F-35

[Changeup]

I've read much written by Sprey, watched half a dozen interviews. I don't recall him ever going after the F-15, or upgrades to the F-16. Can you post links?

The interview that was posted earlier clearly stated his disdain for both

[bozon]

I think the idea that everything will degrade to a dog fight with cannons is overstated.  When formations of Flankers, begin to see random planes exploding around them, all of this, "the Russians out number us" stuff will evaporate like it did in the gulf and Iraq war.

Of course not everything will get to a dogfight. Even when it does, entering the dogfight after a BVR phase can put you in a much better position to dogfight. How the air war will look like will depend greatly on the theater of operations and the situation. The vast empty Iraqi desert is almost the ideal situation for stand-off BVR engagements. Not every place in the world is like that. Stealth is always an advantage, but not necessarily a decisive one. Depends on the situation.

Modern fighters are flying missile platforms. Non-stealth planes that think they can outfly the USA's Satalite/Stealth/missile air-to-air systems are littering the battle fields of the middle east in large numbers.  

Fighting the Russians or the Chinese will be a lot different than fighting the Iraqies. A war is not a 2vs2 training engagement. In a war you fight a system - control, support, force multipliers, ground EW, etc make a big impact and against a super-power it will be very different. Do not under-estimate your enemies. Different environments too, see comment above.

[GScholz]

EXACTLY!   And the JSF has no persistence, energy, few missiles (none internally that are WVR) and may have left a gun behind.

Complete and utter bull exhaust. It has more internal fuel than an F-15C. More internal fuel than an F-16 can carry total with drop tanks. With external drop tanks the F-35's range will only be rivaled by the F-22 and Su-27 family. The F-35 has better thrust to weight ratio than the F-16 on the same fuel load. Internally it can carry only four missiles true, but that is in a stealth role. With external hardpoints it can carry 14 A2A missiles, and there is a future block upgrade planned to expand the internal capacity to six missiles. In a bomb-truck configuration it can carry more ord than an F-16, and if it gets into trouble it can jettison the external pylons and become stealthy with the push of a button. Both the British ASRAAM and the European IRIS-T dogfight missiles can be used on the F-35. We've got IRIS-T missiles for our F-35s. I'm sure a future update to the AIM-9X can give it lock-on after launch capability.





The F-35 has full aspect stealth except straight aft because they didn't design it with an exhaust radar diffuser. An enemy radar needs to be able to see the turbine blades of the engine to get a radar return, and those are buried deep in there. There's only a very narrow cone of vulnerability.




Here's an IRIS-T on one of our F-16s: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRIS-T

[Vraciu]

Air combat vs Russian Mig29 went down exactly as I described it in the Iraq war. That was from an non-low observable F-15.

there is no proof the tech gap is closed. Our missile have been proven to hit targets. No such claim can be made by the Russians.

I think the idea that everything will degrade to a dog fight with cannons is overstated.  T-60 and T-72s in great numbers were going to outnumber and crush the the overwhelmed, high tech Abrams Tanks if I recall.

Except in actual tank battles it didn't go down like the computer sims. Why?  Because the Iraqis learned very quickly that when 5 Russian tanks engage an Abrams, 4 Iraqis died. As your friends are exploding around you, and the communication chain is filled with panic and confusion, the 5th guys doesn't fight as effectively as the model suggest he will. In Iraq, he jumped from his tank and ran for fox hole.

When formations of Flankers, begin to see random planes exploding around them, all of this, "the Russians out number us" stuff will evaporate like it did in the gulf and Iraq war.

Modern fighters are flying missile platforms. Non-stealth planes that think they can outfly the USA's Satalite/Stealth/missile air-to-air systems are littering the battle fields of the middle east in large numbers.  

You're dreaming in technicolor, my friend.

Fighting the Iraqis or North Koreans is a far cry from the Soviets or the Chinese.

They'll do to us what they did to the Germans.  Keep all the important stuff so deep within their territory you'll never get there.    And since JSF can't even do standoff munitions it will be worth even less.

We aren't going to have an Air Force if this thing is our salvation, just a taxpayer funded flying club.

[Vraciu]

Complete and utter bull exhaust. It has more internal fuel than an F-15C. More internal fuel than an F-16 can carry total with drop tanks. With external drop tanks the F-35's range will only be rivaled by the F-22 and Su-27 family. The F-35 has better thrust to weight ratio than the F-16 on the same fuel load. Internally it can carry only four missiles true, but that is in a stealth role. With external hardpoints it can carry 14 A2A missiles, and there is a future block upgrade planned to expand the internal capacity to six missiles. In a bomb-truck configuration it can carry more ord than an F-16, and if it gets into trouble it can jettison the external pylons and become stealthy with the push of a button. Both the British ASRAAM and the European IRIS-T dogfight missiles can be used on the F-35. We've got IRIS-T missiles for our F-35s. I'm sure a future update to the AIM-9X can give it lock-on after launch capability.

(Image removed from quote.)



The F-35 has full aspect stealth except straight aft because they didn't design it with an exhaust radar diffuser. An enemy radar needs to be able to see the turbine blades of the engine to get a radar return, and those are buried deep in there. There's only a very narrow cone of vulnerability.

(Image removed from quote.)


Here's an IRIS-T on one of our F-16s: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRIS-T

(Image removed from quote.)

On what planet???????????????????????  LOL!!   And let's entertain the notion it can outperform an F-16 (absolutely no chance, but okay I'll play along).   What are you gonna' do with it against an SU-30 other than get killed?   The F-16 is already a concern for survivability against the stuff coming out...and the JSF is supposed to wind up between the F-16 and F-18 (it apparently is closer to the Hornet--and for the same weight has about ten or twelve feet shorter wingspan with the corresponding loss of wing area and increased loading).   

And if you put all that crap on the pylons there goes your stealth.  Hello Flanker.  BOOM.  Bye bye JSF.


The only aspect that has full stealth is the front and that is against the radars used by mobile SAMs.   Due to the weapons bay change the side and lower aspect has been completely screwed up.   It was never intended to be like the F-22 any way, but now it is far worse.

[GScholz]

See Rule #4

[Vraciu]

See Rule #4

[Butcher]

Look I know nothing of the JSF, but your common response is "I know FRIENDS!!!" butt here are no links or information to say otherwise. I have my doubts of the F-35, only what I heave read online, unfortunately without proof I can't say nay or yay.

A ground crewman says one thing, you say another thing - but you are neither a ground crewman or a pilot - you showed no proof and even rebuttled your statements. I said early on a Flanker couldnt out run an Amraam, you said later on "No flanker can".
You showed no proof period, other then rambled on about something you have no clue about.

Are you an F-35 pilot or grounds crewman? didn't think so.

You are well within your rights to claim the F-35 is an overpriced piece of junk, I am not here to judge you on that, however you still have not shown any information the F-35 is a piece of junk. Your friends might think so, Hey maybe even my friends thing the same! unfortunately
neither our friends might actually be F-35 pilots or grounds crew members.

Where is the proof is all I am asking.

[Vraciu]

A ground crewman says one thing, you say another thing - but you are neither a ground crewman or a pilot -

(Why are you attributing to me a quote that I did not write?)

Actually, I am a pilot and have been for nearly 30 years.   I am an ATP/MEII with seven type ratings and almost 10,000 hours--about 7,500 in jets--including piston and jet fighters/attack/trainers, airliners, and intercontinental business jets.

No time in the F-35, of course.


I don't feel like giving you the data and not because of anything personal toward you.    It takes away from my time doing other things I actually enjoy (and other people have already done it).   Look for it the way I did starting with the sources I gave.   I really don't care about winning the argument.  Time will prove what I have said correct.  (And it isn't me.  I have nothing to do with any of it.  I didn't design the plane.   I don't fly it.   I simply know how to read data and have people I respect who are light years smarter than anyone here on this topic, myself included.)

[Changeup]

(Why are you attributing to me a quote that I did not write?)

Actually, I am a pilot and have been for nearly 30 years.   I am an ATP/MEII with seven type ratings and almost 10,000 hours--about 7,500 in jets--including piston and jet fighters/attack/trainers, airliners, and intercontinental business jets.

No time in the F-35, of course.


I don't feel like giving you the data and not because of anything personal toward you.    It takes away from my time doing other things I actually enjoy (and other people have already done it).   Look for it the way I did starting with the sources I gave.   I really don't care about winning the argument.  Time will prove what I have said correct.  (And it isn't me.  I have nothing to do with any of it.  I didn't design the plane.   I don't fly it.   I simply know how to read data and have people I respect who are light years smarter than anyone here on this topic, myself included.)

Which branch of service did you fly? 

[Vraciu]

Which branch of service did you fly?  

I do not get that personal.  Sorry.   

[GScholz]

The moment any of the thousands of people from the nine partner nations that are directly involved with the F-35 voice their displeasure with the aircraft, I'll take notice. So far they have nothing but praise for it. Norwegian pilots, British pilots, American pilots have all voiced their admiration for the F-35's capabilities. Anyone else are just talking out of their arses, regardless of how many airliners they have flown or if they fly a desk at the Pentagon.

[Vraciu]

The moment any of the thousands of people from the nine partner nations that are directly involved with the F-35 voice their displeasure with the aircraft, I'll take notice. So far they have nothing but praise for it. Norwegian pilots, British pilots, American pilots have all voiced their admiration for the F-35's capabilities. Anyone else are just talking out of their arses, regardless of how many airliners they have flown or if they fly a desk at the Pentagon.

Orders dialing back.  Support falling off.  (People on the inside depend on it for their livelihood.  They are SO eager to see it canceled.   Or not. Wake up bruh.)

They may buy it to appease America but they're better off buying Eurocanards.

[GScholz]

You're a conspiracy nut. Norwegian pilots do not depend on it for their livelihood. British pilots do not depend on it for their livelihood. USAF pilots do not depend on it for their livelihood. They all praise it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Leh4BXaIgoE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtEdfSKgCOQ

These people should be up on charges for treason for being so enthusiastic and not revealing to the public what a failure the F-35 is!

Why the diddly am I still talking to you? Must be the wine.

[Vraciu]

You're a conspiracy nut. Norwegian pilots do not depend on it for their livelihood. British pilots do not depend on it for their livelihood. USAF pilots do not depend on it for their livelihood. They all praise it.

Yes, because Norway and Britain are building ALL sorts of airplanes to preserve their flying club.

LMAO.

In Dr. Evil voice: Okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay then.