Dogfight : F35 vs F16

[Vraciu]

See Rule #4

[Vraciu]

The F-35 is still incapable of flying any kind of combat missions, it will still take a few years until the necessary software is developed and tested..

Nevermind helmet jitter, cracking bulkheads, persistent vapor trails, and an inability to even power up if it is too hot (or cold) outside. 

Also, if you're flying the C and need to do RESCAP you may have left your gun on deck.  Oops. 

[Zimme83]

See Rule #4

[GScholz]

"Software issues" and other teething problems are not unique to the F-35, and they will be sorted out. The Department of Defense (aka the pentagon) supports the F-35 all the way. They have been critical of the procurement system and cost overruns, but that is an issue separate from the performance of the aircraft.

[Vraciu]

"Software issues" and other teething problems are not unique to the F-35, and they will be sorted out. The Department of Defense (aka the pentagon) supports the F-35 all the way. They have been critical of the procurement system and cost overruns, but that is an issue separate from the performance of the aircraft.

88 Sorties = 15 Bombs.

"Performance."

Beat by an F-16D with drop tanks on.   

"Performance."

It has no performance.   That's the point.  Even Bogdon is admitting it is a pig.  (Finally.)

But you accidentally stated a truth.  Yes, cost is a separate issue from the (issue of the lack of) performance of the aircraft. 

[Vraciu]

See Rule #4

[Zimme83]

But until they are fixed the plane isn't ready for combat..

[GScholz]

If it can fly and shoot it is ready for combat. It just hasn't reached its full potential yet.

[Vraciu]

If it can fly and shoot it is ready for combat. It just hasn't reached its full potential yet.

The Pentagon's Director of OpEval (DOT&E) said otherwise--in March.   Maybe by 2022...   The JSF Program Officer admitted as much. 

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2016/03/14/oversight-group-f-35-may-not-be-suitable-for-combat-before-2022/

[Zimme83]

See Rule #4

[Vraciu]

Quote:

A memo—which the Project on Government Oversight obtained in September—from the Pentagon’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) clearly shows that the F-35B had serious reliability issues before Dunford declared initial operational capability (IOC) on July 31. It also highlights the fact that the aircraft were not tested under realistic conditions during the F-35B’s “Operational Test One” demonstration. The seven F-35Bs onboard Wasp were “not cleared to carry or employ any ordnance.” Nor were the jets deployed with the rest of USS Wasp’s Air Combat Element (ACE) present.


http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/get-ready-islamic-state-the-f-35-ready-battle-syria-or-not-14243

[Vraciu]

...

[Vraciu]

From the previously cited article:

“Even though Marine maintainers had rapid, ready access to spare parts from shore and the benefit of the expertise of embarked contractor personnel, aircraft reliability was poor enough that it was difficult for the Marines to keep more than two to three of the six embarked jets in an flyable status on any given day,” reads the DOT&E memo. “The challenges will be substantially tougher when the aircraft first deploys operationally, where working mission systems will not be optional, and where maintenance is likely to be more challenging due to the presence of the rest of the ACE.”

[GScholz]

See Rule #4

[Vraciu]

QUOTE:

The top officer leading the F-35 program, Air Force Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, said in two-page response that everything in Gilmore's report is accurate, but that it "does not fully address efforts to resolve known technical challenges and schedule risks." It's the F-35 joint program office's job to do so, Bogdan said.

END QUOTE.


Translation: The airplane is woefully inadequate and isn't performing to specs.  But give us credit for TRYING.