基涂料，可以承受更高的温度。
请特别注意这句话:
温特指出，这一问题是在飞机在其飞行包线的边缘飞行时被记录下来的。他还说，这种现象只在B型号和C型号中各出现过一次，尽管有很多人试图复制导致问题的条件。
再读一遍上文:
他还说，这种现象只在B型号和C型号中各出现过一次，尽管有很多人试图复制导致问题的条件。
Boabdil Perez
See they never wanted that supersonic flight anyway. It’s dumb and burns gas and no pilot would even want to.
The roles this plane was suddenly “never intended to do” keeps growing.
看起来他们根本就不想作超音速飞行，这样做很笨还要烧油，没一个飞行员愿意这么做。
这架飞机突然间“从未打算做”的任务越来越多了。
Robert Evan Hardy
Isn''''t ''''supercruise'''' supersonic! Wasn''''t that the other badge of a 5th generation aircraft, the ability to accelerate to and sustain supersonic speeds without the use of afterburner? Hence gifting your air defence weaponry much flight energy and engaging targets at greater range and shorter time.
没有“超巡”的超音速飞机! 超巡难道不是五代机的标志之一吗? 在不使用加力燃烧器的情况下，加速并保持超音速的能力? 这样一来，就给了防空武器更大范围的飞行能量和更短时间接近目标。
Scott Mattson
Robert Evan Hardy the F-35 was never meant to supercruise.
F-35从来就没表示有超巡(超音速巡航)。
Dave Wolfendale
Scott Mattson There was a time when supercruise was part of the definition of "5th Gen."
A meaningless term, sales pitch only.
曾几何时，超级巡航是“五代机”的一部分。
原来是一个毫无意义的术语啊，只是为了推销。
Henry Cooper
Dave Wolfendale I believe the engine is capable of supercruise...But the airfrx is not. The engine is the most powerful engine ever put into a fighter. The design however is to evade radar and make forward ground attacks in heavily defended airspace, slip in and out before they knew what hit them. High altitude and high speed ...are not obxtives in this sense.High subsonic and low altitude with stealth is a big deal in destroying A2/AD defenses!
我相信它的发动机可以进行超巡...但是机体不行，它的发动机是战斗机上使用过的最强大的发动机，然而，该设计是为了躲避雷达，并在重兵把守的空域进行先发地面攻击，在它们知道会被攻击之前溜进溜出，高空和高速...不是设计宗旨，高亚音速和低海拔隐形是摧毁A2/AD防御的一个好方案!
[译注，A2/AD即Anti-Access Area Denial， 反介入及区域拒止]
Andrew Kear
Henry Cooper This is why the airforce needs the F-15x more than ever. The F-35 is even worse than Pierre Sprey has stated. We know have to accept F-4 phantom-like maneuverablity and subsonic speed when it comes to the F-35.
这就是空军比以往任何时候都更需要F-15x的原因，F-35比Pierre Sprey说的还要糟糕。当谈到F-35时，我们知道必须接受F-4幽灵般的机动性和亚音速。
[译注，Pierre Sprey是著名国防分析师]
Andrew Kear
Scott Mattson That may be true, but it should be able to maintain supersonic flight like a vintage 1960 F-7 crusader. This inability to maintain supersonic flight is a travesty for a plane designed for the 21st century. It would be comparable to purchasing an $80,000 sports car that can barely hit a 100mph.
这可能是真的，但它应该能够像1960年代的老式F-7十字军战机那样保持超音速飞行。对于一架为21世纪设计的飞机来说，不能保持超音速飞行是一件滑稽的事情。这相当于买了一辆8万美元的跑车，却几乎不能达到每小时100英里的速度。
[译注，美海军的十字军战机是第一款舰载超音速战机，机型编号为F-8，于1956年服役]
Steven Gaber
Andrew Kear The Crusader was the F-8.
十字军是F-8。
Andrew Kear
Steven Gaber You are correct. Still, the F-8 could maintain supersonic speed longer than the F-35. No wonder the Germans picked the F-18 over the F-35.
你是正确的。不过，F-8可以比F-35保持更长时间的超音速飞行，难怪德国人选择F-18而不是F-35。
Jason Villella
That’s a dumb ass mistake the manufacturer should absorb the cost and fix this!
这是一个愚蠢的错误，制造商应该承担成本并解决这个问题!
Tom Johnson
I dont get the "if the coating is damaged week 1 of an 8 month deployment you lose the plan for the 8 months. I get they can''''t fix the coating on a carrier but nothing in the article says the plane can''''t fly due to the damage.....so it seems you could fly the plane back for repairs.
Still seems the manufacturer screwed up and didn''''t design it to meet the requirements so they should be designing a fix and over time all planes should be retrofitted with the redesigned parts
我没搞明白，“如果8个月部署期间的第一周涂层就损坏了，你就损失了8个月的计划”。我知道他们不能在航空母舰上修复涂层，但文章里没有说飞机因为损坏而不能飞行……所以看来可以把飞机开回去修理嘛。
似乎还是制造商搞砸了，设计没有满足要求，所以他们应该设计一个修复方案，所有的飞机都应该根据时间用重新设计的部件进行翻新。
Henry Cooper
It''''s seriously not a terrible blow to the capabilities of this aircraft...as it was designed to be a ground attack plane that can defend itself better than the A-10 and be similar to the F-16 and F-18 in performance...which none were stealth. none flew supersonic for extended periods in combat and one wasn''''t even capable. It hurts in prestige that it can''''t fly WOT at high altitudes for long, but it''''s only a boasting rite to be able to. It was never designed to be an air superiority fighter, but it''''s stealth makes it capable of defending against adversarial air superiority as well as it''''s data networking with F-15s and F-22s creating a situational awareness that gives it''''s friendly forces an edge. It''''s still much better than both the A-10 and the Harrier being much faster even without afterburners than both and has the stealth that the F-16 and F-18 lack while still being in both those fighters range of capabilities and beyond.
What this article does not touch upon is the fact that the US is lacking a replacement for the F-15 -F14 domain of air superiority, something the planers in the pentagon were short sighted about ...thinking war with China or Russia was ruled out, and then Obama sealed the deficiency cancelling the construction of the F-22 ..which is the cause of this whole argument.. But this plane replaces the planes it was intended to replace ..without a doubt with a much better and much more capable plane!
对这架飞机的性能来说，这并不是严重的打击...因为它被设计成一种地面攻击机，可以比A -10(疣猪)更好地自卫，在性能上与F-16和F-18相似……但这两者没有一个是隐形的。没有飞机在战斗中长时间超音速飞行，甚至没有飞机有这个能力。它不能长时间在高海拔全速飞行，这让它的声望受损，但那本来就只是自吹的噱头而已。它从来没有被设计成空优战斗机，但它的隐身能力使它能够抵御敌方的空中优势，以及它与f -15和f -22的数据网络所创建态势感知能力，赋予它的友军一个优势，它仍然比A-10和鹞式战机要好得多，即使没有加力燃烧，它的速度也比两者都快得多，它拥有F-16和F-18所不具备的隐身性，而且拥有这两种战斗机的全部能力，甚至更大。
这篇文章没有触及的事实是，美国缺乏一个替代的F-15 和F14领域的空优力量，这是五角大楼的规划者们的短视之处...与中国或俄罗斯开战的想法被排除了，然后奥巴马固化了这一不足，取消了F-22的建造...这就是整个争论的原因...但这架飞机取代了它原本要取代的飞机，毫无疑问，这是一架更好更能干的飞机。
David Hoskins
I don''''t see how this plane is in any way shape or form a suitable replacement for the A-10.
I wouldn''''t bet the kids college fund on the A-10 losing a close in dog fight against the F-35 either.
无论如何，我看不出这架飞机是如何打造为或形成为一个合适的A-10替代者的。
我也不会拿孩子们的大学基金赌A -10在与F-35的近距狗斗中败下阵来。
Henry Cooper
David Hoskins The fact that you cannot see why...Is totally irellevant ! Fact is it is !0X the plane the A-10 is And the problems with this plane are not addressed properly as it''''s abilitly far exceeds The A-10 The Harrier the F-16 and the F-18.. Though it may fall short in turning wityh an F-16 and lack the total afterburner speed of both the F-16 and the F-18 it more than compensates in stealth and electronics. You have to remember ...It still has these airfrxs backing it up!
The only thing our airforce is lacking is an intercepter , air superiority fighter in numbers such as the F-22. But they may have solved this with drones that can be control;led by the F-35 ...SWARMING the enemy with drones that can sustain higher g forces than humans can !
David Hoskins，事实上你看不出为什么它们完全不相关！实际上有一个10X型号，A-10和这架飞机的问题没有得到妥善处理，因为它的能力远远超过了A-10，鹞式，F-16和F-18...尽管它可能无法达到F-16战机的水平，也无法达到F-16和F-18战机的加力速度，但它在隐身和电子设备方面的优势足以弥补这一点，要记住....它仍然有这些飞机作后盾!
我们空军唯一缺少的就是一款拦截机，数量多如F-22的空优战机。但他们可能已经用可以控制的无人机解决了这个问题，由F-35带领……用比人类能承受更大g力的无人机集群攻击敌人!
Matt Mosher
Henry Cooper the f35 is a nightmare with maintenance. They can barely give the pilots enough time in the cockpit because they are always being worked on. The a10 does its job and does it well. There''''s no reason to put an overpriced plane like the f35 in that position. Their not going to do strafing runs with an f35 and put it in danger of small arms fire. That leaves smart bombs. They are to worried about its specal coating and stealth to risk that. Every time they fly they spend the next 3 days on the ground getting worked on meanwhile the a10 is in the air doing its job and doing well for less money.
Henry Cooper，f35的维护简直是个噩梦，他们几乎不能给飞行员足够的时间呆在驾驶舱，因为总是在维护。A10能很好地完成它的使命，没有理由把像f35这样的高价值飞机放在那样的位置。他们也没打算用f35进行低空扫射，使之处于轻武器火力的危险中。他们只是担心它的特殊涂层和隐身会有风险，每次飞行下来，他们要花接下来的3天作地勤工作，而A10已经在空中干活了，并做得很好，花的钱也少。
Henry Cooper
Matt Mosher All true, but let''''s not forget the A-10.s are antiques ...and they will not last forever. The Air Force has tried to retire them, but lawmakers would not have it, simply for the reasons you state and the fact it is a real workhorse that strikes fear into hostile gound forces and enemy armor. However...Thje advantages the F-35 has over the A-10 see''''s it''''s way into the future , not so distant when the A-10 is put to pasture. You can say what you want, but I''''m believing what the pilots have said about them, which is universalally the admission they would choose the F-35 over thier previous platforms and that it meets and or exceeds the capibility of their old planes in every way. Each plane has it''''s own niche and it''''d be nice if they would build new upgraded A-10''''s for their worth, the problem is the A-10 is vulnerable in areas where the F-35 can opperate with inpunity. That''''s the deal, whether we like it or not.
Matt Mosher，说得没错，但别忘了A-10s是个老古董…不会长生不死。空军曾试图让他们退役，但国会议员们不同意，原因很简单，你也说过这个事实，它是一匹真正的吃苦耐劳的马，能将恐惧打入了敌方的地面部队和装甲之中，然而……F-35相对于A-10的优势在于它的未来，A-10退役的时候也不远了。你想说什么都行，但我相信飞行员的观点，一般来说，他们会选择F-35而不是他们以前的飞行平台，而且F-35在各个方面都满足甚至超过了他们以前飞机的能力，每种飞机都有自己的定位，如果他们能根据其价值建造升级版的A-10就太好了。问题是，A-10在F-35可以肆行作战的地区是易受攻击的，事实就是这样，不管我们喜不喜欢。
Henry Cooper
David Hoskins You have to be kidding...The A-10 isn''''t even in the same ballpark with the F-35..It wouldn''''t stand a chance in any situation! Even in within visual range dogfighting..The F-35 has off boresight missile tracking and can easily fly twice as fast as the A-10 and take off and land without an airfield.
David Hoskins，你在开玩笑吧……A-10根本和F-35不是一个档次。在任何情况下都没有机会相提并论! 即使在可视范围内狗斗…F-35已经不再使用瞄准线导弹跟踪模式，它可以轻松地以两倍于A-10的速度飞行，而且无需机场即可起降。
Andrew Kear
Henry Cooper The F-35 cannot even fire it gun straight. Time for the NAVY to ditch this plane and go to an all hornet navy. Wait, I don''''t think the NAVY version even has a gun!!!!!
Henry Cooper，F-35甚至都不能用机炮直接开火，现在是海军抛弃这款飞机的时候了，来一个全是大黄蜂战机的海军舰队吧，哎等等，我觉得海军版F-35的也根本没机炮。
Roger Bratt
what was a bigger Con Job for American tax-payers
F35 or F22 ?
almost sounds like the F35 might out-scam the F22.
对美国纳税人来说，什么是更大的骗局？
F35还是F22?
听起来好像F35比F22更具欺骗性。
Andrew Kear
The F-22 is the best fighter ever built while the F-35 is the most disappointing.
F-22是有史以来最好的战斗机，F-35是最令人失望的。
Andrew Kear
So it is now essentially a subsonic aircraft like the A-4. How can the airforce and navy use this as figther in any kind of way. No wonder the Navy wants F-18s instead.
所以它现在基本上是一架亚音速飞机，就像A-4一样，空军和海军如何以全性能方式使用它呢，难怪海军想要f -18战机。
Richard Saunders
This is false. The problem only persists at the extemty of the flight envelope in terms of altitude, and has largely been mitigated in the 10 years since it was first reported by new spray-on coatings.
这是报道错误的，这个问题只是飞行包线在一定高度范围内时才存在，自从新的喷涂涂料首次报道以来，在过去的10年里，这一问题已经得到了很大程度的缓解
Chad Armstrong
F-35: the gift that keeps on giving.
F-35:不断给予的礼物。
Andrew Kear
With the exception of stealth the F-18 does everything better than the F-35. There s a reason the Navy is still ordering hornets. Heck, the new Ford carriers aren''''t even optimized for the F-35.
除了隐形，F-18在所有方面都比F-35强，这是海军仍在订购大黄蜂在原因。糟糕的是，新的福特级航母甚至没有针对F-35作优化。
Theo Baumann
Welcome to World''''s most expensive HANGAR QUEEN !!
欢迎世界上最昂贵的机库女王！！
Gene LeGear
The fix will be in the Gen 6 fighter, 10 years from now.....
这个问题将在第6代战斗机中得到修复，10年后…
GeorgeEmily Skinner
This is the best of our best engineers and skilled craftsmen ? To put a plane together after all that time and money that certainly has Xing and Putin laughing and slapping their knees ???? I pray this is just disinformation....Dear Lord Protect Us from our own stupidity.
这就是我们最好的工程师和训练有素的工匠吗?毕竟花费大量的资金和时间才能组装起一架飞机，中国和俄罗斯肯定会笑得拍大腿，我祈祷这只是假消息…亲爱的上帝，保护我们远离我们自己的愚蠢吧。
John Bonnar
Nothing has changed in decades of procuring anything for the Military. We solict contractors to build something that meets these specifications and it has to do this or that. Then years down the road or maybe during R&D or EMD we (Government) find''''s out it can''''t do all the things we wanted or that the contractors said it could do but we will take it anyway. In the end we pay the same unit price for the item/items that the Military buys with all sorts of Waivers and Deviations.
几十年来，军事采购方面的任何东西都没有改变。我们请承包商来建造符合特定规格的东西，承包商必须这样或那样做，几年之后，或者在研发期间，或者EMD期间，我们(政府)发现它做不到所有我们要的或承包商以前承诺的，不过无论如何我们都会接受，到最后，我们为项目支付相同的单价，军方买到的东西都有某些性能减免和偏差。
John Fourquet
Cancel the F-35 now. It is a failure. The DoD has spent too much money for a marginal aircraft with questionable capabilities. It will never like up to what was promised to be.
现在就取消F-35，这是一个失败的项目。国防部在一架能力有问题的边缘飞机上花了太多钱，它永远不会像承诺的那样。
Andrew Kear
It could be a decent replacement for either the A-6 or A-4. As an interceptor and air superiority fighter it is a flop. Both the Airforce and Navy are going to have to rely on the F-15x and F-18 super hornet for interception mission. No US fighter in 60 years has had a more comprised supersonic performance than the F-35.
它可能是A-6或A-4的一个不错的替代品，作为拦截机和空优战机，它是一部失败之作。空军和海军都将不得不依赖F-15x和F-18超级大黄蜂执行拦截任务。60年来，没有一架美国战斗机比F-35的超音速性能构成更复杂。
Andrew Kear
This says it all. Time for a senate investigation.
" The F-35C can only fly at Mach 1.3 in afterburner for 50 cumulative seconds, meaning that a pilot cannot clock 50 seconds at that speed, slow down for a couple seconds and then speed back up." - Defense News June 2019.
下面这段话说明了一切，是参议院调查的时候了。
“F-35C在加力燃烧中只能以1.3马赫的速度累计飞行50秒，这意味着飞行员不能计时50秒保持那个速度，要慢下来几秒钟，然后再加速上去。”--《国防新闻》2019年6月
Stephan Luc Larose
SU-57s will spot these turkeys from 150 miles away with electro-optics and multiband radar and shoot them down from 150 miles away with hypersonic ordinance. F35s will see the SU-57s clearly enough, they just won''''t have anything to fire back at that range or be able to do anything to escape. SU-57 can supercruise at Mach 2, F35 can barely hit Mach 1. May as well just put sling shots on lemons and call that an "air force."
SU-57s将在150英里外用光电探测装置和多波段雷达发现这些火鸡，并用超音速武器击落它们，F35s将能清楚地看到SU-57，在那个范围内，它们无法回击，也无法逃脱，SU-57 能以2马赫的速度进行超级巡航，F35几乎达不到1马赫，还不如直接用弹弓打柠檬呢，这也叫做“空军”。
WASHINGTON — An issue that risks damage to the F-35’s tail section if the aircraft needs to maintain supersonic speeds is not worth fixing and will instead be addressed by changing the operating parameters, the F-35 Joint Program Office told Defense News in a statement Friday.
F-35联合项目办公室(JPO)星期五在一份声明中对《国防新闻》说，如果只是出于F-35需要保持超音速飞行，那么它机尾损坏的风险就不值得修复，而是需要通过改变操作参数来解决。
The deficiency, first reported by Defense News in 2019, means that at extremely high altitudes, the U.S. Navy’s and Marine Corps’ versions of the F-35 jet can only fly at supersonic speeds for short bursts of time before there is a risk of structural damage and loss of stealth capability.
这一缺陷首次由《国防新闻》(Defense News)在2019年报道，这意味着在极高海拔区域，美国海军和海军陆战队版本的F-35战机只能在短时间内以超音速飞行，否则有结构损伤和隐形能力丧失的风险。
The problem may make it impossible for the Navy’s F-35C to conduct supersonic intercepts.
这个问题使海军的F-35C进行超音速拦截成为不可能的任务。
Victor Perry
''The deficiency, first reported by Defense News in 2019, means that at extremely high altitudes, the U.S. Navy’s and Marine Corps’ versions of the F-35 jet can only fly at supersonic speeds for short bursts of time before there is a risk of structural damage and loss of stealth capability.''
After FOURTEEN-YEARS and a TRILLION DOLLARS of tax-payer''''s money since first flight, and now this. WHAT HAVE WE DONE!
”这一缺陷首次由《国防新闻》(Defense News)在2019年报道，这意味着在极高海拔区域，美国海军和海军陆战队版本的F-35战机只能在短时间内以超音速飞行，否则有结构损伤和隐形能力丧失的风险。“
从第一次飞行到现在，已经花了14年，花了纳税人一万亿美元。我们做了什么!
Albert D. Kallal
Well, first this is old news.
Note how sneaky the headline is:
First reported by Defense news.
Yes, first reported by THIS news site!!!
NOT that the issue was FIRST reported or reported by the Pentagon in 2019!!!
The headline makes this sound like it is NEW NEWS!!
The issue is old had, was fixed, and is not a issue nor even a operational problem.
Talk about a spin headline!!!
As for the issue and fix?
Let’s take some real news quotes, shall we?
*_Vice Adm. Mat Winter, who leads the F-35 program on behalf of the Pentagon, told Defense News that the department has taken steps to mitigate the problem with an improved spray-on coating, but added that the government will not completely fix it — instead accepting additional risk_*
That coating is a new ceramic based paint that can withstand the higher temperatures.
And, NOTE very careful this statement:
Winter noted that the issue was documented while the jet was flying at the very edge of its flight envelope. He also said the phenomenon only occurred once for both the B and C models, despite numerous attempts to replicate the conditions that caused the problem.
Read above again:
*_ He also said the phenomenon only occurred once for both the B and C models, despite numerous attempts to replicate the conditions that caused the problem._*
Occured one time!!!
And NOTE WELL:
Despite numerous attempts to replicate the problem!
So, now if you go and ask and interview some other pilot and ask them how bad this is? Well, they do NOT know this issue was fixed 9 years ago!!
So, it is NOT a wide spread problem. And NOTE ALSO they NEVER saw the issue with the F35 “A” model.
So, no, this is not a big deal, or issue. And note that story and information is NINE YEARS old!!! from 2011.
So, no this is not an issue or problem with the F35.
And this:
*_Greg Ulmer, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 program head, said there have been no cases of this problem occurring in the operational fleet and that incidents have been limited to the “highest extremes of flight testing conditions that are unlikely replicated in operational scenarios.”_*
And Winter goes on to state this:
*_The new coating, which was introduced in Lot 8, allows the jet to withstand hotter temperatures caused by the afterburner, the documents stated. Winter characterized the material as able to withstand “what we call the thermal shock wave,”_*
So, you talking about an issue that cropped up 9 years ago, and has LONG been dealt with.
All jets have some opertational limits imposed. For example, a f16 flying at low altitudutes has restrictons on supersonice speeds since the heat builds up on spots on the canopy, and can cause weaking or even a failure.
Watch the F35 at airshows etc. The pilots use afterburners as they please.
The F35 flies faster, goes farther and yes will fly at supersonic speeds for LONGER times then the jets it replaces - include the f18 and f16 which have more problems and more limits when they attempt to fly at super sonic speeds.
This is a NINE YEAR old problem.
So yes, first reported here by defense news in 2019, but it was fixed and dealt with NINE years ago!!!
This is old news, but a VERY missleading heading is being used here!
首先，这是老新闻了。
注意标题是多么的狡猾:
首次由《国防新闻》报道。
是的，首次由这个新闻网站报道!!
这并不是五角大楼在2019年首次报道或报道的问题!!
标题让这听起来像是新的新闻!!
而且这个问题已经解决了，不是问题，甚至不是操作问题。
谈谈这个耸人听闻标题吧!!
关于问题和修复?
让我们引用一些真实的新闻，好吗?
代表五角大楼领导F-35项目的海军中将马特·温特在接受《国防新闻》采访时表示，国防部已经采取措施，通过改进喷涂层来缓解这一问题，但他补充说，政府不会完全解决这一问题，而是会接受额外的风险。
这种涂层是一种新的陶瓷基涂料，可以承受更高的温度。
请特别注意这句话:
温特指出，这一问题是在飞机在其飞行包线的边缘飞行时被记录下来的。他还说，这种现象只在B型号和C型号中各出现过一次，尽管有很多人试图复制导致问题的条件。
再读一遍上文:
他还说，这种现象只在B型号和C型号中各出现过一次，尽管有很多人试图复制导致问题的条件。
Boabdil Perez
See they never wanted that supersonic flight anyway. It’s dumb and burns gas and no pilot would even want to.
The roles this plane was suddenly “never intended to do” keeps growing.
看起来他们根本就不想作超音速飞行，这样做很笨还要烧油，没一个飞行员愿意这么做。
这架飞机突然间“从未打算做”的任务越来越多了。
Robert Evan Hardy
Isn''''t ''''supercruise'''' supersonic! Wasn''''t that the other badge of a 5th generation aircraft, the ability to accelerate to and sustain supersonic speeds without the use of afterburner? Hence gifting your air defence weaponry much flight energy and engaging targets at greater range and shorter time.
没有“超巡”的超音速飞机! 超巡难道不是五代机的标志之一吗? 在不使用加力燃烧器的情况下，加速并保持超音速的能力? 这样一来，就给了防空武器更大范围的飞行能量和更短时间接近目标。
Scott Mattson
Robert Evan Hardy the F-35 was never meant to supercruise.
F-35从来就没表示有超巡(超音速巡航)。
Dave Wolfendale
Scott Mattson There was a time when supercruise was part of the definition of "5th Gen."
A meaningless term, sales pitch only.
曾几何时，超级巡航是“五代机”的一部分。
原来是一个毫无意义的术语啊，只是为了推销。
Henry Cooper
Dave Wolfendale I believe the engine is capable of supercruise...But the airfrx is not. The engine is the most powerful engine ever put into a fighter. The design however is to evade radar and make forward ground attacks in heavily defended airspace, slip in and out before they knew what hit them. High altitude and high speed ...are not obxtives in this sense.High subsonic and low altitude with stealth is a big deal in destroying A2/AD defenses!
我相信它的发动机可以进行超巡...但是机体不行，它的发动机是战斗机上使用过的最强大的发动机，然而，该设计是为了躲避雷达，并在重兵把守的空域进行先发地面攻击，在它们知道会被攻击之前溜进溜出，高空和高速...不是设计宗旨，高亚音速和低海拔隐形是摧毁A2/AD防御的一个好方案!
[译注，A2/AD即Anti-Access Area Denial， 反介入及区域拒止]
Andrew Kear
Henry Cooper This is why the airforce needs the F-15x more than ever. The F-35 is even worse than Pierre Sprey has stated. We know have to accept F-4 phantom-like maneuverablity and subsonic speed when it comes to the F-35.
这就是空军比以往任何时候都更需要F-15x的原因，F-35比Pierre Sprey说的还要糟糕。当谈到F-35时，我们知道必须接受F-4幽灵般的机动性和亚音速。
[译注，Pierre Sprey是著名国防分析师]
Andrew Kear
Scott Mattson That may be true, but it should be able to maintain supersonic flight like a vintage 1960 F-7 crusader. This inability to maintain supersonic flight is a travesty for a plane designed for the 21st century. It would be comparable to purchasing an $80,000 sports car that can barely hit a 100mph.
这可能是真的，但它应该能够像1960年代的老式F-7十字军战机那样保持超音速飞行。对于一架为21世纪设计的飞机来说，不能保持超音速飞行是一件滑稽的事情。这相当于买了一辆8万美元的跑车，却几乎不能达到每小时100英里的速度。
[译注，美海军的十字军战机是第一款舰载超音速战机，机型编号为F-8，于1956年服役]
Steven Gaber
Andrew Kear The Crusader was the F-8.
十字军是F-8。
Andrew Kear
Steven Gaber You are correct. Still, the F-8 could maintain supersonic speed longer than the F-35. No wonder the Germans picked the F-18 over the F-35.
你是正确的。不过，F-8可以比F-35保持更长时间的超音速飞行，难怪德国人选择F-18而不是F-35。
Jason Villella
That’s a dumb ass mistake the manufacturer should absorb the cost and fix this!
这是一个愚蠢的错误，制造商应该承担成本并解决这个问题!
Tom Johnson
I dont get the "if the coating is damaged week 1 of an 8 month deployment you lose the plan for the 8 months. I get they can''''t fix the coating on a carrier but nothing in the article says the plane can''''t fly due to the damage.....so it seems you could fly the plane back for repairs.
Still seems the manufacturer screwed up and didn''''t design it to meet the requirements so they should be designing a fix and over time all planes should be retrofitted with the redesigned parts
我没搞明白，“如果8个月部署期间的第一周涂层就损坏了，你就损失了8个月的计划”。我知道他们不能在航空母舰上修复涂层，但文章里没有说飞机因为损坏而不能飞行……所以看来可以把飞机开回去修理嘛。
似乎还是制造商搞砸了，设计没有满足要求，所以他们应该设计一个修复方案，所有的飞机都应该根据时间用重新设计的部件进行翻新。
Henry Cooper
It''''s seriously not a terrible blow to the capabilities of this aircraft...as it was designed to be a ground attack plane that can defend itself better than the A-10 and be similar to the F-16 and F-18 in performance...which none were stealth. none flew supersonic for extended periods in combat and one wasn''''t even capable. It hurts in prestige that it can''''t fly WOT at high altitudes for long, but it''''s only a boasting rite to be able to. It was never designed to be an air superiority fighter, but it''''s stealth makes it capable of defending against adversarial air superiority as well as it''''s data networking with F-15s and F-22s creating a situational awareness that gives it''''s friendly forces an edge. It''''s still much better than both the A-10 and the Harrier being much faster even without afterburners than both and has the stealth that the F-16 and F-18 lack while still being in both those fighters range of capabilities and beyond.
What this article does not touch upon is the fact that the US is lacking a replacement for the F-15 -F14 domain of air superiority, something the planers in the pentagon were short sighted about ...thinking war with China or Russia was ruled out, and then Obama sealed the deficiency cancelling the construction of the F-22 ..which is the cause of this whole argument.. But this plane replaces the planes it was intended to replace ..without a doubt with a much better and much more capable plane!
对这架飞机的性能来说，这并不是严重的打击...因为它被设计成一种地面攻击机，可以比A -10(疣猪)更好地自卫，在性能上与F-16和F-18相似……但这两者没有一个是隐形的。没有飞机在战斗中长时间超音速飞行，甚至没有飞机有这个能力。它不能长时间在高海拔全速飞行，这让它的声望受损，但那本来就只是自吹的噱头而已。它从来没有被设计成空优战斗机，但它的隐身能力使它能够抵御敌方的空中优势，以及它与f -15和f -22的数据网络所创建态势感知能力，赋予它的友军一个优势，它仍然比A-10和鹞式战机要好得多，即使没有加力燃烧，它的速度也比两者都快得多，它拥有F-16和F-18所不具备的隐身性，而且拥有这两种战斗机的全部能力，甚至更大。
这篇文章没有触及的事实是，美国缺乏一个替代的F-15 和F14领域的空优力量，这是五角大楼的规划者们的短视之处...与中国或俄罗斯开战的想法被排除了，然后奥巴马固化了这一不足，取消了F-22的建造...这就是整个争论的原因...但这架飞机取代了它原本要取代的飞机，毫无疑问，这是一架更好更能干的飞机。
David Hoskins
I don''''t see how this plane is in any way shape or form a suitable replacement for the A-10.
I wouldn''''t bet the kids college fund on the A-10 losing a close in dog fight against the F-35 either.
无论如何，我看不出这架飞机是如何打造为或形成为一个合适的A-10替代者的。
我也不会拿孩子们的大学基金赌A -10在与F-35的近距狗斗中败下阵来。
Henry Cooper
David Hoskins The fact that you cannot see why...Is totally irellevant ! Fact is it is !0X the plane the A-10 is And the problems with this plane are not addressed properly as it''''s abilitly far exceeds The A-10 The Harrier the F-16 and the F-18.. Though it may fall short in turning wityh an F-16 and lack the total afterburner speed of both the F-16 and the F-18 it more than compensates in stealth and electronics. You have to remember ...It still has these airfrxs backing it up!
The only thing our airforce is lacking is an intercepter , air superiority fighter in numbers such as the F-22. But they may have solved this with drones that can be control;led by the F-35 ...SWARMING the enemy with drones that can sustain higher g forces than humans can !
David Hoskins，事实上你看不出为什么它们完全不相关！实际上有一个10X型号，A-10和这架飞机的问题没有得到妥善处理，因为它的能力远远超过了A-10，鹞式，F-16和F-18...尽管它可能无法达到F-16战机的水平，也无法达到F-16和F-18战机的加力速度，但它在隐身和电子设备方面的优势足以弥补这一点，要记住....它仍然有这些飞机作后盾!
我们空军唯一缺少的就是一款拦截机，数量多如F-22的空优战机。但他们可能已经用可以控制的无人机解决了这个问题，由F-35带领……用比人类能承受更大g力的无人机集群攻击敌人!
Matt Mosher
Henry Cooper the f35 is a nightmare with maintenance. They can barely give the pilots enough time in the cockpit because they are always being worked on. The a10 does its job and does it well. There''''s no reason to put an overpriced plane like the f35 in that position. Their not going to do strafing runs with an f35 and put it in danger of small arms fire. That leaves smart bombs. They are to worried about its specal coating and stealth to risk that. Every time they fly they spend the next 3 days on the ground getting worked on meanwhile the a10 is in the air doing its job and doing well for less money.
Henry Cooper，f35的维护简直是个噩梦，他们几乎不能给飞行员足够的时间呆在驾驶舱，因为总是在维护。A10能很好地完成它的使命，没有理由把像f35这样的高价值飞机放在那样的位置。他们也没打算用f35进行低空扫射，使之处于轻武器火力的危险中。他们只是担心它的特殊涂层和隐身会有风险，每次飞行下来，他们要花接下来的3天作地勤工作，而A10已经在空中干活了，并做得很好，花的钱也少。
Henry Cooper
Matt Mosher All true, but let''''s not forget the A-10.s are antiques ...and they will not last forever. The Air Force has tried to retire them, but lawmakers would not have it, simply for the reasons you state and the fact it is a real workhorse that strikes fear into hostile gound forces and enemy armor. However...Thje advantages the F-35 has over the A-10 see''''s it''''s way into the future , not so distant when the A-10 is put to pasture. You can say what you want, but I''''m believing what the pilots have said about them, which is universalally the admission they would choose the F-35 over thier previous platforms and that it meets and or exceeds the capibility of their old planes in every way. Each plane has it''''s own niche and it''''d be nice if they would build new upgraded A-10''''s for their worth, the problem is the A-10 is vulnerable in areas where the F-35 can opperate with inpunity. That''''s the deal, whether we like it or not.
Matt Mosher，说得没错，但别忘了A-10s是个老古董…不会长生不死。空军曾试图让他们退役，但国会议员们不同意，原因很简单，你也说过这个事实，它是一匹真正的吃苦耐劳的马，能将恐惧打入了敌方的地面部队和装甲之中，然而……F-35相对于A-10的优势在于它的未来，A-10退役的时候也不远了。你想说什么都行，但我相信飞行员的观点，一般来说，他们会选择F-35而不是他们以前的飞行平台，而且F-35在各个方面都满足甚至超过了他们以前飞机的能力，每种飞机都有自己的定位，如果他们能根据其价值建造升级版的A-10就太好了。问题是，A-10在F-35可以肆行作战的地区是易受攻击的，事实就是这样，不管我们喜不喜欢。
Henry Cooper
David Hoskins You have to be kidding...The A-10 isn''''t even in the same ballpark with the F-35..It wouldn''''t stand a chance in any situation! Even in within visual range dogfighting..The F-35 has off boresight missile tracking and can easily fly twice as fast as the A-10 and take off and land without an airfield.
David Hoskins，你在开玩笑吧……A-10根本和F-35不是一个档次。在任何情况下都没有机会相提并论! 即使在可视范围内狗斗…F-35已经不再使用瞄准线导弹跟踪模式，它可以轻松地以两倍于A-10的速度飞行，而且无需机场即可起降。
Andrew Kear
Henry Cooper The F-35 cannot even fire it gun straight. Time for the NAVY to ditch this plane and go to an all hornet navy. Wait, I don''''t think the NAVY version even has a gun!!!!!
Henry Cooper，F-35甚至都不能用机炮直接开火，现在是海军抛弃这款飞机的时候了，来一个全是大黄蜂战机的海军舰队吧，哎等等，我觉得海军版F-35的也根本没机炮。
Roger Bratt
what was a bigger Con Job for American tax-payers
F35 or F22 ?
almost sounds like the F35 might out-scam the F22.
对美国纳税人来说，什么是更大的骗局？
F35还是F22?
听起来好像F35比F22更具欺骗性。
Andrew Kear
The F-22 is the best fighter ever built while the F-35 is the most disappointing.
F-22是有史以来最好的战斗机，F-35是最令人失望的。
Andrew Kear
So it is now essentially a subsonic aircraft like the A-4. How can the airforce and navy use this as figther in any kind of way. No wonder the Navy wants F-18s instead.
所以它现在基本上是一架亚音速飞机，就像A-4一样，空军和海军如何以全性能方式使用它呢，难怪海军想要f -18战机。
Richard Saunders
This is false. The problem only persists at the extemty of the flight envelope in terms of altitude, and has largely been mitigated in the 10 years since it was first reported by new spray-on coatings.
这是报道错误的，这个问题只是飞行包线在一定高度范围内时才存在，自从新的喷涂涂料首次报道以来，在过去的10年里，这一问题已经得到了很大程度的缓解
Chad Armstrong
F-35: the gift that keeps on giving.
F-35:不断给予的礼物。
Andrew Kear
With the exception of stealth the F-18 does everything better than the F-35. There s a reason the Navy is still ordering hornets. Heck, the new Ford carriers aren''''t even optimized for the F-35.
除了隐形，F-18在所有方面都比F-35强，这是海军仍在订购大黄蜂在原因。糟糕的是，新的福特级航母甚至没有针对F-35作优化。
Theo Baumann
Welcome to World''''s most expensive HANGAR QUEEN !!
欢迎世界上最昂贵的机库女王！！
Gene LeGear
The fix will be in the Gen 6 fighter, 10 years from now.....
这个问题将在第6代战斗机中得到修复，10年后…
GeorgeEmily Skinner
This is the best of our best engineers and skilled craftsmen ? To put a plane together after all that time and money that certainly has Xing and Putin laughing and slapping their knees ???? I pray this is just disinformation....Dear Lord Protect Us from our own stupidity.
这就是我们最好的工程师和训练有素的工匠吗?毕竟花费大量的资金和时间才能组装起一架飞机，中国和俄罗斯肯定会笑得拍大腿，我祈祷这只是假消息…亲爱的上帝，保护我们远离我们自己的愚蠢吧。
John Bonnar
Nothing has changed in decades of procuring anything for the Military. We solict contractors to build something that meets these specifications and it has to do this or that. Then years down the road or maybe during R&D or EMD we (Government) find''''s out it can''''t do all the things we wanted or that the contractors said it could do but we will take it anyway. In the end we pay the same unit price for the item/items that the Military buys with all sorts of Waivers and Deviations.
几十年来，军事采购方面的任何东西都没有改变。我们请承包商来建造符合特定规格的东西，承包商必须这样或那样做，几年之后，或者在研发期间，或者EMD期间，我们(政府)发现它做不到所有我们要的或承包商以前承诺的，不过无论如何我们都会接受，到最后，我们为项目支付相同的单价，军方买到的东西都有某些性能减免和偏差。
John Fourquet
Cancel the F-35 now. It is a failure. The DoD has spent too much money for a marginal aircraft with questionable capabilities. It will never like up to what was promised to be.
现在就取消F-35，这是一个失败的项目。国防部在一架能力有问题的边缘飞机上花了太多钱，它永远不会像承诺的那样。
Andrew Kear
It could be a decent replacement for either the A-6 or A-4. As an interceptor and air superiority fighter it is a flop. Both the Airforce and Navy are going to have to rely on the F-15x and F-18 super hornet for interception mission. No US fighter in 60 years has had a more comprised supersonic performance than the F-35.
它可能是A-6或A-4的一个不错的替代品，作为拦截机和空优战机，它是一部失败之作。空军和海军都将不得不依赖F-15x和F-18超级大黄蜂执行拦截任务。60年来，没有一架美国战斗机比F-35的超音速性能构成更复杂。
Andrew Kear
This says it all. Time for a senate investigation.
" The F-35C can only fly at Mach 1.3 in afterburner for 50 cumulative seconds, meaning that a pilot cannot clock 50 seconds at that speed, slow down for a couple seconds and then speed back up." - Defense News June 2019.
下面这段话说明了一切，是参议院调查的时候了。
“F-35C在加力燃烧中只能以1.3马赫的速度累计飞行50秒，这意味着飞行员不能计时50秒保持那个速度，要慢下来几秒钟，然后再加速上去。”--《国防新闻》2019年6月
Stephan Luc Larose
SU-57s will spot these turkeys from 150 miles away with electro-optics and multiband radar and shoot them down from 150 miles away with hypersonic ordinance. F35s will see the SU-57s clearly enough, they just won''''t have anything to fire back at that range or be able to do anything to escape. SU-57 can supercruise at Mach 2, F35 can barely hit Mach 1. May as well just put sling shots on lemons and call that an "air force."
SU-57s将在150英里外用光电探测装置和多波段雷达发现这些火鸡，并用超音速武器击落它们，F35s将能清楚地看到SU-57，在那个范围内，它们无法回击，也无法逃脱，SU-57 能以2马赫的速度进行超级巡航，F35几乎达不到1马赫，还不如直接用弹弓打柠檬呢，这也叫做“空军”。