Posted on 11/16/2010 12:44:37 AM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
Well, it looks like the Pentagon may be joining those who recommend scrapping the short take-off and vertical landing variant of the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter.
The last few weeks have seen some serious punches thrown at the would-be-wonder jet. First, the British announced that they were cutting their nearly 150-plane F-35B buy in favor of an unknown number of F-35C carrier variant JSFs. Next came reports that the Pentagon is bracing for the possibilty that the program will suffer more delays and cost growth. Then, last week, a presidentially-mandated panel recommended that the government completely scrap the B-model JSF as well has half the U.S. Air Force’s and Navy’s purchases of F-35As and Cs, respectively, through 2015.
(Excerpt) Read more at defensetech.org ...
Well, Obama cancelled the B1-Lancer and the F-22 Raptor which is highly sophisticated and now this under his Administration while Russia and China continue to increase development of advanced weapons systems. Didn’t Obama say during the election that he would cancel our advanced weapons systems and take our nukes off hair triggers? Why yes he did. This is a travesty and the president or usurper as I call him is putting our nation in harms way and making us vunerable to attack. It’s like removing the torpedo safety nets at battleship row right before the Japanese planes arrived.
Here is Obama in his own words:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtwRcZXrz0k
The Repubs control the purse strings to the .gov now.
If they have hair on their testicles they’ll threaten to defund every thing Bambi holds near and dear over stuff like this.
And tell him if he so much as hints at a veto they’ll shut the power off to the WHite House.
This is a stupid move and treasonous if you ask me. If no F-22 Raptor and then you get rid of the fighter to replace it, as in the supposedly cost effective F-35, then what do you have left in advanced fighters stealth wise? Nothing. All we have left is Super Hornets and upgraded old Falcons and Eagles. That’s it.
Manned fighters will be obsolete within ten years. We are at the edge of having a fleet of unmanned (and inexpensive) fighters that can be sent into the sky on a moment’s notice. I would suspect that a number of people are being realistic about this and asking keep building in the manned direction when you could go in the other direction.
...the Pentagon may be joining those who recommend scrapping the short take-off and vertical landing variant of the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter... the British [had] announced that they were cutting their nearly 150-plane F-35B buy in favor of an unknown number of F-35C carrier variant JSFs...
“Manned fighters will be obsolete within ten years.”
Perhaps, but I would be very cautious about delaying anything that we can do now in the hope that the technology for unmanned combat will be there. War is fought with what you have, not what you will have.
Unmanned combat drones may someday be reliable, but I would be concerned that a super-EMP weapon, or a laser platform capable of massive-multi-targeting could be developed that would wipe them from the sky. (Of course, the same vulnerability would go with today’s hyper-electronic fighters.) There is also the possibility of hacking or viruses planted by an enemy.
It isn’t an either-or. We can have both manned and unmanned. If Washington would stop spending like drunks we could afford to invest in our security.
Manned fighters will be obsolete within ten years.
Oh, don’t worry. They’ll cancel the F-35 (just like the F-22), but they’ll have something BETTER and CHEAPER on the drawing board that will save us. And we’ll buy THOUSANDS of those to fill the gap. [/s] It’s a classic Liberal tactic to cancel a weapons system in hand for a “better” system that is 10+ years away from production.
“Manned fighters will be obsolete within ten years.”
Uh Huh. Come back after there is a single UAS that can operate in US airspace outside a restricted area without a manned chase aircraft.
TC
Whoops! I was quoting the other poster. I agree with you — I don’t think unmanned aircraft are there yet.
It reminds me of a scene in the first episode of the “Battlestar Galactica” series. The colonial pilots are scrambled in their high-tech Viper fighters to meet a wave of Cylon attack ships. Unknown to them, the Cylons have gotten a man inside who has planted a vulnerability in their network. The Cylons hit them with a signal and all their systems go dead, leaving them floating helplessly in space. The Cylons waltz up and blast them to bits.
There is a danger in relying too much on technology.
ping
The F-35 is not a replacement for the F-22. This latest example of your confusion likely reflects what type of analyst you were.
Rumor Of Marine F-35 Termination Talks Is Wrong
The Navy has made its latest run against the Marine Corps version of the F-35 joint strike fighter, and for something like the twentieth time, it has been rebuffed. The latest failed assault came after the United Kingdom decided to switch its buy of joint strike fighters from the Marine vertical-takeoff version to the Navy carrier-based version. The Navy trotted out the same tired arguments it has been using for a decade -- lack of range, lack of forward support, etc. -- and the Marine Corps responded with its equally aged rationale for why tactical aircraft need to be where the troops are. The Marine Corps prevailed, as usual.
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
There is a danger certainly. The more technically advanced something it, the easier it is to counter it with simple measures.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.