AvWeek: Explore other options beyond F-35

[rkap]

SpudmanWP Red air still lost more that 6:1etc.

What has that got to do with intercepting F35's with 4+ aircraft. No mention was made of who would win.
There are millions of "what if scenarios" that could happen and "what if's".
The simple point is if late Flankers or any 4+ or 4++ were trying to intercept an F35 or any Stealth aircraft they had a rough position on they would not go up to intercept in a tight formation. They would fly WIDE and if possible approach from different angles. That was the point.

[rkap]

1st503rdsgt
The rest of your post is the long-winded ramble of a trolling armchair tactician.

"Complicated maneuver" - Your words - the scenario at the time assumed the enemy would know roughly where the F35's were and they were coming.

CAS - I am talking specific situations - Vietnam type - Jungle warfare -often wet and raining. Not my opinion - the opinion of those who served in Vietnam. Me -100 days+ on extended patrols in the field. Generally 20 day+ patrols - 36 day training camp every year. Maybe 10% parade ground work. Most of the units in the 2 Battalions were rated ready for action with a 6 week final training period. All units included many ex full time Soldiers in the Unit who had served in Vietnam etc. All our field instructors had spent time in Vietnam or other Wars[49RQR - "Bush Soldier Regiment"].
Fast jet ground support was generally ineffective in Vietnam - all experts agree and yes many friends served there.
From what I read I am fairly certain the F35 in that sort of terrain and weather will not be able to get reliable IR signatures to use its stand off weapons from a distance. If am wrong hopefully there is an expert in this area on the forum who can enlighten all of us if IR signatures will be distinct and reliable in hilly to mountainous jungle type conditions with rain or if it will have other ways of targeting ground targets accurately and safely for friendly troops. Somehow despite all its sensors etc. I think it will have trouble if conditions are not good.

Even in Afghanistan in more recent times "fast Jets" have not proved effective in strongly defended situations" with mountains around etc. Early in the Afghan War it was a slow AC130 Gunship that saved the day in "Shahi Kot Valley - the Taliban stronghold" when coalition forces almost ended up in trouble similar to Russian forces who lost 600 men when they tried to take the valley. From what I read coalition forces were withing hours of meeting the same fate until the AC130 arrived. The " F15's, Hornets etc. using stand off weapons were not much help at all. There and gone - miss and they could not do another run etc. Especially after a few "Stingers" came up at them when they ventured in close. [The A10 I talk about is not the A10 of 1977. It would need upgrades.]
All this not my opinion - the opinion of those who served in Vietnam and those who were in the Shahi Kot Valley and thought they would die. Are you calling them "armchair tacticians".

[SpudmanWP]

SpudmanWP Red air still lost more that 6:1etc.

What has that got to do with intercepting F35's with 4+ aircraft. No mention was made of who would win.
There are millions of "what if scenarios" that could happen and "what if's".
The simple point is if late Flankers or any 4+ or 4++ were trying to intercept an F35 or any Stealth aircraft they had a rough position on they would not go up to intercept in a tight formation. They would fly WIDE and if possible approach from different angles. That was the point.

My point was that when experienced pilots ran both Red and Blue using simulators (not computer based sims) then RED did not stand a chance.

Proper tactics and SA is more important than raw performance.

In your scenario F-35s would not likely fly towards a target covered by "anti-stealth" radar and backed up by 4.5+ gen fighters without having a plan to deal with those two issues.

[1st503rdsgt]

...the scenario at the time assumed the enemy would know roughly where the F35's were...

Not good enough; and once again, the rest of your post is still an outdated, armchair ramble. I don't really care if you sometimes played 'army' out in the woods.

[wrightwing]

SpudmanWP Red air still lost more that 6:1etc.

What has that got to do with intercepting F35's with 4+ aircraft. No mention was made of who would win.
There are millions of "what if scenarios" that could happen and "what if's".
The simple point is if late Flankers or any 4+ or 4++ were trying to intercept an F35 or any Stealth aircraft they had a rough position on they would not go up to intercept in a tight formation. They would fly WIDE and if possible approach from different angles. That was the point.

And the F-35s would also utilize formations, that maximized their advantages.

[spazsinbad]

'wrightwing' said: "And the F-35s would also utilize formations, that maximized their advantages." Just on your point (agree) did you note that MADL was tested successfully recently? See the latest LM Fast Facts [ http://f-35.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/ ... 5-2012.pdf ]

"On August 1, the first air-to-air MADL exchange between two F-35s was performed between AF-3 and AF-6."

[count_to_10]

rkap, you are talking about situations were any CAS is basically useless. If the F-35 can't see something at several miles range, no other aircraft is going to see it at close range.

[velocityvector]

rkap, you are talking about situations were any CAS is basically useless. If the F-35 can't see something at several miles range, no other aircraft is going to see it at close range.

Respectfully, that is simplistic. A loitering, relatively stationary, system should enjoy greater probability detecting the enemy given dwell-time opportunities. A fast-mover dependent on a single human pilot aboard, even with F-35 surveillance capabilities, may be at a distinct disadvantage in discovering a well-concealed enemy vice other platforms. Now if you can get a flight of F-35 wagon training over a suspected target and sharing information possibly with slower systems involved, well, that could be better. It all depends.

[popcorn]

In this engagement, 5 pairs of UK-issue Mk-1 eyeballs (3 onthe Lynx and 2 on the Gazelle) were nearly at a loss to locate and neutralize a single Iraqi T-55 that was very happily taking potshots at the former, despite flying low and slow. It's a 5-part series for those interested.

[youtube] http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=gVWprfX7 ... VWprfX7XHM[/youtube]

[wrightwing]

The F-35s IR sensors may not detect targets, if the moisture content obscures signatures, but its SAR/GMTI should be able to see them. If one of these obscured weapon systems opens fire, then the EODAS will see that, and then all other F-35s in the area, will know the location.

[popcorn]

The F-35s IR sensors may not detect targets, if the moisture content obscures signatures, but its SAR/GMTI should be able to see them. If one of these obscured weapon systems opens fire, then the EODAS will see that, and then all other F-35s in the area, will know the location.

Hopefully JAGM gets built offering another fire-and-forget option to the F-35's quiver. Brimstone and SPEAR are slated,for the UK jets eventually. It must have seemed like an eternity to the Lynx crew having to hover vulnerably while waiting for their TOW to reach it's target.

[maus92]

In this engagement, 5 pairs of UK-issue Mk-1 eyeballs (3 onthe Lynx and 2 on the Gazelle) were nearly at a loss to locate and neutralize a single Iraqi T-55 that was very happily taking potshots at the former, despite flying low and slow. It's a 5-part series for those interested.

[youtube] http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=gVWprfX7 ... VWprfX7XHM[/youtube]

Maybe if they were flying Longbow Apaches, it would have been a different story. Their FCR share targeting data interflight, and with other nodes.

[avon1944]

I have often wondered why the design hasn't been frozen and each variant be pursued independently. The F/A 18 program eventually was stopped in the conversion of the F/A-18A-D to the F/A-18E/F. Gawd, even congress got the message to forget the commonality. So now we have the F/A-18A/D that has only 35% commonality with F/A-18E/F! The unit price for F/A-18E/F, is about the same as the current F-35s, or euro-fighters. As long as commonality is enforced on the program will escalate in development and in cost.

[maus92]

I have often wondered why the design hasn't been frozen and each variant be pursued independently. The F/A 18 program eventually was stopped in the conversion of the F/A-18A-D to the F/A-18E/F. Gawd, even congress got the message to forget the commonality. So now we have the F/A-18A/D that has only 35% commonality with F/A-18E/F! The unit price for F/A-18E/F, is about the same as the current F-35s, or euro-fighters. As long as commonality is enforced on the program will escalate in development and in cost.

Super Hornets are substantially cheaper than twin engine eurofighters, and (much) less than F-35s will be for several more years, possibly more.

[SpudmanWP]

That's not a fair comparison since F-35 is still in LRIP.

The F-18 (any version) is also much less capable in terms of range, weapons, survivability, and avionics when compared to the F-35.