«

"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."

RichA <> 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".

On Feb 27, 2:00*pm, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> 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.

Rich <> wrote:
>On Feb 27, 2:00*pm, Bruce <docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> 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.

In article <>,
"R. Mark Clayton" <> 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>

On Mar 1, 12:14*pm, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> On 2011-03-01 06:06:30 -0800, "R. Mark Clayton"
> <nospamclay...@btinternet.com> 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.

On 3/1/2011 9:06 AM, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> "Rich"<> wrote in message
> news:5e045a61-11ad-4f2d-8c4d-...
> On Feb 27, 2:00 pm, Bruce<docnews2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> RichA<rander3...@gmail.com> 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

On 27/02/2011 17:18, Savageduck wrote:
> On 2011-02-27 09:11:19 -0800, RichA <> 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

On 27/02/2011 19:00, Bruce wrote:
> RichA<> 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

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.