DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Planes, Copters, Blimps » Stealth Fighter Loses Some Cover

Stealth Fighter Loses Some Cover

One of the biggest argu­ments for the $240 bil­lion Joint Strike Fighter pro­gram is that the jets will be stealthy — able to evade the next-generation air defense sys­tems that coun­tries like China might even­tu­ally install. But, it turns out, the JSF may not wind up being quite so stealthy, after all.
jsf_overhead.jpgThe “U.S. Defense Department ha[s] down­graded the stealth capa­bil­ity of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters,” the AFP reports, “mean­ing the planes would be less able to evade radar detec­tion and enemy attack than ear­lier believed.”

Australia’s defense min­is­ter “expressed con­cern March 14 at news that the new gen­er­a­tion U.S. war­plane that was to be a cor­ner­stone of Australias future air force will not have the stealth capa­bil­i­ties…”
Peter Goon, a for­mer air force flight test engi­neer, told
The Sydney Morning Herald news­pa­per the change in the JSFs stealth rat­ing would mean the dif­fer­ence between the war­plane appear­ing as a mar­ble and a beach ball on enemy radar…
Dennis Jensen, a gov­ern­ment Member of Parliament and for­mer defense ana­lyst, recently said he did not think the Joint Strike Fighter would be a match for the Russian-built Sukhoi fam­ily of strike jets that are or will be oper­ated by air forces in Asia, includ­ing China, Indonesia, Malaysia and India. 

Meanwhile, the Limeys are still skit­tish about plans to can­cel the JSF’s alter­nate engine, made by Rolls-Royce. “Britains top weapons pur­chas­ing offi­cial said his coun­try would be unable to buy the F-35… unless agree­ment was reached on tech­nol­ogy trans­fers with the United States,” Reuters reports.
(Big ups: BB)

Share |

March 14th, 2006 | Planes, Copters, Blimps | 306321 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/03/14/stealth-fighter-loses-some-cover/Stealth+Fighter+Loses+Some+Cover2006-03-14+17%3A57%3A55david_axe You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Bioweapons Getting Simple, Cheap? | The Enemy is Me » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. sglover says:
    March 14, 2006 at 5:33 pm

    Well, if we admit that it’s just a way to shovel money to the usual well-connected firms, the JSF still makes a lot of sense. The F-22 looks pretty good that way, too.…

    Reply
  2. Byron Skinner says:
    March 14, 2006 at 5:49 pm

    Good Afternoon Folks,
    Where is the news here?
    The Serbes showed in 1998 when they downed an F-117 that “Stealth” is only in the imag­i­na­tions of those try­ing to sell the idea. The defense indus­try and mil­i­tary can make all the claims they like regard­ing stealth but until anti-matter is invented that has no phys­i­cal mass and no infrared sig­na­ture the bad guys will be able to see it if it’s out there.
    The only stealth that exists is how quickly and unseen fromer Flag Officers can fly into a seven fig­ure job with a defense con­trac­tor that they use to buy from.
    Heres an idea, how about a “Life Time Ban” on ALL Flag Officers from tak­ing a posi­tion with ANY busi­ness who does busi­ness with the DoD?
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner

    Reply
  3. Murc says:
    March 15, 2006 at 1:06 am

    Byron SKinner — Ummm yeah, thats why stealth is grow­ing in pop­u­lar­ity.
    Not just on air­craft, but ships as well, theres not many (advanced) Navies out there that dont have a stealthy ship or at least one in con­struc­tion in their hands.
    We all know the rea­sons behind the F-117…I see no point in hav­ing another thread be turned into that diss­cus­sion. No B-2’s have been shot­down, which should tell you that stealth is real, not some lame excuse for cooler look­ing planes.

    Reply
  4. Anonymous says:
    March 15, 2006 at 10:03 am

    The Serbs shot down that F117 only by
    pure chance or because they were tipped of.

    Reply
  5. JSAllison says:
    March 15, 2006 at 10:06 am

    Hang a cou­ple of MERs on exter­nal hard­points and you can kiss that whole stealth thing g’bye, any­way. Stealthy air supe­ri­or­ity fight­ers I can see, barely; stealthy strike fight­ers, not so crit­i­cal if the hyper­ex­pen­sive super­cruis­ing super­stealthy one-seat wun­der­waffe have done the job they were bought for.
    Gee, pro­hibit retired flag rankers from work­ing for DoD con­trac­tors? Whatever might you be think­ing? We all know that hav­ing junior enlist­eds sit through inter­minable brief­ings and classes on the evils of con­flicts of inter­est and hav­ing their heads squeezed inces­santly about ‘val­ues’ is much more pro­duc­tive of eth­i­cal actions than incon­ve­nienc­ing retired flag types who after all, are only try­ing to feed their fam­i­lies… As a com­bat arms non­com no con­trac­tor was going to so much as spring for a cup of cof­fee in a sty­ro­foam cup so why did my time get wasted on this tripe? How come the con­tract­ing office folk weren’t watch­ing it? Never did get a sat­is­fac­tory answer to that.

    Reply
  6. Charles says:
    March 15, 2006 at 11:08 am

    Merc: No B2s have been shot down because they cost too damn much. They weren’t sent to GW1, to Bosnia, to Kosovo (B-1B drew first blood there I believe, and the F117 got blown up). The B-2’s “first com­bat deploy­ment” is to OIF (this is off the AF’s fact­sheet). No B2s were shot down sim­ply because we don’t send them out into com­bat, and we hold them back out of fear for los­ing them. We sent a B-1B into Baghdad to try to kill Saddam (2,000 pd bombs into the Mansour dis­trict), but where were the B-2s?
    Diego?
    As for stealth, stealth is just one piece of the puzzle…

    Reply
  7. madderhatter says:
    March 15, 2006 at 2:41 pm

    Let’s see, the B-2 wasn’t a part of Desert Storm because … they weren’t in the pro­duc­tion arse­nal — not until Dec 93.
    Its first com­bat was dur­ing the Kosovo War in 1999. During Operation Allied Force the B-2s flew less than 1 per­cent of the com­bat sor­ties but dropped 11 per­cent of the total bombs, and it intro­duced the satel­lite guided JDAM bomb to the world as well. Since then the air­craft has seen com­bat over Afghanistan in Operation Enduring Freedom and Iraq in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
    The mis­sions to Afghanistan saw a first for the air­craft. After fly­ing bomb­ing mis­sions over Afghanistan, the air­craft con­cerned landed at Diego Garcia, were refu­eled and had a crew change before launch­ing on another com­bat mis­sion. This was taken a step fur­ther dur­ing the Iraq cam­paign when B-2s were actu­ally based at Diego Garcia.
    Later mis­sions to Iraq were launched and returned to Whiteman AFB in Missouri. This resulted in mis­sions last­ing over 30 hours and even one mis­sion of over 50 hours. B-2 crews have been used to pio­neer sleep cycle research to improve com­bat crew per­for­mance over extended peri­ods. The B-2 main­tained a high mission-capable state for Operation Iraqi Freedom, drop­ping 583 JDAMs dur­ing the con­flict.
    C’mon, do some research or don’t talk about it if you’re just spout­ing off.

    Reply
  8. paul says:
    March 15, 2006 at 6:46 pm

    Ummm, doesn’t this bit of news strengthen the argu­ment for the F-22? It seems like there’s a lot of con­cern that the JSF can’t go toe-to-toe with the new Sukhois because of this stealth down­grad­ing, yet does the anti-fighter crowd con­tinue to believe that the F-15 and F-18 will con­tinue to pro­vide uncon­tested air supe­ri­or­ity?
    Or maybe most the world will do us a favor by not buy­ing those new fan­gled Russian jets, so we can con­tent­edly stick to buy­ing rel­a­tively cheap non-stealthy F-15s.

    Reply
  9. Ian M. says:
    March 23, 2006 at 1:27 am

    paul said:
    “Ummm, doesn’t this bit of news strengthen the argu­ment for the F-22?”
    Not for Naval Flight/general STOVL Ops it doesn’t. The USAF might care lit­tle about it, but the USN, USMC, RN & RAF cer­tainly will, not to men­tion some of the other inter­na­tional partners.

    Reply
  10. Shaun Dean says:
    March 24, 2006 at 10:54 am

    The sad fact is, China is going to rule the world and theres not much America can do but sit and wait. Perhaps the change would be for the better.

    Reply
  11. Joe Knight says:
    June 18, 2006 at 1:32 pm

    While China may become a major player in the world they will NOT rule it. If they don’t begin to peace­fully tran­si­tion into a democ­racy I am afraid that they will expe­ri­ence the same tur­moil as the for­mer Soviet Union. If Russia and China become real democ­ra­cies we will have lit­tle to fear from them except eco­nomic com­pe­ti­tion.
    AS for JSF. I am for can­cel­ing that project and FOR the F22 rap­tor. We can make it afford­able by stretch­ing out the pro­cure­ment and keep­ing the F15 and F16s longer. These planes still have a lot of life in them. And if we buy a lot of F22s the price will come down con­sid­er­ably. And the F22 is top fighter in the world. Joe

    Reply
  12. s.jeevan says:
    August 11, 2006 at 1:09 am

    its not china its india going to be the super­power we have stealth tech­nol­ogy and rus­sia support

    Reply
  13. Russ Sherwood says:
    August 21, 2007 at 8:03 am

    China will never be a super-power. Not until it com­pletely changes, which will never hap­pen. I live here and I can tell you one thing: quan­tity over qual­ity atti­tude com­pletely dom­i­nates Chinese men­tal­ity. This also extends into their military-related deci­sion mak­ing. For exam­ple, they would always pre­fer to pur­chase 1000 MIG-29 then 100 MIG-35, it’s obvi­ous. Inefficiency, bureau­cracy and lack of any rea­son­ing will for­ever be a problem.

    Reply
  14. Chua Shijie says:
    November 20, 2007 at 7:48 am

    Hi peo­ple!
    I think that F-35B of stealth is not good of it’s amoury as when it opens the hatch for the lift­ing fan, if any­thing gets into the lift­ing fan, it would cause a severe engine fail­ure and it is a huge risk for that pilot to do that! A good exam­ple of it is in a movie “Die Hard 4.0″ as they shows a F-35B hav­ing an object dropp­ping into it’s lift­ing fan an causes an extreme engine fail­ure! Anyway, i like the design of it!

    Reply
  15. hellfire says:
    January 6, 2008 at 4:10 am

    1. China invented the space shut­tle and headed the first amer­i­can space pro­gram
    2. China invented the com­puter and held the patent for 20 years in U.S.A
    3. Every coun­try around india uses chi­nese weapons over india.
    4. Jet Li is a god in japan, Jackie Chan is japan­ese pop cul­ture for per­fect police, india has no such thing except they get put in cages for ille­gally immi­grat­ing to japan :)

    Reply
  16. Franklin says:
    March 11, 2008 at 11:16 am

    I think that the fund­ing is impor­tant to, in this case… Because of the dev­olep­ment of the AA defences or radars that can (pos­si­ble) detect stealth crafts like the F-22/F-35, are quite expen­sive.. so maybe if china/india/russia wil dev­olep any anti stealth defences, it will not be enaugh to defend their entire front­lines.
    And to repond to the B2 com­ments… (I think): Isn’t it much cheaper to send mul­ti­ple B1’s instead of 1 B2? because of the main­te­nence and oper­a­tion? I think a b2 wasn’t necessery enaugh. And a B2 is untar­gete­ble by AA defences because of his alti­tude and stealthy­ness right? so they weren’t afraid that it would shut down, but it was cheaper to send B1’s (please cor­rect me if Im wrong)

    Reply
  17. Joko says:
    May 9, 2008 at 4:33 am

    @s.jeevan, what kind of super­power is india if it need russian’s sup­port just to be able to stand up?

    Reply
  18. John Brown says:
    January 17, 2009 at 7:26 pm

    @Joko
    India has its own home-built fight­ers.
    They also upgrade what the Russians give them.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • Don't be Too Quick to Dis the Contractors
    • Chinese Laser vs. U.S. Sats?
    Recent Comments
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
      With the rising tension with N. Korea, Iran and...
      roland
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
      Hey There "Christian Cowboy" : )...
      Rocketman
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
      Great new site look!
      Jimbo
    • NORK Nuclear Test: It’s A Dud (Updated)
      Thanks for good news. العاب فلاش >...
      Abdullaah
    • Secretary Gates and the F-22 Raptor
      why the hell does every want to stop making f-22 its a...
      unknown
    • Adapting Women to Subs
      More boat articles, Shipmate Buff. You do alright for not having fish.
      gsak
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
      Despamming alone is worth having to get used to a...
      SMSgt Mac
    • Adapting Women to Subs
      Agree with Byron, new look is terrific!
      joebuff
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
      Layout is beautiful, but the banner adds are a...
      @Earlydawn
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
      P.S. "canes" is out of location in the right...
      Philo
    Recent Articles
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Data Centers Unprepared For A Cyber Attack
    • While Obama ‘Consults’
    • Don’t be Too Quick to Dis the Contractors
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • Land Warrior Going to Special Forces
    • UK Gives Eyes To FIST
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage