Comments on: Rough Week for F-35 http://defensetech.org/2010/03/05/tough-week-for-f-35/ The Future of the Military, Law Enforcement and National Security Sat, 26 May 2012 06:20:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Lancier http://defensetech.org/2010/03/05/tough-week-for-f-35/#comment-195709 Lancier Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:07:43 +0000 http://defensetech.org/?p=6029#comment-195709 Guys due to current world financial issues and the constant increse in costs buyers are already reducing there requirements the RAAF will now only but one sqn, the UK are still discussing the issue as its dependent on the two new carriers and the costs there, others are also reviewing there budgets, F18 are looking as replacements to some countries, as is the eurofighter while the uk reduced its last batch spend they could again increase, the french are looking at selling Rafale to the UK at 25% of the cost of a F35 and with all the source codes and operational requirements something the US are not offering. Guys due to current world financial issues and the constant increse in costs buyers are already reducing there requirements the RAAF will now only but one sqn, the UK are still discussing the issue as its dependent on the two new carriers and the costs there, others are also reviewing there budgets, F18 are looking as replacements to some countries, as is the eurofighter while the uk reduced its last batch spend they could again increase, the french are looking at selling Rafale to the UK at 25% of the cost of a F35 and with all the source codes and operational requirements something the US are not offering.

]]> By: CHOPS http://defensetech.org/2010/03/05/tough-week-for-f-35/#comment-195727 CHOPS Fri, 12 Mar 2010 07:02:04 +0000 http://defensetech.org/?p=6029#comment-195727 Why don't we give congress and the senate a raise then they can scrap or trade away every one of Americas' vital military programs.[SARCASM] Why don’t we give congress and the senate a raise then they can scrap or trade away every one of Americas’ vital military programs.[SARCASM]

]]> By: pfcem http://defensetech.org/2010/03/05/tough-week-for-f-35/#comment-195718 pfcem Fri, 12 Mar 2010 05:27:49 +0000 http://defensetech.org/?p=6029#comment-195718 Lancier, Australia has not reduced it buy. It is buying 1 squadron (14 aircraft actually) for delivery in FY2014 (still need to replace those now retired F-111s) with additional squadrons (at least 72 additional aircraft) expecting to become fully operational in 2018 & 2021 respectively. It has yet to decide if it will then order another 14 aircraft for it intended total of 100 based on what it does with its F/A-18Fs. Lancier,

Australia has not reduced it buy. It is buying 1 squadron (14 aircraft actually) for delivery in FY2014 (still need to replace those now retired F-111s) with additional squadrons (at least 72 additional aircraft) expecting to become fully operational in 2018 & 2021 respectively. It has yet to decide if it will then order another 14 aircraft for it intended total of 100 based on what it does with its F/A-18Fs.

]]> By: ohwilleke http://defensetech.org/2010/03/05/tough-week-for-f-35/#comment-195640 ohwilleke Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:22:21 +0000 http://defensetech.org/?p=6029#comment-195640 It is worth recalling that the Harriers were hardly the stars of the Iraq War. The stars of the Iraq war were the A-10s, which proved themselves to be the most reliable way of dispatching Iraqi tanks. The shone in this job relative to more modern fighters and relative to helicopter gunships. The F-22 may be the queen of air-to-air, but the F-35 is too much F-22 light and too little a fit for some other niche. Even a regime change war against a medium sized, moderate advanced military like Iraq's, where support on the ground from the locals is modest benefits from aircraft far more basic than the F-35 or even the F-16 or Harrier. It is worth recalling that the Harriers were hardly the stars of the Iraq War. The stars of the Iraq war were the A-10s, which proved themselves to be the most reliable way of dispatching Iraqi tanks. The shone in this job relative to more modern fighters and relative to helicopter gunships.

The F-22 may be the queen of air-to-air, but the F-35 is too much F-22 light and too little a fit for some other niche.

Even a regime change war against a medium sized, moderate advanced military like Iraq’s, where support on the ground from the locals is modest benefits from aircraft far more basic than the F-35 or even the F-16 or Harrier.

]]> By: JSFMIKE http://defensetech.org/2010/03/05/tough-week-for-f-35/#comment-195613 JSFMIKE Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:42:03 +0000 http://defensetech.org/?p=6029#comment-195613 The opposing jets like Sukhoi and MIG in 4th Gen version have one thing in common - targets for F-22's to practice shooting fish in a barrel. It doesn't matter if the costs are 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 in comparison. I'm sure the Kill Ratio of the F-22 will more than make up any difference. The recent Russian supposed 5th Gen prototype is not impressive. The slab tail verticals impose drag with any movement. The engines are nearly fully exposed thus making good IR targets from the side and front. Other areas of the jet are not stealthy, period. The metallurgy is not correct. The steps and gaps are ridiculous. The opposing jets like Sukhoi and MIG in 4th Gen version have one thing in common — targets for F-22’s to practice shooting fish in a barrel. It doesn’t matter if the costs are 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 in comparison. I’m sure the Kill Ratio of the F-22 will more than make up any difference.
The recent Russian supposed 5th Gen prototype is not impressive. The slab tail verticals impose drag with any movement. The engines are nearly fully exposed thus making good IR targets from the side and front. Other areas of the jet are not stealthy, period. The metallurgy is not correct. The steps and gaps are ridiculous.

]]> By: JSFMIKE http://defensetech.org/2010/03/05/tough-week-for-f-35/#comment-195612 JSFMIKE Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:41:38 +0000 http://defensetech.org/?p=6029#comment-195612 F-35 does not cost the same as the F-22 in fly-away cost, period. Nothing says the F-22 line is actually going to be closed; things can change quickly. All tooling will be left in place for a continuation or restart. Drones are Wright flyers when compared to fourth gen jets. The drones fly in uncontested airspace. F-35B is needed to make LHA's have airplanes, just like AV-8B's work today. Upgraded 4th Gen jets are SAM missile fodder in the battlespace in just a few years. Why waste the $'s in making more targets, let alone the loss of pilots? The F-35, once the battlespace has our air superiority established, will have pylons on the wings to carry all types of ordinance, like a souped up A-10 or F-16, and also carry internal bombs and missiles. F-35 does not cost the same as the F-22 in fly-away cost, period.
Nothing says the F-22 line is actually going to be closed; things can change quickly. All tooling will be left in place for a continuation or restart.
Drones are Wright flyers when compared to fourth gen jets. The drones fly in uncontested airspace.
F-35B is needed to make LHA’s have airplanes, just like AV-8B’s work today.
Upgraded 4th Gen jets are SAM missile fodder in the battlespace in just a few years. Why waste the $‘s in making more targets, let alone the loss of pilots?
The F-35, once the battlespace has our air superiority established, will have pylons on the wings to carry all types of ordinance, like a souped up A-10 or F-16, and also carry internal bombs and missiles.

]]> By: DualityOfMan http://defensetech.org/2010/03/05/tough-week-for-f-35/#comment-195591 DualityOfMan Wed, 10 Mar 2010 05:20:09 +0000 http://defensetech.org/?p=6029#comment-195591 But the F-22 is Air Force only, not for export, and would almost certainly have higher operating costs. But the F-22 is Air Force only, not for export, and would almost certainly have higher operating costs.

]]> By: wembley http://defensetech.org/2010/03/05/tough-week-for-f-35/#comment-195565 wembley Tue, 09 Mar 2010 17:18:01 +0000 http://defensetech.org/?p=6029#comment-195565 You should get out more. Air-to-air is in many ways easier than air-t-ground (less clutter, less collateral damage). The jamming issue is no different than for manned aircraft. You should get out more. Air-to-air is in many ways easier than air-t-ground (less clutter, less collateral damage). The jamming issue is no different than for manned aircraft.

]]> By: Why http://defensetech.org/2010/03/05/tough-week-for-f-35/#comment-195560 Why Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:25:08 +0000 http://defensetech.org/?p=6029#comment-195560 Yes, because more units of a single service air superiority fighter makes more sense than more units of a tri- and combined forces multirole aircraft....yes I totally see the logic there. :( Yes, because more units of a single service air superiority fighter makes more sense than more units of a tri– and combined forces multirole aircraft.…yes I totally see the logic there. :(

]]> By: Why http://defensetech.org/2010/03/05/tough-week-for-f-35/#comment-195559 Why Tue, 09 Mar 2010 06:38:28 +0000 http://defensetech.org/?p=6029#comment-195559 I agree with you danf, and I think its a huge issue that hopefully more folks will become aware of. I can't comment on it and keep it under several thousand words, so I'll just say I agree, and I think its a large, possibly nation-destroying issue. It also won't be solved from the inside - sometimes you have to destroy to renovate when the rot is too pervasive. I agree with you danf, and I think its a huge issue that hopefully more folks will become aware of. I can’t comment on it and keep it under several thousand words, so I’ll just say I agree, and I think its a large, possibly nation-destroying issue. It also won’t be solved from the inside — sometimes you have to destroy to renovate when the rot is too pervasive.

]]>