Posted on 08/05/2016 7:20:20 PM PDT by Mariner
The celebration of the Air Force variant of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter reaching initial operational capability continued Friday with a ceremony replete with dignitaries at Hill Air Force Base in Utah, where 15 F-35s were declared combat-ready this week.
The crowd in attendance included Utah Gov. Gary Herbert; Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah; Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James; Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein; the head of Air Combat Command, Gen. Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle; and other top Air Force brass.
The commander of Hill’s 388th Fighter Wing, Brad Lyons, touted the accomplishments of the F-35A variant, saying the aircraft had performed even better than hoped in recent testing.
The now-operational F-35As will be assigned to Hill’s 34th Fighter Squadron, out of the 388th Fighter Wing, and maintained with support from the 419th Fighter Wing.
Lyons noted that the F-35A had completed 88 out of 88 successful sorties at Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho, in June and dropped 15 out of 16 bombs on target. In the F-35 spinup program, he said, the aircraft had achieved 39 direct hits out of 40 munitions deployed.
(Excerpt) Read more at dodbuzz.com ...
Those are not proper metrics for a strike aircraft.
The questions to ask are: Range? Payload? Detection? Survivability?
Your opinion is not supported by the data.
yf23 was not part of f35 type of aircraft program. yf23 competed against the f22 design. the designs competing for the f35 contract were this one and boeings design. they had different combat roles and requirements.
the f22 project didnt have to be used across several services, and have three different models on the same airframe, with one being a stovl deign.
For the number of actual strikes any F-35 may ever partake, drones can supply as much precision and far less cost.
The F-35 was never designed to be all stealth all the time. It was intended to be stealthy during 'first day of war' then become a non-stealthy bomb truck in subsequent days and weeks of a conflict.
look, the article was comparing the two on metrics. i was just curious if they compared their speeds and operational ceilings. it is of interesst to me if they listed them.
“A zillion-dollar aircraft kind-of beats one designed in 1974! Who’d a thunk it?”
Worth checking. I’m sure the F-35 was designed prior to 1988 because it was already in production; it may have been designed as early as the ‘70’s.
The latest block 60/62 F-16s with AESA radars are north of $80 million apiece, so no, you can’t have a swarm of brand new F-16s for the cost of each F-35.
I heartily agree.
Seems there's a political dimension to the design of aircraft and a decided bias toward manned aircraft with discernment and feelings.
That said we have expendable, precision strike/standoff weapons in the Tomahawk cruise missile fired from ships, subs and ground.
If you would spend just a half hour researching the F-35 capabilities you wouldn't be on this tangent.
Top speed and ceiling are almost identical, as are G force in turns.
“Of the F-35, I can say unequivocally we are only beginning to scratch the surface of what this airplane will be able to do in the future,” he said.That might contain a smidgen of overselling, but I think he likes their new toy.“Make no mistake: It is extremely capable today. But it’s going to be an absolute monster in the years to come. I wouldn’t want to face it on the battlefield.
As a commander of airmen, I am comfortable and confident sending my fighters downrange to fly, fight and win in this aircraft.”
I like it, too, and I agree with what he said.
There are now and will continue to be a lot of extremely competent and capable people playing with their new F-35 toys, too, each refining and improving their F-35s to best fit their individual needs.
In fact, I can't wait to see what the Israelis do with theirs!
Granted.
But when was the last time you saw the US Defense Industry produce a mainline combat aircraft that was not vastly superior to it's predecessors or it's competition?
The folks have less a "dog in the fight" than a hand in the cookie jar.
Through final delivery the program will cost at least $1.5 trillion.
Concur. I was reading somewhere, that this will be the last manned fighter/bomber. It takes a long time to build an aircraft this complex and the time to train pilots is a long time. Flight school is just the beginning for pilot competence.
The folks have less a "dog in the fight" than a hand in the cookie jar.
First thing I've agreed with you all night because they are the SAME EXACT THING.
You may see the light yet...
i found a january 2016 soldier of fortune article, speed of f16 max is mach 2, speed of f35 is mach 1.6. both list at max ceilings of over 50,000 ft.
they had range of f16 at 2000 miles and of f35 of only 1350 miles.
F-16 went into production in 1976. It’s design was early and mid-70s.
The JSF contract was bid in 1995. The subsequent build contract was awarded ion 2001. The F-35 first flight was in December of 2006
The F-35 stated range on internal fuel alone is accurate, but the F-16 stated range is FERRY RANGE with large drop tanks.
Combat radius for the 16 is less than half the 35.
The 16 top speed is in a totally "clean" configuration...no missiles, no tanks. Which is how the 35 is most of the time.
If you put weapons or external fuel on a 16, it underperforms the 35 in every category.
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.