How have your opinions of the JSF changed over the years?

[popcorn]

Those are the kinds of scenarios where the C4ISR capabilities of the F-35 will allow it to operate and perform better than any other platform.
It will be continupusly generating an updated SA picture for the pilot from its suite of onboard sensors integrated with offboard data streams.
This translates into more timely and focused responses, successful mission completion and reduced risks to pilot and aircraft.

[wrightwing]

And its quite possible that the second day may never happen, or that an air campaign may require both.

Serbia I think showed a viable political/military strategy for dealing with coalition air campaigns; absorb the body blows as best you can for the first couple of weeks and save your AD until later phases. When the coalition becomes complacent, use the AD to take down a few of their air craft to make a political statement. You are never going to see a lesser opponent stop an air offensive through purely military means. But knock down a dozen or two dozen aircraft and the political effects would be even more devastating.

Its the reason why I think the F-35 is even more vital for our future defense. With the possession of a stealthy reasonably cost multi-role fighter, western states' ability to prosecute such campaigns remains assured. It might be that an F-35 equipped air force will face an environment that remains semi-permissible for the entire campaign because of a elusive foe. Thus it will never carry external stores as the risk is too great.

Against a networked fleet of F-22s, and F-35s, the tactics used in '99 against NATO airpower wouldn't work nearly so well. Their situational awareness would make it a far greater chore to play the shell game, of frequent relocation. The array of weapons that exist now would also make the SAM operator's life expectancy much lower. Lastly, the EA capabilities, combined with VLO signatures, kinematic performance, and situational awareness of incoming threats, would make an F-117(or Scott Grady situation for that matter), far less probable.

[muir]

WW - As I thought then, thanks for the confirmation

[hb_pencil]

Against a networked fleet of F-22s, and F-35s, the tactics used in '99 against NATO airpower wouldn't work nearly so well. Their situational awareness would make it a far greater chore to play the shell game, of frequent relocation. The array of weapons that exist now would also make the SAM operator's life expectancy much lower. Lastly, the EA capabilities, combined with VLO signatures, kinematic performance, and situational awareness of incoming threats, would make an F-117(or Scott Grady situation for that matter), far less probable.

I'm not entirely convinced of that. I'd love nothing more if we could be assured that our air dominance is enhanced because of the F-35. However we've never faced a double digit SAM in an operational environment (and their lethality), and the Russians and the Chinese are investing money into this area (unlike most things in their military.) Furthermore they have had the opportunity to study our operational methods for over two decades. As our technology evolves, so does our opponents. As our tactics evolves, so does theirs.


Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying this because I question the need for the F-35. Actually I think its absolutely vital for the future. And I think the F-35's sensors will offer a major improvement on our current generation of capabilities. I just don't think it will change how we carry out our operations that much because our opponents have been improving as well.

[wrightwing]

Against a networked fleet of F-22s, and F-35s, the tactics used in '99 against NATO airpower wouldn't work nearly so well. Their situational awareness would make it a far greater chore to play the shell game, of frequent relocation. The array of weapons that exist now would also make the SAM operator's life expectancy much lower. Lastly, the EA capabilities, combined with VLO signatures, kinematic performance, and situational awareness of incoming threats, would make an F-117(or Scott Grady situation for that matter), far less probable.

I'm not entirely convinced of that. I'd love nothing more if we could be assured that our air dominance is enhanced because of the F-35. However we've never faced a double digit SAM in an operational environment (and their lethality), and the Russians and the Chinese are investing money into this area (unlike most things in their military.) Furthermore they have had the opportunity to study our operational methods for over two decades. As our technology evolves, so does our opponents. As our tactics evolves, so does theirs.


Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying this because I question the need for the F-35. Actually I think its absolutely vital for the future. And I think the F-35's sensors will offer a major improvement on our current generation of capabilities. I just don't think it will change how we carry out our operations that much because our opponents have been improving as well.

I'm not suggesting that one would fly around without a care in the world, when double digit SAMs are in the area, but when you combine the situational awareness and greatly reduced WEZs, it certainly tilts the odds considerably.

[hb_pencil]

I'm not suggesting that one would fly around without a care in the world, when double digit SAMs are in the area, but when you combine the situational awareness and greatly reduced WEZs, it certainly tilts the odds considerably.

And that's one opinion which I think is well within the realm of possibility. I however differ in my view. There are new technologies on the OPFOR side that make attrition strategies more viable.

One question for me is the survivability of the UAVs we've developed over the past 10 years. Those to me are where the real improvement in situational awareness has come from, but have not been deployed in completely non-permissive environments. If they can be denied a robust defence with MANPADs and other systems then I don't hold out much hope for a new way of war emerging.

[southernphantom]

One question for me is the survivability of the UAVs we've developed over the past 10 years. Those to me are where the real improvement in situational awareness has come from, but have not been deployed in completely non-permissive environments. If they can be denied a robust defence with MANPADs and other systems then I don't hold out much hope for a new way of war emerging.

The current UAVs are, speaking frankly, junk. Their performance is inferior to that of nearly all WWII-era fighters and flying them has been compared to looking through a drinking straw. Expecting the flying snowmobiles to survive versus double-digit SAMs is a prime example of politics over capability. If we must use UAVs, buy a few hundred Phantom Rays and X-47s. Otherwise, start phasing drones out and put the insane planned quantity of F-35As to use defending the USA. Whoever took away the NEW YORK air guard's F-16s had to have been under the influence of something. Fighters for the ANG, snowmobiles for outdoorsmen.