Report of F35A vs F16Cblk40 goes public

[artik]

Now THIS is a simpit!

Wow... this guys play AH3  (see at 1:01)

You know guys...

I think this weapon set looks much better:


(Credit: http://theaviationist.com/2015/08/19/infographic-russia-pak-fa-armament/)

It is stealthy, has more armament in A2A and A2G stealthy modes, most likely cost less or same as F-35 and super maneuverable...

 

 

[PR3D4TOR]

It's a POS and Putin knows it. He's cutting production to almost nothing, and is withholding vital information from his production partners in India.

[Squire]

I get what your saying re that capability yes. Personally I think the F-22 should have continued production until it could entirely replace the F-15. Its certainly a very capable air to air fighter from what I know of it. There were only 195 built however.

...It would have made more sense to produce 3 aircraft: one an air superiority fighter with some a-g capability and then a dedicated multi-role fighter-bomber to do strike and then a dedicated CAS a/c. Trying to do all 3 in one airframe and then on top of that requiring it to be V/STOL and Stealthy was over reach. I oppose the notion that you need CAS aircraft that are super complex and expensive. That role should be done by a large # of less expensive yet capable airframes that can be afforded in some quantity. A-10, MB-339, Alpha Jet, Hawk 200s are examples of that...I am sure a new and better plane could have been produced those are just rough examples. The notion that a CAS airframe needs to be supersonic capable and Stealthy is insane imho. You can't afford to lose any and they are not well suited for the role.

I am going to add that the V/STOL is an almost completely useless capability for a modern jet aircraft. Not once since the Harrier came into service has it ever taken off vertically from some rough forward base to provide CAS to anybody. Its a gimmick that has no use in a real war and it was a huge mistake to require the F-35 to be able to perform it. The Assault Ships should be equipped with helos only and use the Carriers for cover which is what would happen anyways and the USAF/USN and no other air force has any use for V/STOL at all.  I like the AV-8B its a fine strike a/c but its replacement does not need a vertical takeoff or landing capability. Not for the handful that would be deployed at sea on assault ships.

[rpm]

At least it's got guns.

[Ripsnort]

artik, this is the true definition of an AH, AH2, AH3 player right there at 1:19 into the vid. They got their "slouch chair" on!

[Lab Rat 3947]

wrong thread

[PR3D4TOR]

 

[Rich46yo]

War is Boring cant seem to make up its mind. https://medium.com/war-is-boring/don-t-think-the-f-35-can-fight-it-does-in-this-realistic-war-game-fc10706ba9f4

[Zimme83]

Such simulation is only as good as the data u put into it. I doubt that anyone can get enough accurate data from both the F-35 program, the Su-35 and the weapons and support systems to make the simulation accurate. I would not draw any conclusions from that article.

[Gman]

War is Boring cant seem to make up its mind.

Agreed - a while ago they ran an article which said "China can defeat the Americans in Battle", followed shortly by another titled "China's military is a paper dragon".   Uh...ok.

I wonder why articles based on a video game, Command/Naval-air ops, basically a Harpoon analogue, are being published in a manner which is meant to suggest they can be at all accurate?  Even simulations run by the defense department and think tanks are taken with large grains of salt due to their limitations, but using a video game, and writing articles pontificating about the results?  Lame.  It's not the first time WiB has pulled this stunt either, they did the same thing with Command/Ops, writing an article about how the Chinese Navy could defeat the USN in the South China Sea, all based on the results from the game - which was being played by a pretty noobish player/writer to start with, not that this fact makes any difference regarding the legitimacy of info and data gleaned from a PC game which is then applied to real world combat discussions.

I did like one line one of WiB's writers came up with - "Is information the new 9g?". I think that really sums up the F35 debate pretty well. 

[Mitchell]

http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/08/f-35-loses-dogfight-to-red-baron/

Lol. In all seriousness, I wonder what they will say when it losses its head to head with the A-10 in a year or 2?

[Gman]

More stuff Predator will love.  Seems like it just isn't ready yet, not so much that it's going to be total crap, just many, many years behind where it's supposed to be, and that NO variant is ANYWHERE near being combat ready right now.  Pretty horrifying results that are impossible to refute so far as current combat readiness, and these tests had HUGE benefits in favor of the F35, tons of extra contractors on scene, V22s chopped to a mission of standy only for parts for the F35s, extra contractors at every base in the excersice/test, and so, piles of extra support that will NOT be around in a true combat environment.  Yet it still fell right on its face.  Brutal.

http://www.pogo.org/our-work/straus-military-reform-project/weapons/2015/pentagon-testing-office-calls-foul.html?referrer=http://t.co/q47smXsCvI

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/not-a-big-suprise-the-marines-f-35-operational-test-wa-1730583428

http://warisboring.com/articles/we-have-proof-the-u-s-air-force-watered-down-the-f-35-to-avoid-embarrassment/