F-35C CF-1 Rollout

[Dutch[_3_]]

[Indrek Aavisto]

It's interesting to see the poor fit and finish of some of the panels. Have
they been taking lessons from the Russians on quality control. Surely it
cannot have been designed with all those uneven seams and prominent
fasteners. If a car dealer tried to sell me a car assembled like that I
wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.

Cheers,

Indrek Aavisto


--
Criticism is easy; achievement is difficult. W.S. Churchill

[®i©ardo]

Indrek Aavisto wrote:
> It's interesting to see the poor fit and finish of some of the panels. Have
> they been taking lessons from the Russians on quality control. Surely it
> cannot have been designed with all those uneven seams and prominent
> fasteners. If a car dealer tried to sell me a car assembled like that I
> wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Indrek Aavisto
>
>

Ah, but this is powering *freedom*!

--
Moving things in still pictures

....aided by FastStone's Free And Infinitely Flexible Photographic Fixing

www.FastStone.org

[Conscious Pilate[_2_]]

just thinking about the panels - maybe they are that proud because the
'special' anti radar type paint/whatever actually fills to the level of the
panels - anyhow my 2 cents worth


Conscious Pilate

[Michael[_6_]]

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 23:04:36 -0400, Indrek Aavisto wrote:

> It's interesting to see the poor fit and finish of some of the panels.

I remember thinking that same thought about 18 years ago when I first saw
an F-16 close-up. The adjacent panels didn't line up! The forward strake
wasn't lined up with the aft strake and wing. I figured maybe it doesn't
matter enough aerodynamically to invest the extra effort to make it
perfect - although surely shock waves would be forming on those parts
during trans- and super-sonic flight???

Given the effort that's gone into getting the angles just right on the
stealthy F-35 I would guess that it's pretty important to get the
alignment right...

[Neil Hoskins]

"Conscious Pilate" > wrote in message
...
> just thinking about the panels - maybe they are that proud because the
> 'special' anti radar type paint/whatever actually fills to the level of
> the panels - anyhow my 2 cents worth
>
>
> Conscious Pilate

Or maybe it's like the SR71, which only really fitted together properly when
it was heated up at supersonic speeds.

[Bill & Ange]

pardon my dumb question, but what does the CF stand for? I haven't seen that
designation with any other type of aircraft except if it was a Canadian
Forces plane.

"Dutch" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>

[vzlion]

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 19:22:56 -0500, "Dutch" >
wrote:

Roll out is a long, long way from being finished. Anyone know what the
BuNo is?
CF-01 is the factory construction number, carrier fighter 1?

[k.mud]

"Bill & Ange" > wrote in
:

> pardon my dumb question, but what does the CF stand for? I haven't seen
> that designation with any other type of aircraft except if it was a
> Canadian Forces plane.
>
> "Dutch" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Carrier Fighter???

[Bruce R]

"Bill & Ange" > wrote in message
...
> pardon my dumb question, but what does the CF stand for? I haven't seen
> that



Cluster F**k would be my guess


Bruce

[Richard[_7_]]

"Bruce R" > schreef in bericht
ng.com...
>
> "Bill & Ange" > wrote in message
> ...
>> pardon my dumb question, but what does the CF stand for? I haven't seen
>> that
>
>
>
> Cluster F**k would be my guess
>
>
> Bruce

And seeing it's nr 1 they expect a lot more ;-)