The US's Stealth Fighter (F-35) Is Too Heavy and Slow

Vice.com ^ | Adam Clark Estes

[Blood of Tyrants]

There was a delta wing version built over 20 years ago. IIRC, it performed superbly but for unknown reasons (probably part politics and part the generals not wanting it) the military never bought it.

[GBA]

The F-16 XL with the Cranked Arrow wing? I bet we see it again.

The Chinese and who knows who else likely has all the engineering, either from buying it from Clinton/Gore or having it given to them by obama, if they haven't just taken it by any open door they might have found.

Given the fleet of F-16s around the world today and the retrofit/upgrade market potential well into the future, not to mention a few home grown look a likes, I bet the XL will fly again, one way or another.

[okie01]

Don't we ever learn? Why do we have to repeat the same mistakes every generation?

Because we keep electing liberals -- for whom, history is a useless abstraction.

[sukhoi-30mki]

http://www.aviationweek.com/blogs.aspx?plckblogid=blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckpostid=blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7post:e639373f-5629-4eb1-862b-6767176c12a0

Nope-that’s the F-16U concept which was pitched to the UAE in the mid-90s.

[sukhoi-30mki]

The only chance an American F-16XL or any F-16 derivative will fly is if the JSF gets cancelled. Lockheed is unlikely to do anything that will remotely eat into the F-35’s market.

[taildragger]

You are correct, my lower picture might have been the one proposed to the Israeli's or am I all wet on an Israeli variant.

Anyway, the article you note seems to point to the fact I am not crazy, it might have been one kick @$$ machine.

[GBA]

I agree for an American F-16XL, but look at all that's been done with MiG-21s in the refurbish and retrofit markets, as one example.

Somewhere down the road a few years, all those aging F-16s...who knows? I see market potential and that's a sexy upgrade to the standard retrofit package that market will be offering.

Just a day dream. But then, I still live to see the F-23 fully developed and in service. *sigh* What a great F-14 replacement it would make, not to mention revive the "who has the better fighter argument?" between the Navy and AF.

[sukhoi-30mki]

The Mig-21/Mirage-III/F-5 upgrades have been popular for one reason- Cost. Such aircraft are not a threat to their vendors hawking newer platforms. The 21 or Mirage-3 don’t come anywhere close to anything to a Mig-29 or Mirage-2000.

That’s not the same case with a souped up F-16 like the F16U. Barring all aspects stealth, it can match or even better the F-35 in some parameters. Which is precisely the reason why LM happily peddles barebones upgrades like the F-16V variant.

[chesty_puller]

Like the Osprey

I remember the way the Osprey was treated by many on FR.

[GBA]

I agree with everything you're saying. All I'm saying while day dreaming out loud is that everything has its day...then, there's the aftermarket.

Otoh, something could come along and change everything, maybe drone, sensor or weapon tech, that could be as much of a game changer as jet engines were to pistons. Then they're all scrap for the boneyard and smelters.

[af_vet_rr]

On FR I've read posters say the A-10 is all that is needed, when the truth is that the Warthog can only survive in sanitized airspace and against a near-peer wouldn't

I really liked your overall post, but one thing you are leaving out is Congress and the lobbyists (plus drones, more on that later). The US defense industry wants to sell us the most expensive and high-tech equipment they can, because that makes them the most profit and dumps the most money into the troughs the pigs in Congress like to feed at.

Iraq and Afghanistan, along with other growing threats, have proven that we need a large mix of equipment, including equipment that is not suitable for conflict between first-world powers (as you pointed out). Lots of folks on the ground love the A-10s in Afghanistan, and it would be ridiculous to use an F-35 in their place, yet many think it would be fine to do just that.

Another issue is the "Fulda Gap" scenario you mentioned. If we faced such a situation, we aren't going to be dumping a lot of Apaches and A-10s into truly close support in such a situation. It's going to be a heck of a lot of standoff weaponry, including some fired from those platforms, along with a heck of a lot of drones. A Fulda Gap scenario would be an absolute bloodbath for the offensive force, because large tank formations are not going to survive in today's environment if we are talking about a clash between large powers (US, Russia, China).

Even though we have to prepare for it somewhat, such a scenario is not going to happen. We are not going to war with China, it would destroy their economy, and quite frankly they are already working on destroying our economy, which will do more harm to us than any military conflict could. Within 20 years, our aerospace industry will probably be a shadow of itself, because Chinese companies are working to take military exports away from our aerospace/defense industry, and they are even copying our systems in some cases. Putting millions of highly-skilled Americans out of work is very dangerous to our economy.

Quite frankly, our biggest threat is China putting our defense industry out of business and Congress forcing either unnecessary weapons systems upon our military, or forcing systems upon the military at the expense of other much-needed systems.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Yes, the cranked arrow, It still is an excellent design.

[donmeaker]

One interesting thing that happened to keep the A-10 in business was their strong interaction with ground tactics. When the A-10 became vulnerable to all aspect heat seeking missiles, ground tactics changed: NATO antitank units were trained to preferentially target antiaircraft assets. They were perhaps 4 out of 30 of armored vehicles, and after taking them out, a Soviet armored penetration would be permitted into the NATO rear areas, and A-10s would chop them up, fast if they were using roads, more slowly if they went cross country. The A-10 remained survivable in the more sanitized environment of NATO battle areas behind the Forward Edge of the Battle Area.

As George Patton Jr. said, when enemy tanks move on the roads, the P-47 was their worst enemy. If they got off the roads, the US tank-infantry-tank destroyer-artillery team could concentrate against them faster than the German armored forces could penetrate.

[MHalblaub]

The A-10 needs a somehow friendly airspace. Any Soviet fighter aircraft would have sufficient for that. But slow and low flying aircraft are hard to detect. The German anti tank helicopter was an unprotected BO 105. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXNCZlQcvGw

The problem for both would be modern infrared TV-guided missiles like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRIS-T. Don’t miss to see the video of seeker head. This missile doesn’t follows the greatest heat source it follows the shape. Computer power is sufficient today to do that.

Back to the topic. F-35 will have the same problems with such missiles. Another problem for “stealth” aircraft like F-35 is radar like used on German frigates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMART-L
According to antenna dimension the wave length is longer. Far longer than official data.

[Tainan]

Since the beginning of the two programs, it has been very clear to ALL aviation professionals that the F-22 was the better and more versatile a/c.

[R0CK3T]

And the Boeing variant had 2 engines when the USAF clearly wanted only 1.

LMCO has a dog in the F35 IMO and its starting to look like the F111 of our time.

[A.A. Cunningham]

And the Boeing variant had 2 engines

Incorrect. The X-32 was single engine just like the X-35 per the RFP.

[A.A. Cunningham]

More evidence

Evidence? Wonder how much time those "experts" at Motherboard and the discredited David Axe have logged in tactical fighters.

[Blood of Tyrants]

When you have to lower the specs to meet the requirements, you have NOT lived up to the promise.

[A.A. Cunningham]

Excuse me if I take any report of lowering specs prior to achieving IOC with a heavy dose of salt. In addition, having personally dealt with David Axe in the past, if he tells you what time it is, get a second opinion.