Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Reuters: New US F-35 Fighter Dubbed "Lightning II"  
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6485 posts, RR: 3
Posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 7640 times:

In a nod to both the Lockheed P-38 and English Electric fighter:

WASHINGTON, July 7 (Reuters) - The stealthy F-35 Joint Strike Fighter being developed by the United States and eight other countries is to be named the "Lightning II," in homage to two earlier fighters.

The supersonic F-35 is being built by a team led by Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT.N: Quote, Profile, Research) at a cost of $276 billion. It is the costliest U.S. weapons program ever.

[...]


Link to Reuters article.


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
58 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 7617 times:

Sounds appropriate I guess...

Was the F-22 ever considered for this name or was this just the computer sim company calling it the Lightning?



User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6485 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 7612 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 1):
Was the F-22 ever considered for this name or was this just the computer sim company calling it the Lightning?

"Lightning II" was the name that most rags (including AW&ST, as I recall) assumed would be used. USAF surprised everyone with the name "Raptor."



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineAreopagus From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1369 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 7606 times:

The YF-22 was called Lightning II. Wikipedia says: The name "Lightning II" persisted until the mid-1990s, and for a short while, the plane was also dubbed "Rapier". The F-22 became the "Raptor" when the first production-representative plane was unveiled on April 9, 1997, at Lockheed-Georgia Co., Marietta, Georgia.

Lightning III, anyone?


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 7600 times:

Quoting N328KF (Thread starter):
In a nod to both the Lockheed P-38 and English Electric fighter

The Lightning name was much better suited to the F-22 than to this new flying frog.

Peter



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineDeltaDC9 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 2844 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 7593 times:

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 4):
The Lightning name was much better suited to the F-22 than to this new flying frog.

What is your problem with the F-35 anyway?

The F-22 would have been the better plane for the name though, simply due to the fact that the P-38 represents the first highly successful twin engined fighter.

But, the F-35 has the most powerful fighter jet engine in the world, so it is in its own way revolutionary in that respect. The whole point of the P-38 was more power, so I guess it does make sense.



Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
User currently offlineFirennice From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 7589 times:

Great news thanks for posting that. I have wondered for a while what they would call it.

 old 


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 7560 times:

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 5):
What is your problem with the F-35 anyway?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Broekhans


 eek  yuck  ill { crying  thumbsdown 



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4839 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 7543 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 1):

Was the F-22 ever considered for this name or was this just the computer sim company calling it the Lightning?

According to Flightglobal, Lightning II was one of the names originally suggested for the F-22. http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...'s+F-35+JSF+the+Lightning+II.html
I believe they've chosen a most fitting name, since Lockheed made the P-38 and the UK, the only Level 1 partner in the JSF, had the EE version. Would this mean the end of naming new fighters after birds of prey, and the revival of WWII legends?

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 5):
Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 4):
The Lightning name was much better suited to the F-22 than to this new flying frog.

What is your problem with the F-35 anyway?

Let him have his fun. He's just found a way to get even for the Whalejet.  Smile



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineDeltaDC9 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 2844 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 7543 times:

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 7):
Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 5):
What is your problem with the F-35 anyway?

That is NOT the F-35, FYI. I can see why you feel that way, pictured is the losing Boeing offereing that was not chosen.

The F-35 basically looks like a smaller F-22 with one engine.



Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
User currently offlineUh60ftrucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 7544 times:

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 7):

Was that picture a mistake?

Because that's not the F-35... that is the Boeing's F-32, which was the competitor to Lockheed's F-35, in the JSF fly off.

THIS is the F-35



-UH60


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 7524 times:

Thanks guys, that was very stupid of me.    

The Lockheed aircraft does look a lot better to be honest, although I think I saw a side-on photo of the F-35 that also made it look quite ugly.

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 5):
The F-22 would have been the better plane for the name though, simply due to the fact that the P-38 represents the first highly successful twin engined fighter.

That was what I meant, too. A twin, a big fighter, more of an interceptor (The Lightning I was actually designed as an interceptor I believe).

BTW I love the Whale name.

Cheers

Peter 

[Edited 2006-07-07 23:53:56]


The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineAirSpare From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 589 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 7494 times:

I can't agree with the name Lightning, or can think of any historic name for this aircraft. As it really does not have a link to the past, it might as well be called the Jug (or Thunderbolt II which may be most appropriate), or Corsair II, Skyhawk doesn't cut it, Thunderchief II is to "60s".

To bad we did'nt have a poll to name it, that may have been fun though I might have missed it if there were.



Get someone else for your hero worship fetish
User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 7491 times:

Marauder II?

It's Lockheed Martin after all.



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineThorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 7486 times:

Quoting AirSpare (Reply 12):
I can't agree with the name Lightning, or can think of any historic name for this aircraft. As it really does not have a link to the past, it might as well be called the Jug (or Thunderbolt II which may be most appropriate), or Corsair II, Skyhawk doesn't cut it, Thunderchief II is to "60s".

I am one who was very disappointed F-22 was named for a dinosaur instead of Lightning II, so I accept F-35 as second-best.

FYI... Corsair II was the name of the A-7. Republic Aviation is dead and gone, and with it, most likely, the "Thunder-" names (P-47, F-84, F-84F, RF-84F, XF-84H, F-105, A-10) Thunderbolt II is the official name of the A-10, the end of the road for Republic.


User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4839 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 7460 times:

Now that it has a name, could we expect JT to endorse the "greased" Lightning II?  Smile


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offline10boomer From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 57 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 7427 times:

Quoting Thorny (Reply 14):
I am one who was very disappointed F-22 was named for a dinosaur

A Raptor is a bird of prey, a Velociraptor is a dinosaur

Lightning II, it's not a lame as it could be



Fly Gucci
User currently offlineMigFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 7415 times:

Some ideas...

Sledgehammer, Katana, Da Sh!t, Mac Daddy, Daddy Mac, R.E.F. (Really Expensive Fighter), Red-Headed Step-Fighter, Wolverine

Just a thought...

/M


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6485 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 7380 times:

Quoting Thorny (Reply 14):
FYI... Corsair II was the name of the A-7. Republic Aviation is dead and gone, and with it, most likely, the "Thunder-" names (P-47, F-84, F-84F, RF-84F, XF-84H, F-105, A-10) Thunderbolt II is the official name of the A-10, the end of the road for Republic.

Republic became Fairchild-Republic, which became Fairchild-Dornier. They only recently folded.



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineVirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4575 posts, RR: 40
Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 7343 times:

Quoting AirSpare (Reply 12):
Thunderchief II is to "60s"

I reckon it would actually have been quite a good name - the aircraft are similar in a number of respects - single pilot, single engine, strike fighter. It even has the same style of intake when viewed from above...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Frank C. Duarte Jr.
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Charles Falk



Oh well, at least they didn't call it the Spitfire II as some people had been suggesting...

V/F



"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 7129 times:

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 5):
Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 4):
The Lightning name was much better suited to the F-22 than to this new flying frog.

What is your problem with the F-35 anyway?

Awe, now we see how something simple turns offensive. Both of you should be slapped, IMO.



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineScottieprecord From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1363 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 7080 times:

I toured the Lockheed plant in Ft. Worth... That plane is the most badass piece of technology I've ever seen...

The actual construction techniques of the F-35 are amazing... it makes the F-22 look old, and the F-16 ancient. I can't wait for that plane to become operational!

I kinda like the name "Lightning II". Seems fitting to me...

-Mike


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 22, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 7041 times:

Big version: Width: 445 Height: 296 File size: 110kb

Here is the picture that caused me to call the F-35 a flying frog (even though I foolishly tried to illustrate that with an F-32 picture).

There's no need to agree with me on this, of course, and certainly no need to feel offended by it, unless you are the designer of the F-35 AND beauty was your design target. Wink

Peter



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineDeltaDC9 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 2844 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 7012 times:

Quoting Lehpron (Reply 20):
Awe, now we see how something simple turns offensive. Both of you should be slapped, IMO.

Who was offended? It was a simple question based on a remark that seemed a little strange due to the fact that the F-35 is very impressive to look at IMO.

Maybe you should be slapped for trying to find a problem where there is none!

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 22):
There's no need to agree with me on this, of course, and certainly no need to feel offended by it, unless you are the designer of the F-35 AND beauty was your design target

As I said above, I had never seen anyone really upset with the looks of the F-35, and from the picture above of it flying it is a pretty good looking plane, but not to everyone I am sure. The picture you post is not doing it justice thats for sure, and that Boeing plane was just bizzarre, like they took the Corsair and mated it with an F-18.

Do you still not like it after seeing a more flattering picture? Just curious.



Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 24, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 6954 times:

Hi DeltaDC9,

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 23):
picture you post is not doing it justice thats for sure,

That is true, and yes, it does looks better from other angles. But I don't think it's a good-looking fighter. It's too flat and square and the nose, especially, is too short.

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 23):
that Boeing plane was just bizzarre

I'm glad everybody seems to agree on THAT.

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 23):
like they took the Corsair and mated it with an F-18

Now you're insulting the Corsair Wink



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
25 MigFan : I just get the "hawk" name popping into my head when I see this aircraft. It is not as elegant as the F-16, or even the F/A-18, but to say it is ugly
26 N328KF : Don't forget: F-15 Eagle -> "Starship" (though "Eagle" was a good name, so it was still widely used.) EA-6B Prowler -> "Queer" F-111 -> "Aardvark" (t
27 DeltaDC9 : I can see why you would think that, but is is simply form following function. The huge diameter of the engine, combined with the internal weapons bay
28 MigFan : The F-4 is definetley a bad-ass looker. It has an arched-back appearance like a pissed-off cat. I do not think it is as sleek or clean as the F-16, F-
29 Ptrjong : I never doubted its functionality (because I don't know enough of this aircraft, as I have amply proven). I just happen to think it doesn't look very
30 DeltaDC9 : I cant decide why I dont like the way the EF looks, I think you might be on to something. They are loud, they are smokey, but they just seem to slip
31 Post contains links Okelleynyc : Is it just me or do the weapon bay doors look like they don't seat completely flush? Perhaps it's just the way in which the photo was taken? The close
32 Post contains links and images Usnseallt82 : They just had the inauguration of the F-35 in Ft. Worth at the Lockheed Martin Corp... (all pictures from http://www.navy.mil )
33 Post contains images DEVILFISH : Nice pics. Thanks for sharing. The last three shots more than made up for the ungainly side view in Flight's release. Though the bulging cheeks and n
34 Post contains links Okelleynyc : I dunno, while I like the frog analogy, I think it looks more like a pelican. An example: http://www.lotsofrobots.com/images/Pelican_M.jpg
35 MigFan : The aircraft has a wide stance. Plus, the short stubby wings should make for a manoeverable aircraft. One thing is sure, do not judge a book by it's c
36 AerospaceFan : Great pics of the F-35! I'd pay quite a lot to have one of those in my garage!
37 MissedApproach : Isn't it bad enough that car companies are recycling all the names from the great American muscle cars & using them on crappy, pale modern imitations
38 Post contains images Fumanchewd : I've always liked... B52 BUFF and F105 Thud
39 N328KF : Not only that, but many car names are taken from aircraft. Witness Mustang and Viggen.
40 Baron95 : Mustang II would be more appropriate than Lighting II. Mustang as in, single engine, most powerful single fighter engine ever, range, payload, ground
41 MigFan : How about, we call it "Splitting Hairs" ? /M
42 Post contains images DEVILFISH : We're not. It's for sure that while it may look ungainly on the ground, like some birds, it would be powerful, graceful and majestic once airborne! W
43 N328KF : Please quote the proper person in the future.
44 Thorny : I'm not so sure. P-38 was used in more roles than the P-51 was (at least, not counting the unimpressive Allison-powered A-36s), which would seem to b
45 Post contains images DEVILFISH : Sorry about that. Got the first passage but my eyes strayed to your quote on the next. Getting old. Cessna might have an issue with that.
46 N328KF : If anyone would, it would be Boeing, as the successor to North American. Anyhow, there are plenty of cases of name reuse in the aerospace industry. G
47 DeltaDC9 : I think maybe Firebird might be a good name. What about Phantom III? Great name for a stealthy plane really. I agree, tradition is a great thing if t
48 Post contains images Thorny : If you like planes that look like someone closed the hangar door on its when it was half way through! Its amazing that plane flies as well as it does
49 DEVILFISH : For a strike fighter, that is actually quite apt. Makes me think it wouldn't be too long before we see the rebirth of the "Thunderbird" and dread the
50 Post contains images AirRyan : The CH-46 is the one and only perfect Phrog! They could dub the F-35 the Toad and that'd work for me!
51 Post contains links and images Oroka : Don't confuse the X-35 and the F-35... the F-35 looks a whole lot meaner! View Large View MediumPhoto © Thomas P. McManus
52 Ptrjong : Another bad angle for the F-35. I'm sticking to my opinion. Unsexy aircraft, looking like somebody worked with a sledgehammer on it to make it fit in
53 DeltaDC9 : Then there is the Thunderbolt, as in P-47. Always liked that one too. We could have had Thunderbolt and Lightning if the F-22 had been called Thunder
54 Garnetpalmetto : There's already a Thunderbolt in service - the A-10 Thunderbolt II, lest we forget, it's official name isn't "Warthog."
55 DeltaDC9 : DOH! How in the hell did I forget that? It is one of my favorite planes! Still would have been cool though.
56 DEVILFISH : Shades of Queen!..... .....very, very frightening things......Galileo..... Although it looks like Hulk Hogan's disappearing boat - beautiful in its ow
57 DeltaDC9 : I am truly impressed you caught the reference to my all time favorite band.
58 Post contains images DEVILFISH : Nothing to it. Only goes to show how old I am.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Reuters: New US F-35 Fighter Dubbed "Lightning II"
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
When Will Germany Get A New "AF 1"? posted Thu Apr 20 2006 01:24:31 by TommyBP251b
Russian Fighter Jets: "Sighting Device" posted Sun Feb 8 2004 20:49:02 by LY744
Is The U.S.C.G. Considered "Military" posted Sun Nov 12 2006 19:19:37 by UH60FtRucker
ESA Probe Finds "Skull"-Shaped Formation On Mars posted Fri Sep 22 2006 18:37:39 by AerospaceFan
Aidc Ching Kuo - A Twin Engine "Falcon?" posted Sun Sep 3 2006 10:27:57 by DEVILFISH
"Orion" Said To Be Name Of NASA's CEV Program posted Fri Jul 21 2006 10:42:36 by AerospaceFan
"Lost" Greek Air Force F104 Starfighter Found! posted Wed Jul 19 2006 19:23:21 by OwlEye
The Tactic Called "scrambling" posted Sun Jul 16 2006 23:44:52 by Lehpron
Britain In Battle With US Over Fighter Plane posted Tue Dec 20 2005 12:53:58 by Keesje
Lockheed Pitched All New US Tanker Vs Boeing 767 posted Fri May 21 2004 23:09:47 by Keesje

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format