Shadowy jet: The F-35's stealth capabilities are part of the reason it will fly and fight in a new way
Shadowy jet: The F-35's stealth capabilities are part of the reason it will fly and fight in a new way
Another blast from War is Boring
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/one-analyst-predicted-the-f-35s-s-dogfight-failure-50a942d0cf8a
Problem is they have already come out and said the systems in the f-35 are already outdated.
An F-35 may be able to shoot you down before you ever see it, but once within visual range give me an Su-27 flanker. Take out a few satellites and the F-35 is blind anyway.
They always say it will be different, but it is not. If I remember correctly, the venerable old F-14 could fight 4 or 5 different aircraft, all BVR of 100 miles, shoot and kill all of them before they even knew the Tomcat was in the area. This is nothing new, the Tomcat did this 30+(?) years ago. Oh, and they discovered AGAIN that the aircraft still had to dog fight.
The F-35 is a pig and I do not believe it will ever become a front line fighter that can do everything. The F-111 still has not taught them anything. Did someone say McNamara returned from the grave to help promote this disaster?
“Performance and technical developments such as better radar and missiles that can shoot targets beyond visual range”
And yet the 35 allowed the 16 to get close enough to kill it.
“The F-35’s stealth capabilities are part of the reason it will fly and fight in a new way”
Like the early Phantoms did in Vietnam, except they got shot out of the sky by MIG’s the “old way” - after they were out of missiles, they were targets. And as far as stealth is concerned, I can see it.
The F-35 is such a groupthink nightmare, they couldn’t even get the numbering right.
Active Duty ping.
What a pantload. Its far slower than a Sukhoi, can’t turn, can’t accelerate, and has less range.
But all this doesn’t matter they say, because it was will stealthy and will use cool electronics and missiles to blow up everything.
One question then. If this is true, then why not a very large stealth fighter platform the size of a bomber? It would have tremendous range and endurance. It could carry dozens or even a hundred missiles.
I mean, speed and the ability to maneuver simply don’t matter anymore,,,,right? Right?
OK, so if that's true, why didn't the pilot fly the plane the "new way" and then presumably beat the F-16? Sounds like protesting too much to me?
We heard that same thing before Vietnam and North Vietnam’s air force proved otherwise.
It seems to me that the future is probably autonomous flying.
Our enemies will overwhelm us with sheer numbers of Last Generation Aircraft.
The cost to produce a Mig 29 for instance is chicken feed compared to the Cost of an F-35.
When they stopped Production of the F-22 at 187 Planes I believe, it was a warning that the Decision Makers are as clueless as John Kerry is negotiating with Iran.
Build 1000 F-15 Silent Eagles to fill in the Gap.
It's difficult for me to post on any thread relating to the F-35. For one, I always strive to cut through bias and evaluate something on merit (based on available information, of course), and that is definitely a difficult task when it comes to the F-35.
Why?
Well, in quick-point form:
1) The F-35 as a great plane: The F-35 will 100% guaranteed be a great plane, but with a very important caveat. That the US continues to engage the countries it has fought against militarily in the last three and a half decades. The likes of Grenada, Panama, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Libya, etc. In essence, nations that really do not have advanced technological ability (or even anything close to parity - e.g. B-1B bombers sending JDAMs against Taliban positions in what may as well have been evil magic to the Tallies), have a qualitative mismatch (e.g. the NATO forces in the Balkans), have a quantitative mismatch (e.g. the Allied forces, which had a multitude of countries, including little Niger, against Iraq), a total dominance of situational awareness (looking at Iraq again, the Iraqi MiGs didn't even have radar-warning-receivers, and they were up against allied AWACS), proper battle strategy, etc etc etc. If the US/West continues to engage such countries, then the F-35 will have a superlative record and will be an amazing plane. Goodness, even an upgraded F-4 Phantom would be a wonderful platform in such a case! Thus, that is the F-35 as a great fighter, and as I mentioned, I 100% guarantee that as long as that caveat is maintained.
2) The F-35 as a great fighter that was betrayed by reality: What do I mean here? Well, simply put, the JSF project that gave birth to the F-35 has to be looked at as originally envisioned. What was the original plan? Well, you would have the ATF (Advanced Tactical Fighter, which gave birth to the YF-22/23 competition that was won by the F-22) breaking down doors and destroying any advanced opposition, and the ATF would be supported by the JSF (Joint Strike Fighter, which gave birth to the X-32/35 competition that was won by the F-35). Thus, it was envisioned to have hundreds of ATFs supported by thousands of JSFs. Reality? The F-22 numbers were decimated from over 800 to less than 183-187 (due to crashes), and now the JSF (F-35) has to cover roles that were intended for the ATF (F-22) such as air-dominance. Now, there is a reason the ATF had a long list of attributes requested ...such as supercruise, high stealth, maneuverability etc, because it was meant to be the absolute best bar none. The JSF, on the other hand, was to have relatively good stealth, a great sensor suite, and be able to support the ATF. Now, the JSF project also has to be the ATF project as there are not enough F-22s. This means that the F-35 is being judged against something it was not meant to cover had reality not changed ...it is like a top NFL team being asked to play at the Soccer World Cup. They can do the job, but they will never be super. Maybe a better analogy would be comparing an F1 car (Raptor) go a Nascar vehicle (35).
3) The F-35 as a dog: Finally, the F-35 as a dog. There are two ways of looking at this:
a) the first is the program itself, and I will channel a FReeper called PukinDog who (a DECADE AGO) listed all the issues the F-35 is facing today. The program has been a failure in terms of meeting its targets ranging from systems/avionics to weight management. And then there is budget, which is sad considering one of the reasons the F-22 was cancelled was cost ... Also, apparently they have had to shift their judgement metrics several times for the F-35 to 'pass,' and I suspect that the fact the (clean configuration) F-35 was fighting against a F-16 with fuel tanks attached was another example of 'fudging' the test. Anyways, the program has encountered a lot of difficulty, which is something many military systems go through ...but the F-35 (as opposed to other systems, like the Abrams tank, Seawolf sub, and even F-22, that had difficulties as well) is having its difficulties in fundamental areas, which is the main difference from the three I have mentioned. That is troubling.
b) the second issue is how the F-35 will fare against top-level global threats. I am not talking about the usual Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya hammering, but rather a war against a near-peer adversary that actually has working sh!t. For example, a war with China or Russia. Those are countries that will have working systems and that have been working towards an anti-US solution. Now, I know on FR many are quick to say that the US would 'crush' China/Russia (and I believe the US would win btw, just that it would not be easy), but ask yourself if that is the case then why is the US so hesitant at 'smacking' the likes of Iran, north Korea and Pakistan? Yes, I know ...they have nuclear weapons would be the most likely response (even though it ignores that China/Russia have more than those three countries combined, but this is not the place to discuss lack of logical congruence). But Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons currently, so why not go in and 'smack' them? Because they have a military that the US could quickly dismantle, but at cost. It is never as simple as what people in forums think! The Gulf War turkey shoot that had the Allied forces hammer Saddam's forces still left 75 Allied aircraft (including 52 fixed wing aircraft) shot down, and that was against an Iraq that had a SAM system that was created to prevent a small-scale attack from Iran and/or Israel. Now, imagine the Chinese integrated air-defense system. Simply put, the only fighter jet currently known to be flying that can survive a Chinese IADS is the F-22, and even then it would be at the edge of the IADS engagement envelop. Sure, war is never about one asset ...it is an integrated system, and the US military machine would have launched hundreds of tomahawks to degrade the IADS, launched all sorts of cyber attacks to cripple the network, etc etc etc ...if we know this China knows this as well. It would never be that easy, and the F-35 acting as both JSF and ATF would have a hard time to put it mildly.
Thus, what's my conclusion?
Simply that the F-35 was intended to be a great plane as originally envisioned, it has been let down by reality (cancellation of continued ATF production) and rising costs/weight/timelines. However, even though the F-35 would have a difficult time in Russian or Chinese airspace, it WILL BE a great fighter due to the simple reason that it will be used against the likes of Libya, Afgahnistan and Iraq, countries that at most need a B-52H, and at worst need an F-15 with supporting F-16 Wild Weasel support and an occasional smattering of Tomahawks.
Thus, the F-35 will go down as a great fighter
And so it goes ... at the onset of the Korean War, US jets had no need of machine guns becuse they had missles. Now they have a new color of lipstick which makes them invisible.
This is just more BS for a very expensive and very bad aircraft.
Mr Linstead’s attempt to “polish a turd” is explained in the sentence below.
“Previously pilots might have had to fight their way in to a hostile area,” said Mr Linstead, who now works for Lockheed Martin, the lead contractor on the F-35 programme.”
Despite the mission statement type BS the fact is the F35 lost an engagement with a previous generation fighter it was expected to win. That does not bode well.
Years ago when the Generals and their advisers were deciding how to best prepare for current and future aerial combat 10, 20 or even 30 years out, their mindset was the one who brings the biggest computer to a gun fight wins.
And the F-35? Well...is that a computer in your pocket or are you just glad to see me?
Boy howdy, love/hate to see that thing angry.
Not only that, but if you want it bigger, it can easily be enhanced when necessary.
Bottom line, if they can get it up in the heat of the moment and it performs well in close, it should be very satisfying for the pilot and will no doubt be very popular.
Wanna know what this thing does???
put it up against an F-8...
then we will know