
Luke AFB changes refueling truck color, mitigates F-35 shutdowns - protomyth
http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/555558/luke-afb-changes-refueling-truck-color-mitigates-f-35-shutdowns.aspx
======
Guthur
IMO another example of how the F-35 is an over specified, over engineered and
expensive turkey.

And here is a comment by someone who knows a lot more than I do.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDSiwqM2nw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDSiwqM2nw)

~~~
neurotech1
Pierre Sprey didn't design the F-16 and really doesn't know that much about
the F-35. A large amount of his comments on the F-35 are factually incorrect.

Fuel temperature is an important parameter for an aircraft because excessive
vapors in the tanks can be problematic.

Other jet fighters have fuel temperature warnings (eg. F/A-18 is triggered
above 65 degrees Celsius.) so your claim of "over engineered" F-35 is
misguided.

Remember TWA 800? The fuel in the center tank vaporized and the jet exploded.

The Luke AFB crews are being appropriately cautious and implementing an
appropriate temporary solution.

~~~
andrewfelix
From cursory reading about the aircraft, there seems to be a lot of criticism
of it. Can you summarise specifically what was factually incorrect and
misguided?

The f-35 Looks like a jack of all trades, but a master of none.

~~~
neurotech1
I haven't watched the video recently, but I'm familiar with Peirre Spey. Spey
championed the Light Weight Fighter concept (which became the F-16) but
derided the very things that made the F-16 a success; AIM-7 Sparrow BVR
missiles, multi-role strike capability.

The big factual error is comparing the F-35 turning performance to an airshow
F-16. An F-16 with external tanks and combat loads (missiles and bombs)
doesn't turn as well an F-35.

The other big factual error is that Perre Spey seems to confuse program unit
cost or total lifecycle cost with flyaway unit cost when comparing
alternatives. The Pentagon demanded an analysis of the F-35 lifecycle cost,
but without comparing it to contemporary aircraft like the F/A-18E/F Super
Hornet. An F/A-18E costs around $72m Unit Flyaway Cost, and an F-35A is about
$95m in full rate production.

The F-35 has considerable advantages like 360 degree EODAS, which enables off-
boresight missile shots, while avoiding hostile fire. It might not be a
classic Mach 2+ interceptor like the F-15 or F-22, but it'll do fine in a
dogfight.

~~~
andrewfelix
Appreciate the detailed response.

------
protomyth
I am just a little confused why it is different for the F-35, but it is an
interesting story for the paint:

"The white paint is special because it is a solar polyurethane enamel that
reflects the heat of the sun's rays. Interestingly, after dropping off the
first truck to be painted, the 56th LRS learned it is not the color that
reflects the heat."

"The painter said it did not have to be a white color, so we are going to send
one of the four vehicles to get painted green, if possible. We will then
compare temperatures between the green and white trucks."

~~~
hedgehog
It may be related to the fuel being factored into the thermal design (as
coolant) as well as used as a store of energy. If so it sounds like the F-35's
design is less forgiving than the other aircraft they have at that base.

~~~
sswaner
Luke has been a F-16 base for some time.

------
retrogradeorbit
As long as there is no war in any hot, desert countries, we should be right...

------
GHFigs
_" This is the short-term goal to cool the fuel for the F-35; however, the
long-term fix is to have parking shades for the refuelers," Resch said._

But what color are they going to paint the shades?

------
32faction
As a Phoenix native this totally makes sense. Our summers average 110 degrees.
We have our sweaters on if it somehow dips to the 90s.

