Comments on: Navy JSF Takes a Step Forward

By: Marcase

Marcase — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 11:55:09 +0000

Okay, this gotta stop because it’s getting ridiculous:
FORGET about prop-driven CAS/GA planes — even the ALX/Super Tucano just is not suited for hi-intensity (urban) combat like REAL WORLD conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan (god forbid Iran/NORKOR).
Any noob who has seen “Black Hawk Down” should get the message: simple RPKs, RPGs and even good old “Ma Dueces” would shred a slow moving (prop-)plane — period.
And Mohammed watched that movie too.
Counter AAA with good intell mated with stand-off weapons — that’s what the JSF / F-35 is build around. Sensor-fusion-gizmos with precision med/long range precision weapons to evade enemy air defenses.
After all: never fight the way your opponent fights best.

By: Cliff

Cliff — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 05:17:38 +0000

I saw on Military channel F-18 could out fly all the human pilots now. Why spend more money on top priced equipment that can’t be used any more than they are flying now.
The idea of WW2 prop. planes is a good for $ side and slow movers. They still worked in Vietnam.

By: lateralgs

lateralgs — Sun, 01 Jul 2007 01:43:40 +0000

Have an ex-employee/friend that works for Lockheed-Martin. He’s been working on the Raptor program for years. Says the F-35 had trouble making weight targets. I’m not sold on the whole “one size fits all” multi-service concept, anyway. Maybe if the plane were cheaper and still had the same capabilities…
It’ll be an ordnance hog, and hopefully will do just fine in that role.

By: Marcase

Marcase — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 10:00:43 +0000

We down here in Holland are slated for (an initial) 90 F-35 Alpha’s, and we can’t wait for them to arrive.
On the whole subject old vs new — our F-16AMs (for MLU Midlife Update) are flying non-stop combat-ops in Afghanistan (see the recent battle for Chora) and doing just mighty fine. If the JSF just half matches the Falcons capabilities this “cloggie” is a happy camper.
A-10, B-52, P-47 don’t matter. Steel on target does.
Don’t focus too much on STOVL — it’s the conventional fighter capabilites that are mated with STOVL — good range / payload / speed without sacrificing these capabilities just to be able to do the hummingbird mating dance.
Precision strike/CAS mated with STOVL (fast reaction/hi sortie rate) is a drooling concept.
Me like.

By: wpnexp

wpnexp — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 07:09:19 +0000

Also read a report that pilots even with visual sightings of F-22s were unable to lock weapons on them. What a bit__, you can see the guy, but your targering radar or IR sensors can’t. That is a little tough to deal with.

By: wpnexp

wpnexp — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 07:05:49 +0000

It is highly unlikely a MiG-39 will ever be built as the company hasn’t produced new aircraft (only upgraded a few MiG-29s) in a while. And we didn’t have much trouble with any MiG-29 we faced to date anyways. And the Su-37, again, only an upgraded Su-27. As the F-22 Raptor pilots say, they are simply flying chaff waiting to be destroyed. I doubt the F-35 would have much trouble dealing with them either. If fact, the F-22 owes much to the F-35, and vice versa. The Raptors already incredible radar is being updeted with F-35 technology. I am sure US and maybe Brit F-35s will have stealth that is close to that of the F-22. I doubt the rest will be as stealthy though. The only thing that I think the F-35 lacks is a super cruise capability on par with the F-22, but I am sure it can supercruise for a short period of time anyways. I think the STOVL version will lack range and payload, but it should come in handy when flexibilty is required.

By: Ken

Ken — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 03:05:47 +0000

I saw the comment about using WW2 aircraft in wars such as Iraq and Afghanistan. I have often thought that a P47, with 8 50 cal. machine guns, and the ability to loiter at much slower speed than jets would be much more effective in some engagements. The A10 does well, but a 30mm cannon is overkill for personnel. You could probably buld a new P47 for $200,000.00 or less once the lines were restarted. I have watched the gun camera films of P47’s attacking Tiger tanks, and taking them out. For the cost of one JSF, you could fill the air with one of the most incredible ground attack fighters ever. I know the idea sounds crazy, but it is feasible.

By: Don Jensen

Don Jensen — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:48:42 +0000

Why would anyone want to land a B52 on a carrier? That isn’t what they were designed to do. Air Force, try to land one of your f-16’s on a Carrier then you can brag! Actually try to land one of your f-16’s at Corona Airport which is stationary and 3 times the length of an Aircraft Carrier then you can really brag!
Don Jensen
USMC

By: Don Jensen

Don Jensen — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:48:22 +0000

By: Don Jensen

Don Jensen — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:47:51 +0000