The F-35 thread

[Dave]

An E-2D Advanced Hawkeye did it in 2009 as the basis for the system the F-35 uses.

Source

I thought it would be obvious that AWACS can do it, I'm talking about peers to the f35 (and you actually completely cocked up, I said jet, you strangely chose an old turboprop).

Source please since the F-16 Block 60 can hit 1025 miles using conformal fuel tanks.

Source

That's internal fuel, there are also conformal ranks for the f35 under development. The US is building a similar system to the f22 stealth tanks, the Israelis are going for a stealthy but more standard set of conformal tanks.

You wouldn't be wanting to compare one jet with drop tanks against another with just internal fuel, would you? That would seem like a bit of bias to make one look bad, and that isn't good, is it?

 

[Blu82]

I chose a prop driven carrier aircraft because it operates right next to the F-35. The Gripen E should also be able to do it from the marketing material.

 

[Dave]

I chose a prop driven carrier aircraft because it operates right next to the F-35. The Gripen E should also be able to do it from the marketing material.

The Gripen is still vapourware, written in a catalogue to make it look good to prospective customer small countries. Won't happen in the way the f35 does.

 

[access]

did that isreali pilot, epstein, I think, not have an inferior(older) jet? or was that exaggerating.

 

[Blu82]

The Gripen is still vapourware, written in a catalogue to make it look good to prospective customer small countries. Won't happen in the way the f35 does.

Vaporware exactly like the F35 where everything is on paper, in testing or in simulation or downright broken 200 deliveries in.

 

[Dave]

Vaporware exactly like the F35 where everything is on paper, in testing or in simulation or downright broken 200 deliveries in.

Discussion with you is like herding cats.

Go back and re-read the last few pages of links to articles. We've just been discussing the AEGIS link which is working and successful in actual use (which is the exact opposite of vapourware).

 

[Dave]

I don't know why this just made me think of this thread...

 

[hawker]

[video=youtube;ba63OVl1MHw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ba63OVl1MHw[/video]

 

[Dave]

Looks like the 'useless' f35 is still killing all the 'superior' older planes, someone forgot to tell the f35 pilots their plane was supposed to to be inferior...

F-35 Dominates At Red Flag With 15:1 Kill Rate

The U.S. Air Force’s F-35A made its debut at the toughest Red Flag yet, and not only dominated the air space but made the legacy aircraft in the force package even deadlier, according to pilots.
The F-35’s participation in the Air Force’s capstone training event at Nellis AFB, Nevada, which is known as one of the world’s most realistic and challenging air-to-air combat exercises, marked a crucial test for the fifth-generation fighter. This year, pilots went up against the most aggressive threat laydown ever seen at a Red Flag: more surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), more jamming, and more red air, said Lt. Col. George Watkins, 34th Fighter Squadron commander.
The exercise began Jan. 23 and will continue until Feb. 10.

Despite the stepped up threat, pilots lost only one F-35 to every 15 aggressors killed in action—an impressive kill ratio for an aircraft that is not designed as an air-to-air fighter.

Where before an F-16 would not even see the advanced threat on the battlespace—the blue forces would take them out ahead of time with standoff weapons—now with the F-35 added to the mix, pilots can detect and pinpoint multiple threats at once, Watkins said.

Faced with three or four different advanced SAMs in one scenario, F-35 pilots gather and fuse data from a multitude of sources. Then the stealthy aircraft slips undetected within range and takes out the threat. If the F-35 runs out of munitions, F-22 and fourth-generation pilots still want the aircraft to stay in the vicinity, vacuuming up targeting information and transferring it to the rest of the force.

http://m.aviationweek.com/defense/f-35-dominates-red-flag-151-kill-rate

 

[Blu82]

So the F-35 played AWAC and the F-22's did the killing? What generation F-16 was it since the US Air Force have been neglecting their OPFOR squadrons recently? What was the ROE? Did the F-16 fly using Russian tactics? What support did the F-16's have?

 

[Y'all Qaeda]

So the F-35 played AWAC and the F-22's did the killing? What generation F-16 was it since the US Air Force have been neglecting their OPFOR squadrons recently? What was the ROE? Did the F-16 fly using Russian tactics? What support did the F-16's have?

I suppose they would've flown aggressor squads operating in likely OPFOR RoE and tech.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/57th_Adversary_Tactics_Group they fly F-15 and F-16's so likely combination of them. From the article it seems, that the F35 was doing the killing, but once dry they stayed around and played a role similar to AWACS.

 

[Arthur]

Vaporware exactly like the F35 where everything is on paper, in testing or in simulation or downright broken 200 deliveries in.

OK, so what's your recommendation? Scrap the F-35? Shouldn't you be rather pleased the USA is going with such an inferior jet?

 

[Dave]

So the F-35 played AWAC and the F-22's did the killing?

How did you get that from my quote?

Faced with three or four different advanced SAMs in one scenario, F-35 pilots gather and fuse data from a multitude of sources. Then the stealthy aircraft slips undetected within range and takes out the threat

 

[FoXtroT]

So the F-35 played AWAC and the F-22's did the killing? What generation F-16 was it since the US Air Force have been neglecting their OPFOR squadrons recently? What was the ROE? Did the F-16 fly using Russian tactics? What support did the F-16's have?

OPFOR isn't always solely the US's aggressor squadrons. Most of the time its also active duty US squadrons and possibly even foreign airforces.

 

[Blu82]

I just think they are getting an way way inferior jet for the money they are spending on the project. The reasons why the F-15, F-16, F-18, AV-8 and A-10 are/were such good aircraft is that each aircraft had a specific role in mind during the design cycle and compliment each other in the battle space.

The F-35 is designed to replace four of those aircraft and therefor combines their strengths and weaknesses and is in my opinion inferior for it.

Wouldn't four different air frames optimized for each role been better in the long run and even stealthier. I have no problem with them sharing components but I am not so sure on a common air frame.

So my final question is how much better is an F-35A than an F-16, F-35B than a AV-8, F-35C than a F-18 in the real world and was that money well spend doing it or could they simply have spent that money better else were. For example during that red flag exercise the F-35 did duty as a stealthy radar platform, how about developing a stealthy AWACS / Tanker combination instead which they badly need anyway?

Currently all they have to show for it is a 15-1 kill ratio in simulation but the only operational capability the F-35 currently shows is a stealthy AWACS.

 

[Dave]

I just think they are getting an way way inferior jet for the money they are spending on the project. The reasons why the F-15, F-16, F-18, AV-8 and A-10 are/were such good aircraft is that each aircraft had a specific role in mind during the design cycle and compliment each other in the battle space.

The F-35 is designed to replace four of those aircraft and therefor combines their strengths and weaknesses and is in my opinion inferior for it.

Wouldn't four different air frames optimized for each role been better in the long run and even stealthier. I have no problem with them sharing components but I am not so sure on a common air frame.

So my final question is how much better is an F-35A than an F-16, F-35B than a AV-8, F-35C than a F-18 in the real world and was that money well spend doing it or could they simply have spent that money better else were. For example during that red flag exercise the F-35 did duty as a stealthy radar platform, how about developing a stealthy AWACS / Tanker combination instead which they badly need anyway?

Currently all they have to show for it is a 15-1 kill ratio in simulation but the only operational capability the F-35 currently shows is a stealthy AWACS.

I see it's pretty pointless trying to debate with a closed mind...

“Before where we would have one advanced threat and we would put everything we had—F-16s, F-15s, F-18s, missiles, we would shoot everything we had at that one threat just to take it out—now we are seeing three or four of those threats at a time,” Watkins said. “Just between [the F-35] and the [F-22] Raptor we are able to geo-locate them, precision-target them, and then we are able to bring the fourth-generation assets in behind us after those threats are neutralized. It’s a whole different world out there for us now.”

 

[FoXtroT]

I just think they are getting an way way inferior jet for the money they are spending on the project. The reasons why the F-15, F-16, F-18, AV-8 and A-10 are/were such good aircraft is that each aircraft had a specific role in mind during the design cycle and compliment each other in the battle space.

The F-35 is designed to replace four of those aircraft and therefor combines their strengths and weaknesses and is in my opinion inferior for it.

Wouldn't four different air frames optimized for each role been better in the long run and even stealthier. I have no problem with them sharing components but I am not so sure on a common air frame.

So my final question is how much better is an F-35A than an F-16, F-35B than a AV-8, F-35C than a F-18 in the real world and was that money well spend doing it or could they simply have spent that money better else were. For example during that red flag exercise the F-35 did duty as a stealthy radar platform, how about developing a stealthy AWACS / Tanker combination instead which they badly need anyway?

Currently all they have to show for it is a 15-1 kill ratio in simulation but the only operational capability the F-35 currently shows is a stealthy AWACS.

F-35 is clearly showing it is superior to the F-16, F-18 & AV-8. The A-10 is another question altogether but the fact remains the aircraft its replacing aren't really very different from each other in terms of their roles.

As for your other point, how would you like the F-35 to prove it's air-to-air operational effectiveness? Fly through Russia shooting down Mig's and Su's?

 

[Y'all Qaeda]

I just think they are getting an way way inferior jet for the money they are spending on the project. The reasons why the F-15, F-16, F-18, AV-8 and A-10 are/were such good aircraft is that each aircraft had a specific role in mind during the design cycle and compliment each other in the battle space.

The F-35 is designed to replace four of those aircraft and therefor combines their strengths and weaknesses and is in my opinion inferior for it.

Wouldn't four different air frames optimized for each role been better in the long run and even stealthier. I have no problem with them sharing components but I am not so sure on a common air frame.

So my final question is how much better is an F-35A than an F-16, F-35B than a AV-8, F-35C than a F-18 in the real world and was that money well spend doing it or could they simply have spent that money better else were. For example during that red flag exercise the F-35 did duty as a stealthy radar platform, how about developing a stealthy AWACS / Tanker combination instead which they badly need anyway?

Currently all they have to show for it is a 15-1 kill ratio in simulation but the only operational capability the F-35 currently shows is a stealthy AWACS.

AWACS is increasingly important on the modern battlefield. Even if the F-35 fulfilled just that role, it would still save lives. Yes, they compromised a lot by using one airframe across the various variations - however, those sacrifices were made knowingly. Keep in mind, you have a stealthy aircraft, most A2A engagements are BVR anyway, so having a plane that defeats the enemies' ability to lock and engage nullifies the point that they are less dog fight worthy.

The plane was built mainly around increasing pilot awareness on the battlefield with full integration into the various branches and technologies being utmost importance. That the platform is overkill for their current needs - absolutely, the US hasn't been in a near peer engagement for a while, however, with the J20 becoming a real threat - stealth will be more important than dog fighting.

As to your stealth tanker comment:
https://twitter.com/TheWoracle/status/819210345659174912/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

They have you covered. And the Stealth AWACS - well, the F-35 has you covered.

 

[Blu82]

AWACS is increasingly important on the modern battlefield. Even if the F-35 fulfilled just that role, it would still save lives. Yes, they compromised a lot by using one airframe across the various variations - however, those sacrifices were made knowingly. Keep in mind, you have a stealthy aircraft, most A2A engagements are BVR anyway, so having a plane that defeats the enemies' ability to lock and engage nullifies the point that they are less dog fight worthy.

The plane was built mainly around increasing pilot awareness on the battlefield with full integration into the various branches and technologies being utmost importance. That the platform is overkill for their current needs - absolutely, the US hasn't been in a near peer engagement for a while, however, with the J20 becoming a real threat - stealth will be more important than dog fighting.

As to your stealth tanker comment:
https://twitter.com/TheWoracle/status/819210345659174912/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

They have you covered. And the Stealth AWACS - well, the F-35 has you covered.

Until it turns around since it has no rear facing radar so the Growler is a better bet.

All network and sensor fusion stuff can be retroactively added to the legacy aircraft with avionics upgrades or pods so that leaves the F-35 with it stealth capability as a trump card. There are however radar systems in the work that are specifically designed to counter stealth and then what for the F-35?

 

[garyc]

At the moment matter pertaining to the F-35 should be seen in a political light rather than being technical / operational issues. Donald Trump has been threatening the programme and there is a lot of PR happening to counter this.

He may have acheived his objective, Lockheed has just announced a price cut. Hopefully things can get back to normal now.