Israel Pays for Additional F-35s

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1168
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post14 Apr 2018, 17:15

viper12 wrote:
ricnunes wrote:while the last submarine of this same class (the 6th) cost $1 Million USD:
https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,734 ... 89,00.html


$1 Billion USD, with a B. :mrgreen:


Oops! Thanks Viper for the correction :thumb:

Edited my previous post to correct this.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1168
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post14 Apr 2018, 17:18

element1loop wrote:
ricnunes wrote:But the problem here is that these solutions seems to be more expensive than a cruise missile launched from a F-35. Let's look for example... // --> down the rabbit hole ...


omg :doh: :roll:

Have you not heard of a truck? And yes, IDF cruise missiles can currently be launched from trucks (or from a drone, if they wanted to).

scheeesh


Omg, have heard about range??

Good luck reaching farther targets such as Iran with cruise missiles fired from trucks :doh:
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 569
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post14 Apr 2018, 23:22

Have you heard of boosters and drones?

IDF's been able to hit Iran for at least 20 years if they really needed to (but to sustain the strawman about subs and SLCMs, i.e. to avoid the point, bring up Iran to move the goal post and make new strawman---will Pakistan be the next "range" goal post?).

As someone already pointed out you can toss large ALCMs (with a booster) out of a C-130 for long-range high tempo attack, with high repeatable numbers. Some people even put them on container ships---the cargo charges must be outrageous.

But no, TLAMs from a fleet of BIG nuke subs make more sense to you--nonsense.

The Israeli guy's whole point was to use a CHEAPER means to employ precision standoff, in higher (i.e. "critical mass") numbers fast, in 20 years time. So instead, you immediately go to the most expensive delivery platform in existence for a very limited standoff capability with very slow reload salvo times that are measured in weeks.

i.e. precisely the opposite of what he was talking about.

Seems a bit disingenuous. :doh: :roll:
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial-Dist = LIFE
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1168
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post16 Apr 2018, 02:08

@element1loop,

Please go an re-read my previous posts AGAIN!
For example, you failed to realise the disadvantages that I (and others) said about drones - They are not nearly as survivable as F-35s. And I would even add another disadvantage to drones: In order have a drone capable of carrying long range cruise missiles you'll need a much larger and therefore more expensive drones than the "cheap" ones that are often mentioned.

You also failed to realise one of the points of one of my previous post:
- Those "large ALCMs" by themselves (and as such EXCLUDING the launch platform!) are more expensive than the combination of a long range weapon employed by the F-35 such as the JSM plus the F-35's CPFH needed to release such long range weapon (JSM or other similar weapons).


But no, TLAMs from a fleet of BIG nuke subs make more sense to you--nonsense.


Who mentioned nuclear subs here?? Really?? :roll:
First, Israel doesn't have nuclear subs! The most advanced Israeli sub class is the Dolphin-Class which are CONVENTIONAL submarines and these submarines have capability to employ a weapons similar to the TLAM with either conventional or even nuclear warhead, one of such weapons is a modified version of the Popeye air launched missile, the Popeye Turbo SLCM which the Israelis developed because the Americans refused to sell them TLAMs in the past.
Besides, those Dolphin-Class subs are not that "big".

Also and apparently from what I've read, the combination of subs and SLCMs are seen as one of the most important deterrence means by Israel against Iran.

So before you accuse others of posting nonsense perhaps you could actually learn some reading skills, not to mention to learn "politeness skills" as well... :roll:


The Israeli guy's whole point was to use a CHEAPER means to employ precision standoff, in higher (i.e. "critical mass") numbers fast, in 20 years time. So instead, you immediately go to the most expensive delivery platform in existence for a very limited standoff capability with very slow reload salvo times that are measured in weeks.


And again if you actually read others posts you'll see that:
1- There's no actual or hardly a CHEAPER mean to deliver long range weapons than a F-35 (my main point in previous posts). So I clearly disagree with that "Israeli guy".
2- Others such as michaelemouse mentioned another very important point: Those "other means" are also very limited in terms of effectiveness when used against targets that can either move and/or relocate with ease. And again they are NOT cheaper!
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 569
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post16 Apr 2018, 04:36

ricnunes wrote:Please go an re-read my previous posts AGAIN!!


Not a chance am I wasting my time reading your gibberish again, if you can't comprehend that trucks are cheaper than subs you're not going to be taken seriously.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial-Dist = LIFE
Offline

michaelemouse

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 31
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2017, 10:29

Unread post16 Apr 2018, 16:15

The F-35, without pylons (and you wouldn't use pylons on a stealth aircraft when taking on an IADS) can carry 2 air-to-air missiles and 2 2000lbs air-to-ground munitions in its internal weapons bay. That really isn't much which suggests that the F-35 isn't being considered by Israel mainly as a shooting platform but as an ISR with the stealth, agility and speed to be survivable. Related to what I said earlier, the main bottleneck in modern war is often not one of payload, range or speed but of spotting, identifying and guiding.

Element1loop, you seem to be of the opinion that drones with equivalent C4ISTAR capabilities can have a better survivability/cost ratio than the F-35. I don't know of any drone which has that and I'd like to find out more about them. Could you provide some links?
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7356
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post16 Apr 2018, 16:21

Block 3F has 8 internal SDBs (40-60nm depending on altitude & speed of release). Everything delivered since last Aug/Sep is Block 3F.

Block 4 brings Spear3 and SDB2
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1168
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post16 Apr 2018, 22:24

element1loop wrote:
ricnunes wrote:Please go an re-read my previous posts AGAIN!!


Not a chance am I wasting my time reading your gibberish again, if you can't comprehend that trucks are cheaper than subs you're not going to be taken seriously.


Jesus, where did I say that trucks are not cheaper than submarines?? :bang:

What I said is that one of those long range truck launched missiles is more expensive than one of the long range weapons of the F-35 (I mentioned JSM but there are also other options) plus the operational F-35 cost to launch that same weapon.
I'm sorry to hear that your I.Q. and learning skills aren't enough to comprehend this and as such you should not accuse others of "gibberish" when the problem/limitation is on your side. :roll:

Anyway, I feel that you're lost case and as such it's useless to continue this conversation (or any other conversation) with you...
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1168
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post16 Apr 2018, 22:32

SpudmanWP wrote:Block 3F has 8 internal SDBs (40-60nm depending on altitude & speed of release). Everything delivered since last Aug/Sep is Block 3F.

Block 4 brings Spear3 and SDB2


Absolutely!

A F-35 carrying 8 (eight) SDBs (SDBI now and SDBII soon) plus 2 AMRAAMs can deliver quite a punch at a respectable range while maintaining its Stealth.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 4033
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post17 Apr 2018, 05:20

michaelemouse wrote:The F-35, without pylons (and you wouldn't use pylons on a stealth aircraft when taking on an IADS) can carry 2 air-to-air missiles and 2 2000lbs air-to-ground munitions in its internal weapons bay. That really isn't much which suggests that the F-35 isn't being considered by Israel mainly as a shooting platform but as an ISR with the stealth, agility and speed to be survivable. Related to what I said earlier, the main bottleneck in modern war is often not one of payload, range or speed but of spotting, identifying and guiding.

Element1loop, you seem to be of the opinion that drones with equivalent C4ISTAR capabilities can have a better survivability/cost ratio than the F-35. I don't know of any drone which has that and I'd like to find out more about them. Could you provide some links?


Sorry, a typical external load for most 4th Generation Fighters like the Viper is ~ 4,000 - 5,000 lbs. Which, is same as the F-35A/C. (not counting external fuel tanks, targeting pods, and/or Jammers) :doh:

F16A.jpg



F16B.jpg
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 4033
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post17 Apr 2018, 05:44

Here's a common site for a Rafale with 6 AASM Hammers....(550 lbs each) plus four Air to Air Missiles.


Rafale.jpg



The innermost pylons always carry external fuel on a 4/4.5 Generation Fighter. While, the center wing plyons carry nothing more than a single 2,000 lbs class weapon or 2-3 smaller Weapon of 2,000 lbs or less. This Rafale shows the options available. Yet, you won't see most missions with a bomb load more than 4,000 - 5,000 lbs max. As they couldn't carry external fuel if the did.... :shock:


RAFALE1A.jpg
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1989
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post17 Apr 2018, 08:45

“Interesting little clash of views re merits and real effects of F-35A.”

“Yeah, and the debate isn’t about drones — it’s about F-15s, which are even more expensive than F-35.”

“No, not really.”

Yes, really.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2300
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post17 Apr 2018, 09:09

michaelemouse wrote:The F-35, without pylons (and you wouldn't use pylons on a stealth aircraft when taking on an IADS) can carry 2 air-to-air missiles and 2 2000lbs air-to-ground munitions in its internal weapons bay. That really isn't much which suggests that the F-35 isn't being considered by Israel mainly as a shooting platform but as an ISR with the stealth, agility and speed to be survivable. Related to what I said earlier, the main bottleneck in modern war is often not one of payload, range or speed but of spotting, identifying and guiding.


True when talking about single F-35, but with F-35 there are so many options available. Let's say we have 20 F-35s for a mission to take out some high value targets.

Full stealth aircraft to take out toughest targets
4 with 2 AMRAAMs and 2 JDAM/JSOW/LGB/JSM/etc. = 8 AMRAAMs and 8 large weapons
4 with 2 AMRAAMs and 8 SDB/Spear/other small weapon = 8 AMRAAMs and 32 SDB/Spear

Follow-on hard hitters (Of course these could also be something like F-15E/I):
4 with 2 AMRAAMs, 2 AIM-9X and 4-6 JDAM/JSOW/LGB/JSM/etc. = 8 AMRAAMs, 8 AIM-9X and 16-24 large weapons
4 with 2 AMRAAMs, 2 AIM-9X and say 16 SDB/Spear/other small weapon = 8 AMRAAMs, 8 AIM-9X and 64 SDB/Spear

Air-to-air cover with near full stealth:
4 with 4/6 internal AMRAAM and 2 AIM-9X/ASRAAM = 16/24 AMRAAM and 8 AIM-9X/ASRAAM

Total of 48-64 AMRAAMs, 32 AIM-9X/ASRAAM, 24-32 JDAM/JSOW, 96 SDB/Spear class weapons

That would be really overwhelming force against pretty much any current or near future enemy target and defences. F-35s would act as ISR platform, stealth bomber, heavy interdictor, air superiority platform and EW platform in a single mission. All this could be done with Israeli F-35s without outside help.

I agree that spotting, identifying and guiding weapons is the biggest bottleneck with current platforms and F-35 changing all that due to stealth and SA allowing it to go close to targets and use great sensor system to identify and guide weapons to their targets.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 4033
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post17 Apr 2018, 10:17

Even the F-15E Strike Eagle isn't going to match the F-35A/C on Payload vs Range. Something you never hear the critics discuss!

Wonder why..... :wink:
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 4033
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post17 Apr 2018, 10:21

quicksilver wrote:“Interesting little clash of views re merits and real effects of F-35A.”

“Yeah, and the debate isn’t about drones — it’s about F-15s, which are even more expensive than F-35.”

“No, not really.”

Yes, really.



Your not going to buy any version of the Strike Eagle cheaper than the F-35A. Which, is why this whole idea of Israel acquiring more F-15's over F-35's is "ABSURD". :shock:
Previous

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: johnwill and 11 guests