Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > What plastic did the the nation's premiere fighter aircraft

Reply
Thread Tools

What plastic did the the nation's premiere fighter aircraft

 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
"Stealt materials."

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...ntroller=Blog&

plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckB logPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog:
27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:5d5351e5-8a5f-4073-9428-
c3129cabdf6a

Costly corrosion problems on the F-22 caused by stealth materials and
coatings have been addressed on the F-35, but risks remain, concludes
a report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

The GAO's presentation to Congress on its review of the DoD's
corrosion evaluation report on the F-22 and F-35, completed at the end
of September, says:

"Corrosion of the aluminum skin panels on the F-22 was first observed
in spring 2005, less than 6 months after the Air Force first
introduced the aircraft to a severe environment. By October 2007, a
total of 534 instances of corrosion were documented, and corrosion in
the substructure was becoming prevalent. For corrosion damage
identified to date, the government is paying $228 million to make F-22
corrosion-related repairs and retrofits through 2016."
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-27-2011
RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>Costly corrosion problems on the F-22 caused by stealth materials and
>coatings have been addressed on the F-35, but risks remain, concludes
>a report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
>
>The GAO's presentation to Congress on its review of the DoD's
>corrosion evaluation report on the F-22 and F-35, completed at the end
>of September, says:
>
>"Corrosion of the aluminum skin panels on the F-22 was first observed
>in spring 2005, less than 6 months after the Air Force first
>introduced the aircraft to a severe environment. By October 2007, a
>total of 534 instances of corrosion were documented, and corrosion in
>the substructure was becoming prevalent. For corrosion damage
>identified to date, the government is paying $228 million to make F-22
>corrosion-related repairs and retrofits through 2016."



That's the trouble with metal. It corrodes.

It would have been far better to make the aircraft out of composite
materials, otherwise known as "plastic".

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rich
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-28-2011
On Feb 27, 2:00*pm, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Costly corrosion problems on the F-22 caused by stealth materials and
> >coatings have been addressed on the F-35, but risks remain, concludes
> >a report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

>
> >The GAO's presentation to Congress on its review of the DoD's
> >corrosion evaluation report on the F-22 and F-35, completed at the end
> >of September, says:

>
> >"Corrosion of the aluminum skin panels on the F-22 was first observed
> >in spring 2005, less than 6 months after the Air Force first
> >introduced the aircraft to a severe environment. By October 2007, a
> >total of 534 instances of corrosion were documented, and corrosion in
> >the substructure was becoming prevalent. For corrosion damage
> >identified to date, the government is paying $228 million to make F-22
> >corrosion-related repairs and retrofits through 2016."

>
> That's the trouble with metal. *It corrodes. *
>
> It would have been far better to make the aircraft out of composite
> materials, otherwise known as "plastic".


Really? B-52's flew for 50 years. Metal. F-4s, metal decades of
use, F-16s, F-14s, F-15s, F-18s, C5s, etc, etc. Plastic did it to
metal and if plastic was indeed a suitable material to use for 100% of
the plane's construction, they might use it. But it isn't.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-28-2011
Rich <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Feb 27, 2:00*pm, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >Costly corrosion problems on the F-22 caused by stealth materials and
>> >coatings have been addressed on the F-35, but risks remain, concludes
>> >a report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

>>
>> >The GAO's presentation to Congress on its review of the DoD's
>> >corrosion evaluation report on the F-22 and F-35, completed at the end
>> >of September, says:

>>
>> >"Corrosion of the aluminum skin panels on the F-22 was first observed
>> >in spring 2005, less than 6 months after the Air Force first
>> >introduced the aircraft to a severe environment. By October 2007, a
>> >total of 534 instances of corrosion were documented, and corrosion in
>> >the substructure was becoming prevalent. For corrosion damage
>> >identified to date, the government is paying $228 million to make F-22
>> >corrosion-related repairs and retrofits through 2016."

>>
>> That's the trouble with metal. *It corrodes. *
>>
>> It would have been far better to make the aircraft out of composite
>> materials, otherwise known as "plastic".

>
>Really? B-52's flew for 50 years. Metal. F-4s, metal decades of
>use, F-16s, F-14s, F-15s, F-18s, C5s, etc, etc. Plastic did it to
>metal and if plastic was indeed a suitable material to use for 100% of
>the plane's construction, they might use it. But it isn't.



Did you ever have a sense of humour?

Have you ever smiled - even just once - in your sad little life?

Has anything ever made you laugh? Would you know how to?

I picture you with a permanent deep scowl.

 
Reply With Quote
 
shiva das
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-01-2011
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
"R. Mark Clayton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> BTW do the F22 and F35 come with a camera built in?


There are also two separate infrared camera systems onboard the F-35.
The AN/AAQ-37 Distributed Aperture System consists of six infrared
cameras placed around the fuselage of the F-35. Working together, the
cameras create a 360-degree spherical image that can be viewed in the
pilot¹s helmet-mounted display. The cameras provide the pilot with an
infrared image equivalent to roughly 20/20 human vision, said Dave
Jeffreys, Lockheed Martin¹s senior manager for F-35 Improvements and
Derivatives. Additionally, these cameras also provide the pilot with
missile warning, cueing of air and surface targets, and air-to-air
situational awareness.

The second infrared camera type is the Lockheed Martin AN/AAQ-40
Electro-optical Targeting System, which is similar to the Sniper
targeting pod mounted on the F-16 but is carried in an internal mounting
in the F-35¹s nose. The camera provides very high-resolution video with
a continuous zoom feature, which would be useful during nontraditional
ISR missions in support of ground troops, he said. The camera will also
provide the F-35 with long-range passive air-to-air search and track
abilities.

<http://www.c4isrjournal.com/story.php?F=4756598>
 
Reply With Quote
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-01-2011
On Mar 1, 12:14*pm, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> On 2011-03-01 06:06:30 -0800, "R. Mark Clayton"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
> <Le Snip>
>
>
>
> > BTW do the F22 and F35 come with a camera built in?

>
> Several.
> A gun camera, and several methods of recording other data images as
> well as missile targeting events.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Savageduck


And the missles have cameras in their noses, some of them.
 
Reply With Quote
 
PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2011
On 3/1/2011 9:06 AM, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> "Rich"<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Feb 27, 2:00 pm, Bruce<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> RichA<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> Costly corrosion problems on the F-22 caused by stealth materials and
>>> coatings have been addressed on the F-35, but risks remain, concludes
>>> a report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

>>

> SNIP
>>
>> That's the trouble with metal. It corrodes.
>>
>> It would have been far better to make the aircraft out of composite
>> materials, otherwise known as "plastic".

>
> Really? B-52's flew for 50 years. Metal. F-4s, metal decades of
> use, F-16s, F-14s, F-15s, F-18s, C5s, etc, etc. Plastic did it to
> metal and if plastic was indeed a suitable material to use for 100% of
> the plane's construction, they might use it. But it isn't.
>
> Various materials have been used to make aeroplanes: -
>
> Wood - e.g. De Haviland Mosquito


Wood the Spruce goose and probably millions of flying planes made mostly
of balsa wood.





> Aluminium - most recent civil and military aircraft
> Stainless Steel - English Electric Lightning (fighter and interceptor)
> Titanium - Lockheed SR71
> Plastic - Boeing 787
>
> In fact most of these and magnesium have been made to make cameras too.
>
> The only material unlikely to be affected by corrosion is gold, but for a
> number of reasons this is unsuitable for aviation use or to make cameras.
>
> BTW do the F22 and F35 come with a camera built in?
>
>



--
Peter
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mike
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2011
On 27/02/2011 17:18, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2011-02-27 09:11:19 -0800, RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>> "Stealt materials."
>>
>> http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...ntroller=Blog&
>>
>>
>> plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckB logPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog:
>>

> 27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post:5d5351e5-8a5f-4073-9428-
> c3129cabdf6a
>
> Costly
>>
>> corrosion problems on the F-22 caused by stealth materials and
>> coatings have been addressed on the F-35, but risks remain, concludes
>> a report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
>>
>> The GAO's presentation to Congress on its review of the DoD's
>> corrosion evaluation report on the F-22 and F-35, completed at the end
>> of September, says:
>>
>> "Corrosion of the aluminum skin panels on the F-22 was first observed
>> in spring 2005, less than 6 months after the Air Force first
>> introduced the aircraft to a severe environment. By October 2007, a
>> total of 534 instances of corrosion were documented, and corrosion in
>> the substructure was becoming prevalent. For corrosion damage
>> identified to date, the government is paying $228 million to make F-22
>> corrosion-related repairs and retrofits through 2016."

>
> If I were you, Rich, I wouldn't buy an F22, or F35 for any of my
> photography needs.
> Unless you really need a very stealthy camera made with aluminum skin
> panels.
>


Ahh but it can bomb the s**t out of those pesky p&s and olympus cameras.


Mike
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mike
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2011
On 27/02/2011 19:00, Bruce wrote:
> RichA<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>> Costly corrosion problems on the F-22 caused by stealth materials and
>> coatings have been addressed on the F-35, but risks remain, concludes
>> a report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
>>
>> The GAO's presentation to Congress on its review of the DoD's
>> corrosion evaluation report on the F-22 and F-35, completed at the end
>> of September, says:
>>
>> "Corrosion of the aluminum skin panels on the F-22 was first observed
>> in spring 2005, less than 6 months after the Air Force first
>> introduced the aircraft to a severe environment. By October 2007, a
>> total of 534 instances of corrosion were documented, and corrosion in
>> the substructure was becoming prevalent. For corrosion damage
>> identified to date, the government is paying $228 million to make F-22
>> corrosion-related repairs and retrofits through 2016."

>
>
> That's the trouble with metal. It corrodes.


Maybe the manufacturer should speak to the european automotive
manufacturers who by and large have managed to make cars that resist
corrosion provided they are maintained properly.

> It would have been far better to make the aircraft out of composite
> materials, otherwise known as "plastic".


Cameras made out of metal, planes made out of plastic and dresses made
out of meat, my god it's madness, madness I tell you!!!

I think my cat may be part methane.

Mike
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tarasz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2011
Le Wed, 02 Mar 2011 00:28:01 -0800, Savageduck a écritÂ*:

> Apparently you are not familiar with the Alfa Sud (life expectancy 18-36
> months) and various 1970's & 1980's Lancias.


At this time, as some other manufacturers, they were reluctant to invest
in electrocoating process. The result was a commercial disaster.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What plastic is the Nikon Coolpix camera body made up of (why did glue melt it?) Jeanette Guire Digital Photography 44 10-16-2007 02:11 PM
DVD Verdict reviews: PIT FIGHTER, FREAKY FRIDAY (1976), and more! DVD Verdict DVD Video 0 07-07-2005 08:11 AM
[ot] New Stealth Fighter Unveiled JaR MCSE 12 01-27-2005 06:39 PM
Fighter Planes (yeah more of them) J.D. Parker Digital Photography 15 10-03-2003 07:53 AM
Fighter planes pictures Jankins Digital Photography 31 09-21-2003 05:31 AM



Advertisments