Dogfight : F35 vs F16

[Vraciu]

Regarding the 65 planed Canadian F35s -

It hasn't been dropped from consideration, all that is happened is a party that won the election had an election promise to not buy it. 

What's actually happened is this - just 2 weeks ago, the Canadian government paid millions, nearly 40 to be exact, to remain an F35 partner and keep their seat at the table, as there has been a paper "contest" of sorts, with LM, Dassault, the Eurofighter group, MacDoug and the Superhornet people, and Saab having all sent representatives to plead the case for their fighter to replace the aging CF18s.  There will likely still be a real fly off/contest of sorts, however the F35 is STILL in the competition.  A good friend of mine for the last 30 years is the CO of our test fighter squadron and is right in the middle of all of this right now.  The F35 purchase has been cancelled, under the guise of it being chosen without any competition, but the F35 is STILL in contention, and is in fact rumored to be the leader in the paper competition so far, again, versus all the other aircraft.  The Liberal government knows that it'll look foolish if it wins, and has floated ideas such as doing what Australia did, buying Superhornets in small numbers, like 12 or 24, as an interim fix, however nothing has been decided yet.  All that they've done is promise to have a competition to see which of the currently available gen 4.5 and higher fighters would be the best buy. 

There have been flip flops less outrageous out there, so don't be surprised if the F35 in fact wins the official fly off, in whatever form that takes, and ends up being the CF18 replacement after all.  It's probably a coin flip right now, with the SuperHornet, either interim or full buy on one side, and the F35 on the other.  The Eurofighter is almost as much $ as the F35, the Rafale would render the RCAF's huge stocks of Aim120, Aim9, bombs, and gun ammo worthless and require complete replacement, and the Gripen has been declared "unfit" for the RCAF by insiders, for some unknown and likely ridiculous reason.

There is a huge economic factor here too, there are many parts and components for the F35 being constructed in Canada by Canadian aerospace companies in that industry, and those jobs = gone if the F35 isn't chosen, and Canada could face other penalties and economic fallout for dropping out.  I'm just saying that it's a part of this equation as well, not the be all end all part of the debate.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/f35-stealth-fighter-jet-1.3696269
The only thing that is certain regarding the RCAF's fighter program right now is that the current CF18s are timed OUT.  The entire batch of nearly 140 that were purchased long ago were F18A and B models, which have been constantly upgraded along the way, and they all are very high time ariframes.  Our guys are constantly having issues sourcing and procuring parts and keeping them flying.  There are roughly 62 single seat and 18 2 seat fighters being upgraded to the current standard flying, the rest are either in mothballs/storage or have been canabilized here and there, and of those 80 only 35 at max are able to fly at any given time, and many of those are represented in the 410 training squadron and not combat coded and ready to fight.  So, with a huge, huge airspace to defend, as well as potential missions like the RCAF has been engaged in since 9/11 possibly coming up still, the bottom of the barrel has been scratched and gouged deep already.  Replacements are needed, and quickly.  The current government has decreed that Canada will no longer be involved in foreign offensive military ops, and that the fighter the RCAF needs is only required to defend NORAD airspace.   Obviously the F35 isn't optimized as an interceptor, which is what the mission calls for by this new "definition", so it's difficult to know what the future will bring.

You hit on one of the main reasons why this boondoggle is still here.   Blackmail.   (I won't get into the non-monetary arm-twisting by the US government toward our allies.  You can dig that up yourself on Wiki Leaks.)

Lockheed was very shrewd--as were its lackeys in Congress.   They spread T/A-35 production across hundreds of districts and partner nations to insure "skin in the game" which shields it from cancelation.   Too big to fail. 

Anyone wanting out of the program will pay a huge price in penalties and lost manufacturing.    Thus it takes a ton of guts (and political capital) to pull out of the Ponzi scheme. 

Canada would be fine with Super Hornets.  Put the Enhanced Performance Engine in there and it is a beast in A2A configuration.  They don't need the supposed first strike stealth capability falsely promised by the Just So Failed.   A Silent Eagle would also be a good choice as well, though pricier than the Super. 

In any event, the Joint Strike Failure is not a fighter and never will be.  If Canada is going to buy the wrong plane any way they should buy the Super Hornet.   It's cheaper and it actually works.

[LCADolby]

You're not getting it and I won't bother explaining as it wouldn't matter to you any way.

Explain away, educate me Vraciu, I'm all ears.

[Vraciu]

Explain away, educate me Vraciu, I'm all ears.

I have better things to do.   

He who has ears let him hear. 

[LCADolby]

See Rule #4

[Vraciu]

See Rule #4

[GScholz]

Pilots Say F-35 Fighter Is A Winner. So Where's The Media Coverage?

At least some in the media is starting to take notice...  Forbes no less

http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2016/09/06/pilots-say-f-35-fighter-is-a-winner-so-wheres-the-media-coverage/#7dea7bb84984

[GScholz]

The 461st at Edwards released a video of their recent surge in weapons testing. Looks good 

[Vraciu]

Pilots Say F-35 Fighter Is A Winner. So Where's The Media Coverage?

At least some in the media is starting to take notice...  Forbes no less

http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2016/09/06/pilots-say-f-35-fighter-is-a-winner-so-wheres-the-media-coverage/#7dea7bb84984

What do you expect them to say?

They have their marching orders.   If you want to have a career you toe the party line plain and simple.  REALITY.

https://www.ecnmag.com/blog/2015/09/if-you-cant-say-nice-things-about-f-35-air-force-will-tell-you-how


Pilots loved the F2A also.  Midway showed what a farce that was. 

[Vraciu]

The 461st at Edwards released a video of their recent surge in weapons testing. Looks good 

Surge?

Two missiles fired in TWELVE minutes?

I got news for ya.   You can "surge" until the cows come home.   The airplane is still a DECADE behind schedule.  A DECADE.   

Behind schedule, over budget, designed for yesterday's war.   Slower that the Super Slow Hornet.   

We are going backwards. 

This is not a fighter and never will be. 

[Vraciu]

Ah the beloved (sarc) $400K helmet. Ruh roh...

"Intricate kit breaks—and when it does, a pilot cannot simply borrow another’s helmet. This is because each HMDS is calibrated to an individual flyer, such as the alignment of their pupils for eye-tracking, which is a two-day laboratory job that only Rockwell Collins is authorised to conduct."  H/T - The Economist

[DaveBB]

World's most expensive 5th Generation A-7.

I am still concerned about the cracking of the airframe.  What is the latest news on that?

[Vraciu]

World's most expensive 5th Generation A-7.

I am still concerned about the cracking of the airframe.  What is the latest news on that?

Classic!

And without the range/payload of the A-7 nor the ability to carry the AIM-9.   

A "hoped for solution" to the cracking is still being "engineered".

[GScholz]

World's most expensive 5th Generation A-7.

I am still concerned about the cracking of the airframe.  What is the latest news on that?

Not a bad comparison I guess... If the A-7 had been supersonic, had a state of the art air intercept radar, and radar guided missiles back in its day.

The cracking I've read about was in the engine mounts and bulkheads of an airframe that had flown the equivalent of 7000 hours. They've also discovered cracks in the wings of the C  model. This is not unexpected, but basically by design. They fatigue test to see where the structure needs to be beefed up. It is way easier to add metal/composite as fatigue hot spots are found then to take material out of an over built airframe. The beef up as you go method yields the airframe with highest strength to weight ratio.

[Gman]

There was a lot of press about the two Aim120s fired as the F4 target drone which was the target was actually preserved and returned to base.  Many "The F35's only 2 missiles both missed" etc etc etc.  Turns out they didn't actually miss, but were right on target and closing to warhead detonation when it was decided there was no point in wasting the last F4 drone that was to be used to prove that the missile warheads worked, so they sent self destruct through the datalink connection from the F35 to the Aim120s.  That's actually a pretty interesting feature, and probably has some real world use for times in swirling combat when a pilot might wish he hadn't let one fly due a friendly or unknown all of  sudden showing up somewhere downrange. 

IMO this still all boils down to theory - does low observability, new/great sensors, and modern tech in weapons and their employment trump maneuverability, speed, and power?  I've said this before, I'm still waiting for info from a very large EX where the various versions of the F35 are used in large, as in a 4 ship or a section of a squadron versus current Red Air and other threats at say Red Flag or what have you.  The Air Force has recently joined the USMC in stating that using their F35s even with current software and restrictions is to the point now where all the other fighters (save the F22 of course) are saying it's pointless to even play, as they are dead as soon as they turn inbound during their scenarios, and never even see the F35.  I do hope that's true, this thing needs to work, regardless of how any of us feel about its design and the compromises made in building it the way it is.  There are still issues, but there are still issues with every fighter out there in some manner, and there have been more and more glimmers of hope regarding the F35 recently IMO.

[Vraciu]

Not a bad comparison I guess... If the A-7 had been supersonic, had a state of the art air intercept radar, and radar guided missiles back in its day.

The cracking I've read about was in the engine mounts and bulkheads of an airframe that had flown the equivalent of 7000 hours. They've also discovered cracks in the wings of the C  model. This is not unexpected, but basically by design. They fatigue test to see where the structure needs to be beefed up. It is way easier to add metal/composite as fatigue hot spots are found then to take material out of an over built airframe. The beef up as you go method yields the airframe with highest strength to weight ratio.

"Basically by design."   This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.   Yet another flaw of the Just So Failed program.

Fatigue testing is done in a benchmark airframe BEFORE production in order to find problems.  You don't DESIGN an aircraft to have cracking show up AFTER it is built. 

SMH.   You can't make this stuff up.


Oh, and at the time the A-7 had the most state-of-the-art avionics around.  It was the first airplane with a modern HUD and it went from mockup to combat in about two and a half years.   It left active service just shy of fifty years later.