Lockheed Martin F-35A, B, C and other ideas

[kitnut617]

I was down in Yuma this last week and took in the airshow last weekend.  I got to see my first 'for-real' F-35B

[rickshaw]

My, so they really do exist?  They are not merely figments of the whiffing world's collective imagination? 

[kitnut617]

This was one of only three that the Marine Corp in Yuma has at the moment, it didn't do a flying display.  The show announcer said a forth one was to be delivered within a week or so.

[KJ_Lesnick]

I think I can say something that most people here will agree with...
..."We should have just built the F-22 and refitted it's electronics with the stuff on the F-35"

[PR19_Kit]

Hehe, I love the gratuitous glimpse of the 'BAE Systems' banner in one shot............... 

Those pale grey panel area markings on the top seem to be painted on rather than the distinct raised panels seen on some models.

[rickshaw]

They more than likely about 1-2mm higher than the surrounding surface, Kit.  Of course, that translates to about 5-10 inches in the minds of many model kit designers...   

[PR19_Kit]

They more than likely about 1-2mm higher than the surrounding surface, Kit.  Of course, that translates to about 5-10 inches in the minds of many model kit designers...   

Hehe, perhaps they have their calculators back to front, so 1/72 becomes 72/1? 

[kitnut617]

Hehe, I love the gratuitous glimpse of the 'BAE Systems' banner in one shot...............  

I think it was half hidden behind a table because I didn't notice the sign when I was taking my shot Kit, mind you I was totally engrossed with what I was looking at. You can see the banner beside the tent and just under the port wing in the third photo (or here). I was standing right where that fellow is when I took the picture.

Those pale grey panel area markings on the top seem to be painted on rather than the distinct raised panels seen on some models.

When you get a little closer, they don't appear to be protruding at all.

[PR19_Kit]

We'll have to be shot now we've seen your piccies Robert. 

[rickshaw]

What I love is that recently one of our current affairs TV programmes did a show on the F-35.  During it, the people from Lockheed stated on camera that they weren't allowed to film the aircraft from certain angles "for security reasons".  Kitnut617 has provided pictures from the same angles.   

[kitnut617]

I don't think we have to worry, I was surrounded by others all taking photos as well as the local TV Channel reporters.  Although the aircraft was in a compound which restricted how close you could get to it, it wasn't that far away from the fence line as my pics show. And there wasn't that much of a security presence either -- at one point I was stood right next to one of the guards.  Besides that, there isn't anything there in the photos which 25,000 other show-goers couldn't see for themselves.

I needed a couple of good pics of the u/c so I can sort out my Italeri kit of the plane, couple of things stood out though, Italeri seem to have the u/c bays doors about right from what I can remember of the kit, but it's buried in the stash somewhere at the moment so can't find it right now.  I had read the doors were all wrong on the kit but I think actually the u/c legs themselves need revising, the kneebrace angles outward which is interesting.  Also the clear fairing looks interesting, I think I'll add something like that on my McD Harrier Replacement project (AV-19A).

[PR19_Kit]

Isn't the Italeri kit an X-35 though? Or maybe you're planning a major upgrade? or maybe they've done an F-35 too.

[kitnut617]

Yes I think you're right Kit, it's the X-35  

I'll have to give it a good look over again once I've dug it out, then decide what I need to do to it.

There's supposed to be a couple of new tool kits coming out of the F-35 in 1/72 though (IIRC Trumpeter & Academy), it might be a waste of time messing around with the Italeri kit ---

[Thorvic]

Italeri did the X-35 based on a mock up so was a bit off compared with the actual aircraft.

Fujimi do the F-35B in 1/72 in three differnt boxings, not brilliant as appears to tie in with a ready made as very snap fit in places, but currently its the only F-35B in 72nd.
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10173108

Both Italeri and Academy have announced F-35A's this year in 1/72nd, but no sign of an F-35C.

In 1/48th KittyHawk have done both the B and A variants.

[Taiidantomcat]

I think I can say something that most people here will agree with...
..."We should have just built the F-22 and refitted it's electronics with the stuff on the F-35"

The real trick is getting them to hover and land on an aircraft carrier    Keeping in mind even if the F-35 was a USAF only jet, the USAF wanted 381 F-22s and could only afford 183, and the USAF now requires 1700+ F-35As I think thats a serious stretch KJ, even before you add the F-35 avionics to the F-22. The United staes spends more money on its military than any other nation to the tune of nearly 800 billion a year, and couldn't afford more than 200 F-22s...

Also this:

Pilots refuse to fly F-22:

http://rt.com/usa/force-air-f-22-wilson-731/

F-22s grounded for months:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/03/us/politics/for-f-22-oxygen-problems-elude-air-forces-fixes.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Raptor cough:

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/02/stealth-pilots-coughing/

What I love is that recently one of our current affairs TV programmes did a show on the F-35.  During it, the people from Lockheed stated on camera that they weren't allowed to film the aircraft from certain angles "for security reasons".  Kitnut617 has provided pictures from the same angles.    

Those big red FOD guards protect what they want to keep secret. in that program you mention the FOD guards weren't in-- hence the "dont film that" reaction. there are things in that engine that we don't want people seeing same goes for the F-22.



You can take pictures of that^ all day long. Remove that FOD guard and its a different story.