4 F-35Bs take out 9 attackers

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

charlielima223

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1186
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post02 Aug 2015, 11:12

popcorn wrote:@geogen
The General made some deliberately general statements, lacking in specifics to describe the various training scenarios, for obvious reasons. Somehow you've managed to weave your own version of things, making all sorts of assumptions on alternative specific platform/sensors/weapons combinations that somehow make sense to you And based purely on your speculations, you imply he is unprofessional and should be investigated for possible OPSEC breach for leaking vital national security information?
So how is the General responsible for what goes on inside your head?
Saying "with all due respect to the general in charge" to start off your post doesn't excuse your little witch hunt.


Image
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24283
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post02 Aug 2015, 15:54

Over on previous page there is a note to another note about MADL [ viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27640&p=297291&hilit=Butler#p297291 ] - so here is anotherie...
Northrop Grumman-Developed Stealthy Data Link Validated as Combat Ready with US Marine Corps
31 Jul 2015 Janis Lamar NG PR

"SAN DIEGO – July 31, 2015 – With the U.S. Marine Corps achieving F-35B initial operating capability (IOC), the Multifunction Advanced Data Link (MADL) waveform developed by Northrop Grumman Corporation has been proven a key combat-ready capability of the F-35 Lightning II program.

MADL is a high-data-rate, directional communications link that allows fifth-generation aircraft to communicate and coordinate tactics covertly. During testing of the Lockheed Martin F-35, MADL exceeded 1,000 flight hours.

The Marine Corps declared the F-35B short takeoff and vertical-landing (STOVL) aircraft and the first squadron – Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121 (VMFA-121), known as the Green Knights – officially operational July 31. VMFA-121, based at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Arizona, is equipped with 10 aircraft.

"Northrop Grumman congratulates the Marine Corps on their achievement of this momentous F-35 milestone," said Jeannie Hilger, vice president and general manager, communications division, Northrop Grumman Information Systems "The successful completion of IOC also validates Northrop Grumman's more than 10-year effort to advance communication among fifth-generation aircraft."

MADL is part of Northrop Grumman's F-35 integrated communications, navigation and identification (CNI) avionics and an important element of the F-35 Block 2 software release. Northrop Grumman has delivered 181 CNI systems to Lockheed Martin, the F-35 prime contractor.

Since August 2012, MADL has been used continuously to support a variety of developmental and operational objectives during testing at Edwards Air Force Base, California. Block 2B MADL testing culminated with four F-35s demonstrating that data passed among the aircraft via MADL could be correlated with data from other F-35 sensors and fused to form a unified situational awareness picture on cockpit displays. [So the problem is not with MADL but software]

"In addition to fifth-to-fifth, Northrop Grumman's CNI system also provides a core capability for fifth-to-fourth generation networked data sharing and unparalleled interoperability," Hilger said, citing a series of operational flight tests under the Jetpack Joint Capability Technology Demonstration program.

As part of the Jetpack JCTD program, Northrop Grumman developed the Freedom 550™ software-defined radio that bridges fifth-to-fourth generation platform interoperability gaps. Jetpack JCTD, which concluded in 2014, was sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), U.S. Air Force Air Combat Command, Pacific Command and OSD's Defense Microelectronics Activity.

Northrop Grumman's integrated CNI system provides to F-35 pilots the equivalent capability of over 27 avionics subsystems. By using its industry-leading software-defined radio technology, Northrop Grumman's design allows the simultaneous operation of multiple critical functions while greatly reducing size, weight and power demands on the advanced fighter. These functions include Identification Friend or Foe, automatic acquisition of fly-to points, and various voice and data communications, including MADL, which was approved by the U.S. Department of Defense Joint Requirements Oversight Council for use on all low-observable platforms...."

Source: http://www.globenewswire.com/newsarchiv ... d=10144140
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24283
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post04 Aug 2015, 16:18

I have raged a lot about the lack of editing skills at SLDinfo - wade through the misspellings and longeurs there but it is a chore to extract sense from a lot of their drivel. For gorssake get an editor - Majumdar seems to need a job - get him.
CNI and MADL Data Link also IOCd [WUT?] Along with F-35B
03 Aug 2015 SLDinfo

Source: http://www.sldinfo.com/cni-and-madl-dat ... ith-f-35b/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1380
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post14 Oct 2015, 23:35

It should be noted too that it didn't occur during OT-1, it occurred during the ORI.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24283
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post15 Oct 2015, 09:11

The detail (whatever it may be AFAIK not much) will be found when searching the F-35 Forum for 'Readiness' for example.
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

kukemaim

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 60
  • Joined: 04 Sep 2015, 12:57

Unread post15 Oct 2015, 13:17

oldiaf wrote:Anyone hear about 4 F-35B defeating 9 F-16s and AV-8B in real life scenario mock fight during Marine OT-1 ?

Everyone raise their hands who's surprised by this outcome
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6370
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post15 Oct 2015, 16:27

kukemaim wrote:
oldiaf wrote:Anyone hear about 4 F-35B defeating 9 F-16s and AV-8B in real life scenario mock fight during Marine OT-1 ?

Everyone raise their hands who's surprised by this outcome



Pierre Sprey?
Choose Crews
Offline

vanshilar

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 403
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2015, 11:23

Unread post16 Oct 2015, 11:33

kukemaim wrote:
oldiaf wrote:Anyone hear about 4 F-35B defeating 9 F-16s and AV-8B in real life scenario mock fight during Marine OT-1 ?

Everyone raise their hands who's surprised by this outcome


I want to be snarky and say that the DOT&E will probably release a statement saying "this doesn't count because it wasn't operationally representative since the adversary pilots weren't speaking in Russian."
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2331
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post16 Oct 2015, 13:03

Not surprised by the outcome at all, this was what the F-35 was built for, 2nd only to the Raptor in A-A was the requirement for the JSF program.

However like all DACT engagements, the question remains, What were the ROEs? the F-35 is no exception.
Offline

bring_it_on

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 973
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014, 14:32

Unread post16 Oct 2015, 16:44

I don't know you so how can I or Scott claim to not like you? Your actions however, with a gazillion threads (you are not the only one, there is at least one another member who is also doing this) for every question that a simply 5 minute search on this website can do - is littering the thread and is borderline trolling that requires some moderating. Such utter disregard for basic courtesy (searching on a topic for a few minutes prior to starting a discussion) is going to bring strong reactions from those that are trying to engage in a decent discussion.
Offline
User avatar

zerion

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 676
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2014, 01:47
  • Location: Everywhere like such as...

Unread post19 Jul 2016, 17:37

35 Very ‘Raptorish,’ Adversary Pilot Says

By RICHARD R. BURGESS, Managing Editor

ARLINGTON, Va. — An experienced fighter pilot who has flown in mock combat against the Marine Corps’ F-35B Lightning II strike fighter has described the F-35’s performance as similar to that of the Air Force’s F-22A Raptor air superiority fighter.

“I was just flying at Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort [S.C.] about three weeks ago against the F-35s,” said Jeff Parker, a former Air Force fighter pilot and now chief executive officer of Airborne Tactical Advantage Co. (ATAC) — a unit of Textron Airborne Solutions — that provides commercially operated adversaries, jet fighters that pose as enemy aircraft to train Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force fighter pilots. “The F-35Bs “are very ‘Raptorish’ in their training and the aircraft is a very capable airplane in the air-to-air arena.”

Parker, speaking July 18 in a teleconference with reporters, also described the challenge of providing adversary services to fifth-generation fighter aircraft like the F-22 and F-35.

“Fifth-generation aircraft have a generous appetite for bad guys — for bandits.” Parker said. “They need a lot of adversaries in order to challenge them because their systems are so spatially aware and limited only by the number of missiles that they carry. We have flown against Raptors on many occasions; they are a very impressive aircraft.”

An F-22 can carry six AIM-120 air-to-air missiles and when a section of two F-22s trains, “ideally they want 12 bandits; the minimum is eight, I believe,” he said. “The F-35 will be a little more missile-limited, but you still are going to want to max out your missile supply [and bandits to counter], because you can.”

http://www.seapowermagazine.org/stories ... 9-f35.html
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1984
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post19 Jul 2016, 18:38

Go to 08:40

Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6370
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post19 Jul 2016, 20:25

basher54321 wrote:Go to 08:40



Watched the whole thing... I thought the USAF and USMC had the joint deal and the Navy came last. He says the USAF and USN had a joint program and the USMC came last.

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

zerion

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 676
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2014, 01:47
  • Location: Everywhere like such as...

Unread post19 Jul 2016, 22:06

XanderCrews wrote:
basher54321 wrote:Go to 08:40



Watched the whole thing... I thought the USAF and USMC had the joint deal and the Navy came last. He says the USAF and USN had a joint program and the USMC came last.

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Yeah I remember hearing that awhile ago I don't recall where. I'll see if I can find it.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4785
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post19 Jul 2016, 22:41

ASTOVL was a Navy/DARPA program to replace the Harrier. It was then decided that such a plane, minus the lift system, would serve as a replacement for the Viper so the AF was brought in and the program was re-christened CALF. By the end of '94 JAST absorbed CALF to include a Hornet replacement for both the Marines and Navy. So, depending on how you want to read it, either is correct. It all seemed to start with a replacement for the Harrier though.

good reading starts here.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... astovl.htm
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests