Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Morpheus on March 23, 2023, 09:33:20 AM
-
This probably a moot question or whatever but My knowledge on what we have right now isn't up to par regarding this whole subject... so SHOOT ME! :airplane:
After what I call a sin we ran away it seems from a whole world of positive additions that the F-14 brought to the Navy and the US. Do we have anything that is as bad arse as the pheonix missle? The range and accuracy... Is that whole world open now for the next?
No Jet in the world is as sexy or as bad a... as the Tomcat was is now and forever will be!!!
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-260_JATM
-
Unlimited cheap drone swarms
Eagler
-
Them drones ain't cheap.
-
Them drones ain't cheap.
It's all relative.. the cost to just defend against them would bankrupt a country...if it didn't have billions being pumped into it...
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/03/world/europe/ukraine-russia-drones.html
https://aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0119.shtml#:~:text=How%20much%20does%20it%20cost%20to%20produce%20an%20F%2D14%20Tomcat%3F&text=The%20initial%20acquisiton%20cost%20of,purchase%20cost%20but%20maintenance%20expenses.
Eagler
-
I think it was worse that they killed the f22.
-
Dick Cheney killed the F-14 just as they started making the D model. The navy wanted hundreds of them but Cheney called it a jobs program and killed it off. Grumman and it's supply chain ended up losing 80k jobs and forced a merger with Grumman.
They were very expensive to maintain.
-
Phoenix highly overrated, but the D was a beast airplane.
-
It's all relative.. the cost to just defend against them would bankrupt a country...if it didn't have billions being pumped into it...
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/03/world/europe/ukraine-russia-drones.html
https://aerospaceweb.org/question/planes/q0119.shtml#:~:text=How%20much%20does%20it%20cost%20to%20produce%20an%20F%2D14%20Tomcat%3F&text=The%20initial%20acquisiton%20cost%20of,purchase%20cost%20but%20maintenance%20expenses.
Eagler
How to hide money laundering 101
-
The US DoD is full of bullcrap. We're gonna lose a war because of all these obscenely expensive weapons systems.
Okay fine we have stealthy aircraft, that cost tens of thousands of dollars per flight hour, meaning pilots get less than 15 hours per month (not even enough to maintain safe aircraft familiarity, much less combat prowess). (Source: 2022 Congressional Budget Office analysis: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57713 (https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57713))
Remember when the Serbs took down an F117 with an old SAM system and a new technique? Supposedly the F117 is stealthier than the Raptor (read, the F22s are screwed).
All that tech amounts to nothing when a 78 year old 88mm finds its mark.
The Pentagon has dumped over $1,000,000,000,000 into the JSF F-35 program over the past 27 years, and we still don't have a truly effective force of them. Plus, the pilots call it the Penguin on account of its handling. Great. (Source: Top Gun by ret. USN Capt. Dan Pedersen, published 2019)
Reminder that the Tomcat took FOUR years from Navy request to entering service. Yes it had some teething problems but it took 23 less years than the F35.
Vietnam taught us that the altar of high technology and BVR kills is a false god's sacrifice. A lot of good men died in Vietnam because of those foolish ideas. Now they're saying almost the exact same thing, except now they're saying stealth instead of BVR missiles.
We need a LOT of F16s is what we need. None of these stupid 5th-6th generation toys.
Navy needs the Tomcat back in service, Hornets simply cannot run the same range without a very expensive inflight refueling network.
-
We've built almost 900 F-35s so far. They are WIDELY in service with many countries. Our allies. They will be a huge factor in any war. They are highly capable AND being built in huge numbers. Along with drone force multipliers - we will have the most formidable air power in history.
We've got the Nest generation fighter too. It was developed and FLOWN in about one year.
We are not sitting around.
https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2020/09/15/the-us-air-force-has-built-and-flown-a-mysterious-full-scale-prototype-of-its-future-fighter-jet/ (https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2020/09/15/the-us-air-force-has-built-and-flown-a-mysterious-full-scale-prototype-of-its-future-fighter-jet/)
-
We've built almost 900 F-35s so far. They are WIDELY in service with many countries. Our allies. They will be a huge factor in any war. They are highly capable AND being built in huge numbers. Along with drone force multipliers - we will have the most formidable air power in history.
We've got the Nest generation fighter too. It was developed and FLOWN in about one year.
We are not sitting around.
https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2020/09/15/the-us-air-force-has-built-and-flown-a-mysterious-full-scale-prototype-of-its-future-fighter-jet/ (https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2020/09/15/the-us-air-force-has-built-and-flown-a-mysterious-full-scale-prototype-of-its-future-fighter-jet/)
Sorry, I really don't care about so called press releases about stuff like this. Look at actual statistical analyses and government reports and studies instead if you want to know what's really going on. We already know they have toys, and toys don't win wars.
And how many hours are the pilots flying this so called end-all fighter again?
We still have yet to see the US military use these so called drone force multipliers. How many hours are these export countries flying their F-35s?
I call BS on pure numbers.
-How many F-35s are combat-ready (meaning ready to scramble within one day)?
-How long to take an F-35 out of reserve and into combat safely?
-How many personnel to get one into the air for a combat air patrol flight?
Let's look at the logistics. How long to order a new part for an F-35 to get to say, Germany? How much in air refulling capabilities do these countries have?
If the F-35 is so good, why is the Pentagon ordering F-15EXs? AC-130s?
They're building new AC-130s. What happened to the F-35 being the end-all multirole and ground attack aircraft? We're still putting howitzers and miniguns on cargo planes.
The reality of war is that you can NEVER expect to easily win. Anyone who says "there's no way we lose this" or "this is better than everything else" is trying to sell you something or manipulate you. Even though we had the best fighters by the end of WWII, we still won by brute numbers and force. This is backed up by countless war history books. American mass manufacturing crushed the Luftwaffe and Japan.
Look at the CBO report I linked, you might want to think about how that might affect this so called "huge factor" in a combat scenario.
-
Simulators have gotten a lot better over the last few decades. You can model your own aircraft in them quite realistically. What you can't do with as much accuracy is model enemy aircraft. You can't exactly war game with them in real life either so there will always be unknown unknowns.
-
Nobody said we can win no matter what or that we have something better than anybody else.
The fact is that the f-35 is being built in very large numbers probably more than any other fighter we've ever built.
We will have numbers and probably superior technology. We already have numbers over the Chinese Air Force. And quality.
The f-35 is a massive program and it's not just the United States building these and maintaining the parts.
Now that Russia invaded Ukraine, more orders are coming in for the f-35. It's going to be a huge production run.
On top of that we will have the next generation fighter coming along as well.
I'm not sure what you think, tig, but we're not sitting around losing ability. We're gaining ability.
-
Nobody said we can win no matter what or that we have something better than anybody else.
The fact is that the f-35 is being built in very large numbers probably more than any other fighter we've ever built.
Try 4,604 F16 Falcons. Try pulling up actual facts instead of unbased opinions. :cheers:
I'm not sure what you think, tig, but we're not sitting around losing ability. We're gaining ability.
Apparently I'm still not making myself clear. I don't believe the JSF program is meeting its goals, and I think as a result the US military is grossly unprepared for the next war. Capisce? :aok
-
We've built almost 900 F-35s so far. They are WIDELY in service with many countries. Our allies. They will be a huge factor in any war. They are highly capable AND being built in huge numbers. Along with drone force multipliers - we will have the most formidable air power in history.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
You can laugh all you want. Go ahead and look up what actual pilots think of the f-35 compared to the F-16 or even the F-22..
Look at the capabilities of the f-35. It blows away anything else.
And go ahead and laugh. But you're ignorant
-
The Navy thought the Brewster Buffalo was a-okay.
Physics does not lie. The F-35 is a piece of crap. Good luck with that 90-second supersonic dash capability. :rofl
-
Like I said. Ignorant. You have no idea how deadly that plane is.
-
You can laugh all you want. Go ahead and look up what actual pilots think of the f-35 compared to the F-16 or even the F-22..
Look at the capabilities of the f-35. It blows away anything else.
And go ahead and laugh. But you're ignorant
I cited a book written by the founder of the famed Top Gun school, USN Capt. Dan Pedersen. Much of my information comes directly from that book. Think he's ignorant too? He doesn't like the JSF any more than I do. You might also be interested to know that he spent around 20 years in fighter jets, and commanded the USS Ranger for multiple cruises. Think an ignorant person could do that? Think again.
I personally know 4 star Air Force general Bruce Carlson. You know what he said when I asked what his favorite plane was? He said F-16 without skipping a beat. Keep in mind this guy flew F-15s, F-4s, and worked with Lockheed on the F-117 to become one of the first F-117 pilots. And he currently serves on the Lockheed Martin Board of Directors, but he still likes the General Dynamics plane more than a Lockheed.
I did in fact look at what pilots think. :aok
Sounds like a pretty big assumption to say everyone who disagrees with you is ignorant, especially considering there are many retired fighter pilots around here.
-
Iraq Afghanistan are the two latest...other lost wars in the past proves the side with the most expensive weapons doesn't always win
Missiles and drones can do what more expensive aircraft can do these days just as well if not better and much cheaper and do it without risking air crew loss of life
Eagler
-
Try 4,604 F16 Falcons. Try pulling up actual facts instead of unbased opinions. :cheers:
Apparently I'm still not making myself clear. I don't believe the JSF program is meeting its goals, and I think as a result the US military is grossly unprepared for the next war. Capisce? :aok
It's kind of unfair to cherrypick a number of a type that's been in production for 45 years as opposed to one that's been in production for 17. Also, 1 trillion spent on a program over 27 years is nothing. The US spends nearly a trillion each year on defense alone. Every new type is going to have issues early on. I can't even fathom what goes into trying to design a base type that not only can fly normally, but take off or land vertically or land on carriers, all in the same base design. The military can't just stand pat with 50 year old tech and call it good. That's why Germany was so great in WWII, the US is where it's at now, and Russia is currently the laughingstock of the world. Innovation vs. lack of.
So in this hypothetical war, who is the US so grossly unprepared to fight? Is it Russia and their 20 some odd Su-57s? Or China and their 200 J-20s? Keep in mind there are no more 1v1 fights like in WWII where a lone P-51 finds a lone Fw 190. Where there's a US aircraft there's an entire ecosystem of stuff behind it including but not limited to refuelers, conventional bombers, supersonic bombers, electronic warfare aircraft, carrier groups, and all the weaponry that comes with these. The US war machine is really a marvel and the only one of its kind. But that's to be expected when we dump so much money into it annually.
Let's look at the logistics. How long to order a new part for an F-35 to get to say, Germany? How much in air refulling capabilities do these countries have?
If the F-35 is so good, why is the Pentagon ordering F-15EXs? AC-130s?
They're building new AC-130s. What happened to the F-35 being the end-all multirole and ground attack aircraft? We're still putting howitzers and miniguns on cargo planes.
Countries, including the US, continue to buy and use these because they work. That does not mean that a country should not innovate. Why does the US still operate B-52s and will continue to do so until they are 100 years old? Because they work. The US is fortunate enough to have this tech that is generations ahead of other non-ally countries. Why do you think the US developed the P-51 in WWII when the P-40 flew just fine? Because we were always innovating. Why did Germany develop the world's first operational jet fighter or bomber? Because they were innovating. The US operated the P-40 until the end of the war. By your (flawed) logic, I guess that makes it better than the P-51.
As for your air refueling question: Canada, France, Germany, UK, Australia, Saudi Arabia, Spain, UAE, Czech Republic, Turkey, Chile, Singapore, Israel, Japan, Netherlands and likely more all have their own capabilities.
I personally know 4 star Air Force general Bruce Carlson. You know what he said when I asked what his favorite plane was? He said F-16 without skipping a beat. Keep in mind this guy flew F-15s, F-4s, and worked with Lockheed on the F-117 to become one of the first F-117 pilots. And he currently serves on the Lockheed Martin Board of Directors, but he still likes the General Dynamics plane more than a Lockheed.
So because 1 guy flew a plane some 40 years ago during his time in service and retired 6 years before the F-35 even entered service, thus never flying it, we're declaring the F-16 better? I mean...okay.
16 countries besides the US operate or have placed orders for the F-35. Must be so bad.
-
The Navy thought the Brewster Buffalo was a-okay.
Physics does not lie. The F-35 is a piece of crap. Good luck with that 90-second supersonic dash capability. :rofl
(https://i.imgur.com/HOY5gJr.jpg)
-
All of these experts. All you have to do is read what pilots are saying. Former f-15 and F-16 pilots hands down will pick the f-35.
Or perhaps would like to explain which planes can easily deal with an f-35?
The pilots that fly these things are saying that it's the most advanced plane in the world. More advanced than the F-22. More capable than the F-22..
But what do they know? They're too stupid to know that they should have been flying tomcats today instead
-
Also the per unit cost is down to about 77 million per plane., Fully combat ready. The new f-15 is more expensive just in its base package.
And the new f-15 EX or whatever they call it, that plan is not survivable in a modern airspace like the f-35 will be.
Yeah it's good to still have stuff like that because you're not always going to be fighting a high-tech enemy.
But we are going to have massive numbers of f-35s. Way outstripping what the Chinese have put up with their j20.
There are almost 1000 f-35s in service now. There are about 200 j-20s. I think there's only about 20 of the Russian stealth planes.
We have massive numbers and quality over anybody else. By far.
-
If Aces High has taught us anything, it's not necessarily about the plane, it's about how many are behind you and can you escape from them :rofl. Sorta joking aside, there's a big difference between 1v1 and 5v5 scenario. Or if a war broke out and squads were all over the place. What would that actually entail? What would the drone situation be like? 3 million drones with people flying them in their homes ain't nothing to sneeze at. I dont think thats too far fetched. Superiority is a tough advantage to beat. Would the aircraft have the ability to remain off radar in order to better prepare a shot? How far away can you prepare a shot? How good are your missiles? Who has the advantage in a defensive escape? Could you create an advantage if more than 1 or more enemy are chasing you?
While one guy might say F16s and one might say F35s. At the end of the day, it's going to come to pilot knowhow of the plane and its capability of success vs the enemy with #s. I think innovation is always wise, especially due to technological advances and computer power, however we must be aware they aren't going to potentially fly the same way they use to. Which means training is the #1 priority.
-
Out in the real world of fighters, a common saying is “Hamburger is hamburger, no matter what you wrap it in”.
-
No it's not going to be the pilot it's going to be the system. That's the difference with this plane. There's more situational awareness by far than anything that's ever flown.
I guess you guys don't get it.
There are lots of things still classified about its abilities but what is known is incredible.
You think it's the pilot?
They sent an f-35 against anything we've got now and that plane will be shot down before it even knows there's an f-35 around.
-
No it's not going to be the pilot it's going to be the system. That's the difference with this plane. There's more situational awareness by far than anything that's ever flown.
I guess you guys don't get it.
There are lots of things still classified about its abilities but what is known is incredible.
You think it's the pilot?
They sent an f-35 against anything we've got now and that plane will be shot down before it even knows there's an f-35 around.
:rofl :rofl :rofl is all I have to say
-
If not for the F-35 China would have already invaded Taiwan.
Prove me wrong.
-
Yeah Tig, I guess we need more Tomcats with those Phoenix missiles (which failed each time we used them in combat).
F-14's. That's what we need.
-
If not for the F-35 China would have already invaded Taiwan.
Prove me wrong.
There's no way for you to prove that or anyone to disprove that, it's a "what if" scenario.
:banana: :rofl
-
Tig, how do you think the F-14, or f-15 or f-16 would do against an f-35?
4th gen planes are not even a challenge to the F-35. The tools and integration of information that f-35 pilots have - the MUCH better radars and avionics. It's not even a contest.
The f-35 is a multi-role TACTICAL fighter. The kind of thing we actually use in the wars we fight. The F-35 pilot has an unquestionably VASTLY better informed picture of the battle space and situational awareness than any 4th gen fighter.
There's no better tactical fighter on earth.
-
Consider what the f-117 did in Iraq.
It went into a highly contested airspace to begin the crippling attack on Iraq. There were only 59 117 ever made as production versions. I think we had 36 in Iraq and they hit a big percentage of the main targets and took down Iraq's defenses - with no losses.
There are over 900 F-35's in service.
The first Red Flag they participated in, they had a 20-1 kill ratio in a realistic - highly contested battle space. They took out ground targets as well as fighters with ease. Surface to air missiles too.
https://theaviationist.com/2017/02/28/red-flag-confirmed-f-35-dominance-with-a-201-kill-ratio-u-s-air-force-says/ (https://theaviationist.com/2017/02/28/red-flag-confirmed-f-35-dominance-with-a-201-kill-ratio-u-s-air-force-says/)
Indeed, while early reports suggested a 15-1 kill ratio recent Air Force testimony by Lt. Gen. Jerry D. Harris, Vice Commander of Air Combat Command characterized the kill ratio as “20-1” meaning that, for one F-35A “lost” in simulated combat in a high threat environment that the aircraft destroyed 20 simulated enemy aircraft.
During the same testimony, U.S. Marine Lt. Gen. Jon M. Davis, Deputy Commandant for Aviation, related a 24-0 kill ratio for U.S. Marine F-35B aircraft during a different exercise.
Whereas the air superiority scenario has not been disclosed (therefore, the above mentioned kill ratio should be taken with a grain of salt, as always when it deals with mock air-to-air engagements…), other details of the F-35As specific missions during the exercise are beginning to emerge from Red Flag 17-1.
The recently revealed reports suggest that large-scale F-35A strikes were conducted in a highly contested/denied aerial environment. Air Force F-35As penetrated denied airspace and directed standoff weapons from B-1B heavy bombers flying outside the denied airspace. Those strikes destroyed simulated surface to air weapons systems. This suggests some of the exercises were an example of a “first day of war” scenario where Air Force F-35As spearheaded an attack on a heavily defended target set both in the air and on the ground. The F-35As entered the denied airspace and engaged both aerial and ground targets, not only with weapons they carried but also with weapons launched from other platforms such as the B-1Bs as they loitered just outside the threat environment acting as “bomb trucks.”
USAF Capt. Tim Six, and F-35A pilots of the 388th Fighter Wing from Hill AFB, alluded to the “Sensor fusion both on-board, and off-board the aircraft” when he discussed the F-35A’s expanding envelope of strike and inter-operable capabilities.
This demonstration of F-35A capabilities counters an ongoing trend in the development of air defense networks for potential western adversaries. To a much greater degree than the F-117A Nighthawk defined the opening hours of the first Gulf War by penetrating Iraqi Air defenses and striking strategic targets with precision and stealth the F-35A expanded on that strike capability during this Red Flag according to the flying branch’s post-exercise statements.
At Red Flag 17-1 the F-35A also included additional roles previously reserved for air superiority aircraft like the F-15C Eagle and heavy strike capability from large bombers while even performing “light AWACS” duties.
“I flew a mission where our four-ship formation of F-35A’s destroyed five surface-to-air threats in a 15-minute period without being targeted once,” Major James Schmidt, an F-35A pilot for the 388th Fighter Wing from Hill AFB told the Air Force Times.
“After almost every mission, we shake our heads and smile, saying ‘We can’t believe we just did that’ Schmidt told reporters.
-
Curious why the F18 ain't in the discussion. That's what they fly out of Portland. I'm thinking that would do wonders around the F14 and F16. Curious how that matches vs a F35. Something tells me the stick time behind the F18 and F16 would give the F35 pilots a run for their money. Systems are one thing, but utilizing them effectively and efficiently is the key and I'm not sure how much advantage you'd have over a very skilled F18 squad if you had a relatively new F35 squad.
-
Here is an account of a more recent Red Flag
https://www.businessinsider.com/the-f-35-tore-apart-fourth-gen-fighters-in-major-combat-exercise-usaf-2019-2 (https://www.businessinsider.com/the-f-35-tore-apart-fourth-gen-fighters-in-major-combat-exercise-usaf-2019-2)
US Air Force F-35s wrecked their enemies in mock air combat — even the new pilots were racking up kills against simulated near-peer threats
The US Air Force put the F-35 up against "the most advanced weapons systems out there" during the recent Red Flag air combat exercise, and the fight-generation stealth fighters apparently dominated — so much so that even the rookie pilots were crushing it.
Pilots from the 388th Fighter Wing's 4th Fighter Squadron took to the skies in upgraded F-35A Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters, integrating into a "Blue Force" consisting of fifth and fourth-generation fighters for a "counter air" mission against a "Red Force" made up of "equally capable" fighters.
During the intense fight, aggressor aircraft blinded many of the "blue" fourth-generation aircraft using electronic attack capabilities, such as those advanced adversaries might employ in battle.
"Even in this extremely challenging environment, the F-35 didn’t have many difficulties doing its job," Col. Joshua Wood, 388th Operations Group commander, explained in a US Air Force statement summarizing the exercise results.
Novice F-35 pilots were able to step in and save more experienced friendly fourth-generation fighter pilots while racking up kills against simulated near-peer threats.
"My wingman was a brand new F-35A pilot, seven or eight flights out of training," Wood said, recounting his experiences. "He gets on the radio and tells an experienced 3,000-hour pilot in a very capable fourth-generation aircraft. 'Hey bud, you need to turn around. You’re about to die. There’s a threat off your nose.'"
That young pilot took out the enemy aircraft and then went on to pick up three more "kills" during the mission, which lasted for an hour. "I've never seen anything like it before," Wood added.
The latest iteration of Red Flag — a multinational exercise aimed at training pilots to defeat enemy aircraft, integrated air-defense systems, and electronic and information warfare tactics — was said to be "exponentially more challenging" than past drills, as they were specifically intended to simulate real combat against a more serious threat like Russia or China. The pilots waged simulated war in contested environments characterized by electronic attack, communications jamming, and GPS denial.
"Those situations highlight the fifth-generation capabilities of the F-35. We’re still able to operate and be successful," Lt. Col. Yosef Morris, the 4th Fighter Squadron commander, said in a US Air Force statement.
The F-35A participated in Red Flag, the service's top air combat exercise, for the first time two years ago. At that time, the powerful stealth aircraft was only at its initial operating capability, yet it still destroyed the opposition with a 20:1 kill ratio.
This year, pilots were flying F-35s with upgrades offering improved combat capabilities and maneuverability, making the aircraft more lethal in air combat. The Block 3F software upgrades brought the aircraft up to full warfighting capability.
The F-35A is "exceeding our expectations when it comes to not only being able to survive, but to prosecute targets," Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein said Tuesday, according to Air Force Times.
-
Out in the real world of fighters, a common saying is “Hamburger is hamburger, no matter what you wrap it in”.
Yeah, but really, what do you know?
Geez, kids today...
- oldman
-
Yeah, but really, what do you know?
Geez, kids today...
- oldman
:rofl :airplane:
-
When hypersonic missiles take out air bases and carriers where are you launching your planes from?
Eagler
-
Grim Reapers did an interesting what if scenario a while back. China will have to deal with Kadena at some point if they want Taiwan. Of course this sim is pretty crude when it comes to realistic predictions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLHcSV8KUzc
-
Tig, how do you think the F-14, or f-15 or f-16 would do against an f-35?
Depending on how good the pilots are, anything could happen.
Yes F-35s are performing quite well at Red Flag, where there are tons of known and controlled variables. You think the F-4 Phantom didn't perform well in trials before the Vietnam War? Then they went up against an enemy that knew how to play their rules of engagement and tactics, and thus the supposedly unstoppable US air power machine went down to a 2:1 K/D against so called "obsolete" technology.
What changed to exponentially increase their kills? Tactics
Sometimes something as simple as a bad weather system or a crude forward air base can make all the difference. Remember a few years back when F-35s couldn't even fly into lightning storms?
Regarding the F-117s: They were not infallible if you look outside the Iraq War, seriously, look up the Serbian F-117 shootdown. Tactics and the people executing them are everything.
I really don't have a problem with you saying the F-35 has some considerable strengths- it does! But saying it's the be-all end-all is just naive.
At the end of the day, a bad pilot making a mistake can crash or get shot down by one bad decision, no matter how advanced his/her plane is.
Likewise, flying 200kts at 5k feet into enemy territory could also get an extremely advanced fighter killed. However unlikely these scenarios are, they exist, the technology doesn't always win, and if you aren't going to admit that, then I don't think I have anything else to say :cheers:
Have a nice day :airplane:
P.S - you never answered me about the 'F-35s are the only reason China hasn't invaded Taiwan yet'
-
P.S - you never answered me about the 'F-35s are the only reason China hasn't invaded Taiwan yet'
That wasn't gg that said that. And there wasn't even a question to answer.
Oh the irony..what about the multiple questions I asked you and points I brought up in my post, will you address them?
Red Flag is all we've got and all we've had for some time. It is ridiculously stupid to want these planes to actually have to prove themselves in a real war. The ideal situation is that it never happens.
-
Depending on how good the pilots are, anything could happen.
Yes F-35s are performing quite well at Red Flag, where there are tons of known and controlled variables. You think the F-4 Phantom didn't perform well in trials before the Vietnam War? Then they went up against an enemy that knew how to play their rules of engagement and tactics, and thus the supposedly unstoppable US air power machine went down to a 2:1 K/D against so called "obsolete" technology.
What changed to exponentially increase their kills? Tactics
Sometimes something as simple as a bad weather system or a crude forward air base can make all the difference. Remember a few years back when F-35s couldn't even fly into lightning storms?
Regarding the F-117s: They were not infallible if you look outside the Iraq War, seriously, look up the Serbian F-117 shootdown. Tactics and the people executing them are everything.
I really don't have a problem with you saying the F-35 has some considerable strengths- it does! But saying it's the be-all end-all is just naive.
At the end of the day, a bad pilot making a mistake can crash or get shot down by one bad decision, no matter how advanced his/her plane is.
Likewise, flying 200kts at 5k feet into enemy territory could also get an extremely advanced fighter killed. However unlikely these scenarios are, they exist, the technology doesn't always win, and if you aren't going to admit that, then I don't think I have anything else to say :cheers:
Have a nice day :airplane:
P.S - you never answered me about the 'F-35s are the only reason China hasn't invaded Taiwan yet'
You made my argument. Tactics. The F-35 is a system, Extreme situational awareness with the radar signature of a golf ball. It's a total situational awareness system.
The Red Flag scenarios pitted the F-35 against our best 4th gen fighters and the 4th gen fighters never had a chance. And that scenario happens anytime they fight a simulated fight. The pilots in the 4th gen planes never even see what hit them.
The f-33 radar and avionics are beyond compare. They have off-boresite lock and kill ability. They can track and shoot down planes that are BEHIND them.
The F-117 was not flawless? What plane is? I've never claimed stealth was flawless, but what those 36 F-117's did in Iraq was unprecedented.
Killing from beyond visual range is what this is about. Kill the other planes before they can even know you're there.
European countries picked the F-35 over their very best domestic fighters because nothing they have or plan to have can compete with the f-35
-
:rofl :airplane:
Yup you just don’t get it…. You were just an undercooked rump roast! :devil But I know you had a genie in a bottle who always said yes master. :joystick:
:salute
-
This is part of what I've been saying and this is one of the reasons no other aircraft can compete. Most of the F-35s capabilities are highly classified.
the F-35 is an airborne command and control centre - it can track you using satellite, other aircraft, ground stations, naval assets etc etc without even firing up its' own radar and it can both fire and guide munitions from those same assets without even opening a weapons bay
and it can do that from thousands of miles away and doesn't even need to be airborne to do so
-
Curious why the F18 ain't in the discussion. That's what they fly out of Portland. I'm thinking that would do wonders around the F14 and F16.
The 142nd Air Guard out of PDX and 173rd Air Guard out of LMT fly the F-15. I don't believe the F18 has ever been in the Airforce inventory.
Squadrons from NAS Lemoore, MCAS Miramar and occasionally the TOP Gun squad out of NAS Fallon fly adversarial missions against the Air Guard, and when detached will base their aircraft at PDX during the mission.
The F18 has primarily been a Navy/ Marine, Fighter/ Attack and with the addition of the Growler an Electronic Counter Measure aircraft. Initially replacing the A6, A7, and then the F14 & EA-6B.
-
I would argue it's the proper tools for the job, and in a real fight the F-35 has its place but I doubt would take on every role. The F-35 was designed as a day 1 strike fighter, to go in to areas where the enemy capabilities are at full strength and 4th gen aircraft survivability would be very low. Once the threat level is lower then the cheaper and more numerous 4th gen F-16s, F/A-18s, A-10s can go in to clean up. First choice for air superiority would be the F-22. That's what it was built to do and pretty much all their pilots train to do. As the threat level lowers then F-15s would pick up the slack. Depending on the theatre, there would also be Rafales, Typhoons and maybe even Gripens in the mix. All very capable modern aircraft.
I think there is a lot of evidence to show that although the aircraft you're flying can give you an advantage, it's the pilot at the controls (and their training) that makes the difference. WWII I firmly believe it was Allied doctrine to pull experienced aces off the front lines and make them instructors that made the biggest difference. Instead of using that one ace to try to rack up as many kills as they can until they have a bad day, then that experience is gone forever, send him home to make 100 more just like him. Allied aircraft were not overwhelmingly superior to Axis aircraft by the end of the war, we see it in the MA all the time where an expertly flown K4 or Dora can mop the floor with anything the Allies have.
Even more modern examples, 4th gen aircraft have scored kills on F-22s and F35s during training. I've even heard of T-38s getting kills on F-22s on the odd day where the T-38 pilot is on top of their game and nothing's going right for the F-22 pilot. This is pure speculation (really most of this post is) but I would think in major ops like Red Flag where the world is watching, the powers that be are going to stack the deck to make sure bluefor looks as good as possible.
That's not knocking the F-35. I think it does what it was designed to do very well and has a lot of things going for it that helps the pilot do their thing and get home safe. But IMO it was hampered by the requirement that 3 very different aircraft must fit in the same airframe. Some sacrifices were made in performance and capabilities that could have been avoided if 3 separate aircraft had been developed.
Anyway that's my very non-expert opinion
-
The performance sacrifices are almost all because of stealth and carrying all fuel and weapons internally.
4th gen planes can't fly at the rated speeds when loaded. Their top speed and performance stats are at clean configurations.
Still, the F-35 is meant to be a tactical attack/fighter platform. The F-22 was supposed to be the fighter. Now we will have the Next generation fighter that has already been flown.
We are building one hell of an air capability that no other nation has or will have. We have numbers, quality, quantity AND training in our favor.
-
The 142nd Air Guard out of PDX and 173rd Air Guard out of LMT fly the F-15. I don't believe the F18 has ever been in the Airforce inventory.
True statement.
-
But I know you had a genie in a bottle who always said yes master. :joystick:
:salute
Ahhhh yes, the all knowing, all glowing Genie. :D
-
You need to reintroduce BW-239, as it has the best kill ratio of all time.
-
True statement.
Could have swarn those were F18s lol. Thought somone told me they were F18s as well. Never got close enough to tell personally. Figured they should all be flying those by now. I always thought it was strange the Airforce was flying F18s but I guess they were F15s after all. Woops!
-
Looks like all models of the “Bestest ever Fighter” need new engines. Waste of money just like the V-22 program. Gotta keep the corporate industrial war machine chugging along.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f-35-engine-running-too-hot-due-to-under-speccing-upgrade-now-vital (https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/f-35-engine-running-too-hot-due-to-under-speccing-upgrade-now-vital)
-
It's all about the $$$$$$
See the bogeyman...we need nore $$$$$
Eagler
-
Could have swarn those were F18s lol. Thought somone told me they were F18s as well. Never got close enough to tell personally. Figured they should all be flying those by now. I always thought it was strange the Airforce was flying F18s but I guess they were F15s after all. Woops!
Not a problem. The unit has been in Eagles since transitioning from the mighty Phantom.
-
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-f0WsrD6BNhw/WaIjFKEuzqI/AAAAAAACirY/Dkm0oW7c3jQy_TkZ1wXUSHO7b_o0duq9wCLcBGAs/s1600/20953182_650826431794847_8414949651474774277_n.jpg)
-
That F4 has to be about 2mph above stall...
-
You should read RUSI report.
https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/whitehall-reports/regenerating-warfighting-credibility-european-nato-air-forces
Professor Justin Bronk points out Airforces needs to be built on mulitple dispersed airbases and not on a few large bases, easily taken out by saturating them with missiles, drone etc, much like the Finnish and Swedish Airforces are doing since the cold war.
-
Re the OP - The US DOD is currently developing 6 new air to air missiles.
-The already mentioned Aim 260.
-Long-Range Engagement Weapon (LREW)
-Peregrine Air-to-Air missile
-Modular Advanced Missile (MAM)
-Lockheed Martin’s Cuda
-Long-Range Air-to-Air Missile (LRAAM)
https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/america-has-6-new-air-to-air-missiles-headed-for-service/
Considering the most current model Aim120 AMRAAM has been hitting targets at >Aim54 Pheonix ranges, the upcoming missiles should have pretty incredible capabilities.
Sticking them in the bays of the F35, F22, and upcoming NGAD, will likely ensure US/NATO overmatch vs Russia/China. That is so long as we don't let China steal that tech, like they've stolen virtually everything else through hacking, coercion, donations, etc.
-
in the works now is the sixth gen fighters. The F22 is 5th Gen (I think) It's getting to that point where science fiction is becoming reality. Now they are looking at control planes that are human manned but they control a number of drones. This is addition to the drones that are controlled from a remote sight.
Russia's SU 57 (I think that's the right number) Is their answer to the F22. But given their training, my bet is on our guys. The F22 is amazing. But Russia and China are both looking to counter it. But they are at least a generation behind it.
-
Thread sounds like an air to air conflict ..plane against plane..man against man..topgun on roids
I don't see that myself
Eagler
-
Very little serial production of SU57 since many “in service” SU57 are prototypes foisted on the pilots as new planes.
-
In the not too distant future, the US will have a HUGE advantage in air power over anyone. I mean, we already do - but the next stage is going to be off the charts.
With up to two "Loyal Wingman" stealth drones per F-35, plus the new 6th gen air-superiority fighters for the navy and air force. And the B-21 bombers.
Nobody will have anything even close to being able to deal with that.
-
Vietnam taught us that the altar of high technology and BVR kills is a false god's sacrifice. A lot of good men died in Vietnam because of those foolish ideas. Now they're saying almost the exact same thing, except now they're saying stealth instead of BVR missiles.
In Vietnam missiles were unreliable in part due to the high humidity. Lessons were learned and improvements were made to missile designs. One of those lessons learned was that dog fighting was not obsolete and training was instituted to address that issue.
*Edit* Most of the aircraft we lost in Vietnam were lost to AAA and SAMs.
-
Sorry, I really don't care about so called press releases about stuff like this. Look at actual statistical analyses and government reports and studies instead if you want to know what's really going on. We already know they have toys, and toys don't win wars.
And how many hours are the pilots flying this so called end-all fighter again?
We still have yet to see the US military use these so called drone force multipliers. How many hours are these export countries flying their F-35s?
I call BS on pure numbers.
-How many F-35s are combat-ready (meaning ready to scramble within one day)?
-How long to take an F-35 out of reserve and into combat safely?
-How many personnel to get one into the air for a combat air patrol flight?
Let's look at the logistics. How long to order a new part for an F-35 to get to say, Germany? How much in air refulling capabilities do these countries have?
If the F-35 is so good, why is the Pentagon ordering F-15EXs? AC-130s?
They're building new AC-130s. What happened to the F-35 being the end-all multirole and ground attack aircraft? We're still putting howitzers and miniguns on cargo planes.
AC-130 gunships are fantastic gun platforms that can put a bullet in every square inch of a football field. The AC-130 has never had mini-guns to my knowledge, 2 20mm gatling guns, 2 40mm Bofors and 1 105mm howitzer. The mini-guns were on AC-47 gunships that were known as Puff The Magic Dragon to US ground forces. (I knew a former Green Beret that serrved in Vietnam that was bat toejam crazy but he loved telling stories about the times Puff saved them.)
The F-15EX is a missile truck and it can carry 12 A2A missiles. No other US fighter can carry that many missiles.
Questioning how long spare parts can get to another country shows a level of ignunce about how spare parts supply works that is almost unbelievable.
When you scamble aircraft you don't get a day to do it, these things must be done in a matter of 5 minutes or less for alert aircraft and a few hours (2-3 tops) for an entire squadron. I helped launch an F-15 on 5 minute alert and we did it in just under 3 minutes. We regularly generated 21-22 F-15s in under 3 hours during exercises and inspections. That's 3 bags, 8 missiles and 940 rnds of HEI per aircraft.
Simulators give real pilots training at a fraction of the cost of real flying. Do you think other countries aren't using simulators to train their pilots also?