← Back to Squawk list

The F-35 Can't Run On Warm Gas From A Fuel Truck That Sat In The Sun

9년 전 제출됨

The F-35 program continues to work through a litany of problems, but this one is almost laughable. According to the USAF, the troubled fighter cannot use gas from standard green colored USAF fuel trucks if it has been sitting in the sun. Considering that these jets will most likely find themselves operating in the desert or in somewhere in the scorching Pacific, this is a big problem. (foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com) 기타...

canuck44

22 멤버 코멘트

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

btweston 9년 전 5

Facepalm-35

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

preacher1 9년 전 4

What about after the plane gets fueled and sits in the heat for a bit. Fix the fuel problem on the hunk of junk.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

[This poster has been suspended.]

preacher1 9년 전 2

Waste of money but probably the best thing for it.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Ricky Scott 9년 전 4

Boeings bid was test ready and Build ready. It didnt need to be designed. It was just ugly, the military didnt want ugly. But it Functioned as requested for all the requirements.

This Lockheed Boondogle was a political choice.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

WALLACE24 9년 전 3

Park in the shade.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

BaronG58 9년 전 2

Yea...I'm surprised Washington or Lockheed hasn't blamed the warm gas problem on global warming....."Not our Fault"

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

preacher1 9년 전 7

So many billions of $ and we are choking on warm gas????????????????????????? Junk the thing, take our losses, fire the ones responsible and lets move on.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

Shenghao Han 9년 전 1

I am sure they will do that if they didn't presold so many planes to UK, Japan, Canada and many other countries lazy enough to build their own. (or want to kiss someone's ****)

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Jeremy Chen 9년 전 2

No offense this is one of the most sketchy websites that I have seen...

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

btweston 9년 전 1

I'm pretty sure the target audience consists of the sort of people who masturbate to Soldier of Fortune.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

BaronG58 9년 전 0

Kind of a sketchy post...explain

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

preacher1 9년 전 2

Is this for real or did the article come from the onion?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

joel wiley 9년 전 5

About the fuel truck or the F-35 itself?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

BaronG58 9년 전 1

Good one Joel !!!

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

joel wiley 9년 전 1

Harry S. Truman's adage "if you can't stand the heat,stay out of the kitchen" comes to mind.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

btweston 9년 전 1

...Why?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

jesse murga 9년 전 1

Wouldn't wrapping the tankers in a reflective material, like a 'Space Blanket' be more cost efficient than repainting the tankers?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

preacher1 9년 전 1

idk, it cost $4000 to repaint one. At gov't prices a space blanket would cost at least $10000, if not more. LOL John, I know you made a valid post but is this for real?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

bbabis 9년 전 1

So, as I read it, if you're on a mission and getting low on fuel, you shouldn't sweat running out because before that happens you'll overheat and EXPLODE!

Cool the avionics and sub-systems with fuel? Who thinks this stuff up?

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

preacher1 9년 전 1

Sounds about right to me. Weren't hydraulics included in that cooling part too or to save weight? I would hope this whole story was from the onion or such. Sad part is, there is just enough truth in there to be believable. If this mess is all true, it will make the $40 toilet seat seem like child's play.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

Torsten Hoff 9년 전 1

The plane uses the fuel in the hydraulics system to save weight.

Personally I'd be more concerned about what a leak in the F-35's hydraulic system does, than it needing to be fueled with tepid fuel.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•Report

[This poster has been suspended.]

linbb 9년 전 1

Then the 747s? Makes no sense or you spelled wrong.

응답 ↓•퍼머링크•모•Report

The F-35 Can't Run On Warm Gas From A Fuel Truck That Sat In The Sun

22 멤버 코멘트

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

로그인