Report of F35A vs F16Cblk40 goes public

[PR3D4TOR]

I remember a *LOT* of negative rhetoric when the F-15 was first announced ..s'kinda funny in that it used all the same words .. overpriced, not as good as <insert any other fighter in the world here> ..ad infinitum.

Right on. And the F-16 too. People never learn and the fifth columnists in the media can just rinse and repeat the same old rhetoric.

[PR3D4TOR]

In other news, the first F-35 squadron is operational:

http://www.jdnews.com/article/20150802/NEWS/150809902

[CavPuke]

Right on. And the F-16 too. People never learn and the fifth columnists in the media can just rinse and repeat the same old rhetoric.

Again a very poor attempt to obfuscate the matter at hand and attack the integrity of the critics instead of the points the critics make. I would imagine that the Secretary of the Air Force would be surprised to be categorized as a "Fifth Columnist".

Greyeagle a good read on the F-15 and F-16 programs and their proponents and opponents is a PHD dissertation by Marshall Micheal III at https://etd.auburn.edu/bitstream/handle/10415/595/MICHEL_III_55.pdf
Pred I'm quite sure you won't want to read the treatise because of it's possible Fifth Columnist origins.

[PR3D4TOR]

The Secretary of the Air Force is not a fifth columnist () as she did not write that diatribe. She was quoted out of context to support the writer's rhetoric.

[PR3D4TOR]

The road to USMC  Initial Operational Capability:



I find myself agreeing with one of the youtube posters: "It is so hilarious that now the F-35s are going into service and doing just fine and passed all the testing. Proven it is ready for combat service. That those that are ignorant, fear or hate this craft still slam and make false claims. They are like rats on a sinking ship and soon they to will be drowned by their own false claims,hate or ignorance. Now they will have to join the flat earth idiots so they can have something stupid to rant about. To that nut still worried about F-22, well kid there are still here and in service."

[Grayeagle]

Cavpuke dood .. I was workin the flightline as a USAF ECM troop when we got news of the Bacaa Valley air war.
Up till then all we heard in the 'media' were negative waves about the F-16 and F-15.
Lotta hype about how superior the Migs were.
After Bacaa Valley .. well .. I cannot imagine how empty those Syrian flightlines were at the end of that day.

I remember a lot of hype about the Mig 25 that went Mach 3 over Libya or some such.
Then that guy defected and flew his Mig 25 into Japan.. and it came to light that perhaps
the Mig 25 was a bit different than the West thought it was.
Like ..heavier .. for one.
And it burnt to a shell to do that Mach 3 run, basically chucking out the compressor blades and converting itself to a ramjet ..
..throttle control was not an option at that point .. among other things.
Turned out an F-4 could out turn that beast.. even.

Just sayin . . media has always seemed to be 99 percent BS .. combat invariably shows what is what,
opinions and papers fall by the wayside.

The thing that bugs me is .. the powers that be seem to be pushing for missile boats and canning the whole dogfight genre, again.
Every time we get our tits in a wringer, a fighter with a gun is required. Every Time.
I hope the F22 has a long .. long .. lifespan.

In my humble opinion ..the F-22 will probably be the last human piloted air superiority fighter.
Same with the F-35 as a strike fighter.
AI / human guided RPV's can do it better ..already proven in the F4 era and they have gotten better exponentially.
-just sayin

-GE (I could be wrong .. wouldn't be the first time

[PR3D4TOR]

Grayeagle, the last time a U.S. fighter shot down an aircraft using a gun was probably during the Vietnam War. I know the Israelis have done it, but that's mostly for the sheits and giggles (very prestigious among IAF pilots). I also know an A-10 blasted a Iraqi helicopter during GW1, but that's not a fighter. Getting rid of the gun before the missiles were combat proven was clearly a mistake, but these days it is mostly an air to mud weapon. That said the F-35A does have an internal gun, and a better one than the legacy jets it replaces. The other two can bring one along in a pod.

[eagl]

Before the Vietnam war proved that they still needed a gun, everyone was saying "the last time anyone shot down a fighter with guns was in the Korean war, using *primitive* second generation jet fighters". 

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The day guns aren't necessary in an air superiority fighter is the same day a Navy SEAL doesn't need to include a knife in his kit.  When was the last time a Navy SEAL had to take someone on one-on-one with nothing but his knife?  The answer is that it doesn't freaking matter because they're gonna carry a knife (or two or three) when they go out, because they might need it and its worth carrying the extra weight.

Plus, strafe.  Everyone thought the F-15E was too expensive to risk strafing, yet they employed the gun A/G a LOT when lives were on the line and the gun was the right weapon.  At some point the price of an F-35 or F-22 will be measured up against the value of some troops in contact, and then they'll put their nose down and brrrrt like every fighter before them has done.

Heck, when I was at Lakenheath we even tried teaching the F-15C drivers how to strafe with their fixed A/A reticle.  It didn't work too well because the up-canted gun plays hell with strafe ballistics, but it was important enough that a bunch of smart pilots gave it a shot.

[PR3D4TOR]

Like I said, mostly air to mud these days. And no air to air kills for some forty years or so.

[PR3D4TOR]

Found it! The newsies went ballistic over this back in the 70s.






In other news, Lockheed receives $431M to support F-35 production ramp up...

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lockheed-receives-431m-to-support-f-35-production-ramp-up-415435/

[Gman]

Ol' Predator will like this - The F35A has officially joined the 62nd Fighter Squadron.

I have a feeling, unlike the F22, that they will get F35's, completely ready or not, into combat missions sooner or later, in order to sway support towards the program and all that.

[PR3D4TOR]

They would first have to reach IOC. So far only the Marines are ready for limited operations.

In other news:

Rockwell Collins delivers first Gen 3 helmet for F-35

http://www.janes.com/article/53587/rockwell-collins-delivers-first-gen-3-helmet-for-f-35

[PR3D4TOR]

Even the Vietnamese know how cool this jet is... Beaucoup dien cai dau man!

[PR3D4TOR]

"At the end of the day, history books will not remember that the F-35 was a little bit late, that there's maybe some dysfunction out there in the different zip codes in and around this town, all the history books will care about is were we ... ready to go on game day. Yes or no, that's all they're going to care about." -Lt. Gen. Jon Davis

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/history-books-will-only-care-if-f-35-works-officials-say/article/2570070

[caldera]

Grayeagle, the last time a U.S. fighter shot down an aircraft using a gun was probably during the Vietnam War. I know the Israelis have done it, but that's mostly for the sheits and giggles (very prestigious among IAF pilots). I also know an A-10 blasted a Iraqi helicopter during GW1, but that's not a fighter. Getting rid of the gun before the missiles were combat proven was clearly a mistake, but these days it is mostly an air to mud weapon. That said the F-35A does have an internal gun, and a better one than the legacy jets it replaces. The other two can bring one along in a pod.

Nope.  It was in 1980 when an F-14 shot down a Zero. 

Never mind.  That was in 1941.