AvWeek: Explore other options beyond F-35

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8379
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post12 Oct 2012, 17:23

F-35s will use support assets to a much lower degree than 4th gen assets.

Image
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

hb_pencil

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 870
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2011, 21:50

Unread post12 Oct 2012, 18:51

rkap wrote:
velocityvector - Respectfully, that is simplistic. A loitering, relatively stationary, system should enjoy greater probability detecting


You sum up a simple situation very well. Raised by others earlier in the forum. The Mafia as usual resort to personal attacks or go off topic or respond with complicated tactics as if everything can be planned to suit the F35.



What's really ironic about this statement is that you didn't even respond to the 1000 word, reasoned reply that discussed the issues with your claims. You ignored it, then claimed that the "mafia" resport to personal attacks when you were the first one to.

And the claim that we don't bring facts? The only piece of evidence that you brought forward was that in 2002 the AC-130 was required to end a large battle. That's it. I've raised a number of cases since then when "normal" multirole aircraft have been extremely effective at the role you claim they cannot do.

Just today I spoke to a Royal Marine who served in Helmand and Basra during some of the worst of the fighting. He was adamant about the very effective role that fast jets like the Harrier played in their operations, particularly given the very fluid and chaotic battles they faced against the Taliban. They helped identify targets, carried out numerous strikes and self assessed bomb damage. In most operations he saw the air strike basically ended the engagement or was the turning point (taliban fire petered out and they withdrew).

rkap wrote:Not much time for complicated tactics when you unexpectedly encounter enemy and you are in a situation where you could be wiped out within minutes in a real war. All theory.


Nobody denies the F35 will be excellent in in some situations but a Swiss Army Knife is no substitute for a good pair of pliers, a good wrench or a good knife at times.
It is obvious a modern A10 type platform equipped with similar IR capabilities and suitable modern defensive systems and a radar etc. that can travel slow and low and loiter with a pilot who can talk to the ground troops and see what they are seeing - an aircraft that can take a few rifle rounds without coming to grief - has a heavy cannon that can use "shock and awe" to keep the enemies heads down - can come around again or loiter has advantages in many situations.



See the thing is, the F-35 can do alot of that because it has improved sensors. EODS is able to spot a human being at 50km; does the aircraft need to fly at 2000 ft when it can do the same task at 10,000 and avoid being shot down by MANPADS?


rkap wrote: It amazes me how the F35 has in some peoples minds become the ultimate Air Superiority fighter, the ultimate attack aircraft, a mini AWAC and now the ultimate CAS machine. And pigs might fly.


Sure. I can. Its the synthesis of over 25 years of investment in fighter technology, where no other state has put in 25% of the effort. What do you expect would happen?
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3212
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post12 Oct 2012, 20:56

rkap wrote:
velocityvector - Respectfully, that is simplistic. A loitering, relatively stationary, system should enjoy greater probability detecting


You sum up a simple situation very well. Raised by others earlier in the forum. The Mafia as usual resort to personal attacks or go off topic or respond with complicated tactics as if everything can be planned to suit the F35. Not much time for complicated tactics when you unexpectedly encounter enemy and you are in a situation where you could be wiped out within minutes in a real war. All theory.


Which threat, is the F-35 going to unexpectedly run into, in the air? Tactics aren't just used, once a threat is identified. The F-35 flight will be utilizing defensive formations, the entire time that they're anywhere near threat. They won't wait, until somebody spots a Mig 28. :wink:
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3212
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post12 Oct 2012, 21:03

maus92 wrote:Extras, of course, that the F-35 will also need- like jamming pods, external fuel tanks, support aircraft like Prowlers, Growlers, tankers, AWACS....


Correction. The F-35 doesn't NEED jamming pods, and due to its longer ranges/reduced signature, can operate without additional support in far more instances.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7691
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post12 Oct 2012, 23:52

The Package Q mission over Baghdad illustrates how difficult and expensive it could be choreographing a complex air strike involving dozens of legacy assets in hostile airspace. After the raid, it was decided to leave future missions over downtown Baghdad to stealthy Nighthawks.
Offline

stereospace

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 686
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2009, 17:35
  • Location: Columbia, Maryland, USA

Unread post13 Oct 2012, 02:18

wrightwing wrote:
maus92 wrote:Extras, of course, that the F-35 will also need- like jamming pods, external fuel tanks, support aircraft like Prowlers, Growlers, tankers, AWACS....


Correction. The F-35 doesn't NEED jamming pods, and due to its longer ranges/reduced signature, can operate without additional support in far more instances.


I also was under the impression that one of the F-35's biggest selling points is that it doesn't NEED all those extras to carry out its missions. See diagrams above.
Offline

maus92

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2052
  • Joined: 21 May 2010, 17:50
  • Location: Annapolis, MD

Unread post13 Oct 2012, 02:55

stereospace wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
maus92 wrote:Extras, of course, that the F-35 will also need- like jamming pods, external fuel tanks, support aircraft like Prowlers, Growlers, tankers, AWACS....


Correction. The F-35 doesn't NEED jamming pods, and due to its longer ranges/reduced signature, can operate without additional support in far more instances.


I also was under the impression that one of the F-35's biggest selling points is that it doesn't NEED all those extras to carry out its missions. See diagrams above.


Fantasy.
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8379
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post13 Oct 2012, 03:13

Only in the mind of the APA and their acolytes.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

cola

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 559
  • Joined: 18 May 2009, 00:52

Unread post13 Oct 2012, 04:10

hb_pencil wrote:EODS is able to spot a human being at 50km;...

Any reference on this particular figure?
Cheers, Cola
Offline

munny

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 630
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2010, 01:39

Unread post13 Oct 2012, 04:54

cola wrote:
hb_pencil wrote:EODS is able to spot a human being at 50km;...

Any reference on this particular figure?


I'm sure he meant EOTS. Google BBC deadly eye in the sky and watch the video. There some 50 mile footage where a individual windows of a hotel can be seen.
Offline

Prinz_Eugn

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 957
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2008, 03:35

Unread post13 Oct 2012, 09:14

"A visitor from Mars could easily pick out the civilized nations. They have the best implements of war."
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23079
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post13 Oct 2012, 10:50

Something for the endless CAS discussions...

Airpower for Hybrid Warfare Michael W. Isherwood, June 2009

http://www.afa.org/mitchell/reports/mp3 ... e_0609.pdf (0.6Mb)

"...As this paper maintains, airpower can simultaneously contend with the spectrum of conflict—from simple low-intensity attacks to high-intensity, sophisticated uses of force against a major adversary. Within the hybrid battlespace, for example, an F-35 providing overwatch for a ground convoy could use its advanced electronically scanned array (AESA) radar as an offensive cyber weapon, direct its advanced air-to-ground surveillance radar’s ability to track insurgents moving on foot, or simultaneously detect a cruise missile. These capabilities reflect the relevance of airpower to the new warfare style...."
&
"...Fifth generation fighters such as the F-22 and F-35 can provide additional, unique capabilities to the hybrid campaign with their nonlethal attributes. These aircraft are more than “stealth” fighters—they can potentially serve as C2, ISR, and electronic attack platforms. US airpower in the early part of the 21st century will be netted—with the F-35 and F-22 serving as a key node. When not needed for lethal firepower, the sensor suite of the F-35 and F-22 can search and track a variety of surface targets while being controlled from ground locations. Information will flow via the multi-function advanced data link (MADL), which will link all stealth assets.

Once the information is received at a C2 node, such as an air operations center (AOC), it will be translated to a traditional Link 16 common data link for distribution with the rest of the force. In addition, the fighter’s AESA radar, together with AESA radars on other large body aircraft such as AWACS or Joint STARS, can map and engage a belligerent’s information networks. Collectively, electronic and cyber-attack may include support aircraft such as the EA-6B, EA-18G, and EC-130H platforms.

In short, the days of strike aircraft being fighter aircraft on station only for a strafing or bombing run are over...."
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23079
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post15 Oct 2012, 22:44

The usual suspects have a go at AvWeak editorial at beginning of this thread (and please stop the whining drivel about Thompson - thanks).

Super-Weapon: Why Have F-35 Fighter Costs Increased? 15 Oct 2012 by Loren Thompson

http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthomps ... increased/

"Nearly a decade ago, I was one of several pundits invited to discuss troubled weapon programs with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. He was concerned in particular about a new Army helicopter and Air Force fighter. It quickly became apparent that Rumsfeld knew next to nothing about either program. The one thing he did understand was their astronomical price-tags....

...You would never get any of this out of the critical editorials that Aviation Week and other outlets have published about the F-35. That isn’t because journalists and pundits are willfully distorting reality, it’s because they simply don’t understand the numbers. If they did, it would be obvious the Pentagon’s biggest weapon program is in much better shape than most commentators realize. And if we took AvWeek’s advice of searching for alternatives, we would go through the same buyer’s remorse all over again with whatever new program we embraced. It seems our system rewards misguided criticism more than accurate analysis."

ONLY beginning and ending paragraphs here so best read the article at source. TAH.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

Prinz_Eugn

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 957
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2008, 03:35

Unread post16 Oct 2012, 02:37

Loren is a shill, but that doesn't mean his points aren't valid.
"A visitor from Mars could easily pick out the civilized nations. They have the best implements of war."
Offline
User avatar

archeman

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 709
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2011, 05:37
  • Location: CA

Unread post16 Oct 2012, 02:51

rkap wrote:
velocityvector - Respectfully, that is simplistic. A loitering, relatively stationary, system should enjoy greater probability detecting


You sum up a simple situation very well. Raised by others earlier in the forum. The Mafia as usual resort to personal attacks or go off topic or respond with complicated tactics as if everything can be planned to suit the F35. .


Spaz, writewing and HBpencil,

So I guess you guys are in the MAFIA of some sort as described above.
Does that come with free drinks and big hair dames with leopard-print undies and all the rest???
If so, where do the rest of us outsiders sign up?
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests