Forum: General F-35 Forum

I find low band and lock fleeting in the same breath.

F-16.net Sponsor

madrat wrote:

I find low band and lock fleeting in the same breath.

What?

The low-band radar doesn't have the same detection resolution, but a downed F-117 proves that its possible to lock onto a target.

If you use the Low Band radar to vector in interceptors, ones running silent and with IRST equipment, that would give you a pretty good air defense network.

I didn't expect the CNO to outright admit that he doesn't like the F-35, but it is noteworthy that his article and his press release are so at odds.

'arkadyrenko' "noteworthy" in your and other 'bloggers/so called news reporters but really commentators' fervid collective imaginations.

arkadyrenko wrote:

If you use the Low Band radar to vector in interceptors, ones running silent and with IRST equipment, that would give you a pretty good air defense network.

I didn't expect the CNO to outright admit that he doesn't like the F-35, but it is noteworthy that his article and his press release are so at odds.

I'm not sure the two are at odds. I think the CNO was pointing out that stealthy aircraft aren't an end unto themselves. Moreover, I don't think we want to go down the path of ever more hyper-ultra sophisticated bleeding edge aircraft. They now take decades to develop and field and it's not affordable or time & cost effective.

His point was the aircraft is a platform for achieving our goal, whether it is weapon delivery or recon or whatever. The aircraft isn't the goal. There may be far more quickly developed and fielded methods for achieving those same goals, such as UAV's and smarter weapons. His points are valid. Idea

Come on, could anyone honestly interpret his comments otherwise? There are 3 stealth programs in the US Navy.

1) Is a pure technology demonstrator: N-UCAS
2) Is almost a pure technology demonstrator: DDG-1000
3) Is a budget killer, as admitted by previously leaked Navy documents.

No bonus points for identifying the 3rd program.

Odds are, the Navy won't make a definite move one way or another until sequestration happens / doesn't happen. The CNO's article is noteworthy, because it shows that a 2nd route exists for strike instead of using F-35C. If sequestration happens, the Navy may go for the F-35C as the easiest leg to cut in order to meet the budget demands.

'arkadyrenko' u can make predictions all day and interpret the words of others all you wish. We will see. However the CNO did clarify what he was saying due to the misinterpretation by some. Deal with it.

The CNO's article intentionally allowed misinterpretation. He talked about the expense of building new platforms, especially stealth platforms. And now his spokesman comes out and says that he wasn't referencing the F-35. That may be true, but it is an awfully indirect method of saying it. He could have prefaced the article with a statement like: for future programs, we should consider. Or other words to that effect. I don't remember him saying anything along those lines.

We have already seen articles accusing the Navy of unfaithfulness to the F-35, and then the Navy comes out and states that it is true to the program. And yet those rumors persist, supported by sentiments such as were expressed in the CNO's article,

As I sated above, I think that the Navy is waiting to see for sequestration. I have already suggested that the F-35C is at best the 3rd highest priority for the Navy. Right now, no one in the Pentagon will go against the F-35, because it is sacrosanct. A suggestion that I read from another Navy commentator is that the Navy will reduce its F-35 buy even further, going down to 1 squadron per carrier. But, whatever happens will happen after the sequestration problem is settled.

'arkadyrenko' claims: "The CNO's article intentionally allowed misinterpretation...." 'There you go again' in the ineffable/laconic words of 'Ronnie Raygun'. Very Happy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_you_go_again

The F-35 is basically done, and will give the USN a significant capability it didn't have before at a reasonable price. The CNO's article mostly seems to be warning the navy not to get too involved with a F/A-XX program that ends up being more expensive than it's worth.

Forum: General F-35 Forum

Spokesman reaffirms CNO’s faith in F-35