Posted on 02/25/2021 4:07:10 PM PST by maddog55
The U.S. Air Force’s top officer wants the service to develop an affordable, lightweight fighter to replace hundreds of Cold War-vintage F-16s and complement a small fleet of sophisticated—but costly and unreliable—stealth fighters.
The result would be a high-low mix of expensive “fifth-generation” F-22s and F-35s and inexpensive “fifth-generation-minus” jets, explained Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Brown Jr.
If that plan sounds familiar, it’s because the Air Force a generation ago launched development of an affordable, lightweight fighter to replace hundreds of Cold War-vintage F-16s and complement a small future fleet of sophisticated—but costly and unreliable—stealth fighters.
But over 20 years of R&D, that lightweight replacement fighter got heavier and more expensive as the Air Force and lead contractor Lockheed Martin LMT -1.4% packed it with more and more new technology.
Yes, we’re talking about the F-35. The 25-ton stealth warplane has become the very problem it was supposed to solve. And now America needs a new fighter to solve that F-35 problem, officials said.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Ping
Okay, thanks. I have vague memories of the F22’s inability to land on a carrier, and figured the F35 was the alternative.
Appreciate the correction.
A belated welcome to FR.
Seems like a lack of planning... or wishful thinking.
What’s the lead time on these jets from inception to readiness, 10 years?
“One other item that you need to understand; with today’s manufacturing infrastructure and capacity we would lose World War Two”
Food, clothing, and shelter are essential for human life. For modern life add low cost reliable energy, computer technology, and basic skills (reading, wiring, arithmetic) including the ability to objectively assess fact to arrive at objective, reason conclusions. As the US demonstrated in WWII, a strategic advantage in war is having self sufficiency in supplying the basic needs for its entire population.
We no longer have self sufficiency nor could we regain it quickly in a time of crisis. Our supply chains to produce food, clothing and shelter are no longer contained within our borders and can quickly be severed physically or electronically by an external enemy.
Our education system has failed and is continuing to decline turning out millions of students who are functionally illiterate and incapable of reasoning. The textile and apparel industry is essentially gone. We cannot clothe the people of this country. While we still have the potential to be self sufficient in food within our borders, many of the systems and supply chains supporting the growing of food and transportation of food are highly dependent on imports of components and products no longer produced here. The same applies to shelter. More and more building materials, applliances and systems used to construct and furnish buildings are produced outside our borders.
Energy independence, recently achieved is being abandoned by the new administration. The computerized systems, and components, and technologies required to support 21st century supply chains are largely produced outside the US. Today our domestic auto plants are being shut down due to supply chain shortages of electronic parts produced offshore.
If China today embargoed the US, the way we have embargoed other nations, we would be on our knees in less than a year. Does anyone think Joe Biden, and his behind the scenes handlers, would engage in a shooting war with China if:
1) China invades Taiwan
2). China embargoes shipments of critical high tech components
3). China completely shuts off all exports to the US
4). China engages in a covert attack on the civilian population of the US with a biological agent
5). China replaces the dollar as the reserve currency and demands payment in yuan for our debt.
6). In a contrived incident, China sinks a US carrier operating near its shore.
7) Through its proxy North Korea, an EMP attack is made on the US destroying the electrical grid and condemning most of the population to death through starvation, disease and anarchy.
Our nation is more vulnerable to destruction from within and without than at any time in its history. Sadly, our leaders do not care nor will they take action before it is too late.
lolololololololol!!!!!!!!!!!
I worked a program called Combat Dragon... Did ery well so they brought it back for Combat Dragon II. Some good write ups available if you do a search. Point was you don’t need high dollar fighters to do basic jobs.
As they say.. Measure twice, mark it chalk and cut it with an axe.
“Finally.. the truth comes out.”
Nope. It’s just a hit piece, as it lines up with the Dem’s anti-military stance in general.
The F-35 isn’t perfect, but developing a new, non-stealthy Gen 4.5 aircraft would be incredibly stupid and a waste of money. The F-35 is a world beater against anything but the F-22, and the cost continues to drop.
For cost effectiveness, the “loyal wingman” unmanned programs make a whole lot more sense, and they’re already proceeding apace. We can cut the F-35 buy and build more of those instead (along with other types of swarming drones).
“Wasn’t the F-35 meant to be the version of the F-22 that’s carrier capable?”
No. The F-35 is primarily an attack aircraft (bomber). The F-22 is for “air dominance”.
“For a full on symmetrical war, those two systems will either be hidden, or blown up.”
“Hidden” is “stealth”...which is why a gen 4.5 aircraft is a stupid idea unless it’s in the backfield being cued by stealthy aircraft in front. That’s the role for the F-15EX, missile truck.
“Wasn’t that the A-10’S Warthogs specific mission? :)”
No. The A-10 was a purpose-built tank buster designed to help hold the Fulda Gap. Even in the 70’s it was predicted to survive only the first few days of a war. Today, it’d be wiped from the sky by any first-tier adversary (including by shoulder launched missiles).
If nothing else, it’s way too slow for use as a general-purpose bomber.
It’s a pretty good anti-camel terror weapon, but otherwise it is vastly overhyped.
If it's relegated too the backfield, a modified C-130 or C-5 could carry a lot more missiles.
That's fascinating, given that both the F-15 and F-16 excel at being multirole aircraft. There are no better Gen 4 aircraft in the world.
The F-35 was directly inspired by the extremely successful F-16 design.
So much for those "experts"...
“If it’s relegated too the backfield, a modified C-130 or C-5 could carry a lot more missiles.”
That’s true, but those can’t launch them at Mach 2, which gives them a LOT more range... Nor can they arrive where needed as quickly.
The same range issue applies to things like the small diameter bombs, which glide for tens of miles before impact.
OK, the B-1B can go supersonic, and carry a lot more than the F-15.
And I doubt the F-15 can pull Mach 2 with a full load under its wings.
Not saying the experts are correct but some have raised concerns. On the other hand the fact that so many countries are adopting it seems to indicate its detractors may be incorrect.
A supersonic version of the Barrier was cancelled in the late 60s by the Brits. With updated avionics and engines, by this time such a platform would have covered 99% of the F35 mission at 1/10th the cost.
Sounds like 4th century Rome.
They forget to mention Boeing’s new Improved F15EX with modern avionics which the air force is getting ready to start using.
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.