Author Topic: F-35  (Read 17684 times)

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: F-35
« Reply #270 on: May 14, 2014, 09:23:58 AM »
Military or Civilian or Private?

That's probably too personal...


 :lol
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Vinkman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: F-35
« Reply #271 on: May 14, 2014, 09:47:40 AM »

Maneuver warfare worked out.  But precision munitions were overrated--again.   You buy too much PR.


The Iraqi air defense system, including it's aircraft were distroyed in the first 48 hours. A few Iraqi planes escaped to Iran. They shot down nothing.
Precision munition are not air-air combat so that's not relevant to this discussion.

What is "Manuever Warfare" and what do you mean when you say "it worked"?
Who is John Galt?

Offline Vinkman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: F-35
« Reply #272 on: May 14, 2014, 10:00:55 AM »

We will have less than 100 stealth aircraft.   The enemy will have many more.   And our stealth will be degraded over time.  It doesn't work forever.   It especially doesn't work when it (RAM) wears down, which it does, particularly in a humid and corrosive environment like the Pacific.  Stealth fighters are of little use when in maintenance.  

There are 187 F-22s, plus 2400 expected F-35s to be purchased through 2035. [Base on the 2005 GAO eprot] don't know if that's still the correct number.

The enemy has NO stealth aircraft. When they do, they will be produced in much smaller numbers as well because of cost.

So you are arguing that stealth planes, like the F-35 are no match for su-27s because of a maintenance record that doesn't exsit yet? Were the F-117 all stuck in hangars during the Iraq war instead of fighting?

your reaching........and not grasping.

Who is John Galt?

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: F-35
« Reply #273 on: May 14, 2014, 10:22:01 AM »
The Iraqi air defense system, including it's aircraft were distroyed in the first 48 hours. A few Iraqi planes escaped to Iran. They shot down nothing.

That is not entirely accurate... The Iraqi air force did shoot down and/or severely damage a number of coalition aircraft. The Iraqis lost 23-44 aircraft in air-air combat varying on report. The coalition lost 4-5 destroyed and 4 damaged. So the coalition enjoyed a K/D of between 5:1 and 10:1.

On the first night of the war, two F/A-18's from the carrier USS Saratoga were flying outside of Baghdad when two Iraqi MiG-25PDs interceptors from the 96th Squadron engaged them. In the beyond-visual-range (BVR) kill, one of the Iraqi MiGs piloted by lieutenant colonel Zuhair Dawood, fired an R-40 missile. The missile impacted Scott Speicher's jet head on when he was travelling Mach 0.92. The impact sent the aircraft spiraling downwards and most people believe Speicher died on the impact of the missile.

An Iraqi MiG-23 fired a R-24T missile at a F-111 on a bombing run and scored a hit, although the bomber made it safely back to base. Another similar incident occurred with the same Iraqi interceptor several minutes later, this F-111 also made it back to base despite the severe damage to the aircraft.

An Iraqi MiG-29 struck an F-111 aircraft with a R60 missile, though the sturdy F-111 stayed airworthy. Several minutes later the same pilot fired a R27 missile at a B-52G on a bombing run, severely damaging it.

It has been claimed by some sources that a Tornado (ZA467) crewed by Squadron Leader Gary Lennox and Squadron Leader Adrian Weeks was shot down on 19 January by a R-60MK missile fired from an Iraqi MiG-29 piloted by Jameel Sayhood, however this aircraft is officially recorded as having crashed on 22 January on a mission to Ar Rutbah.

In what was the last aerial victory for the Iraqi Air Force before Operation Iraqi Freedom, an Iraqi MiG-25 destroyed an American UAV RQ-1 Predator after the drone opened fire on the Iraqi aircraft with a Stinger missile.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2014, 10:27:26 AM by GScholz »
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline danny76

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2583
Re: F-35
« Reply #274 on: May 14, 2014, 10:52:31 AM »
That's probably too personal...


 :lol


Hmmm, either it's a PerSec issue or a Walting issue :headscratch:
"You kill 'em all, I'll eat the BATCO!"
The GFC

"Not within a thousand years will man ever fly" - Wilbur Wright

Offline danny76

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2583
Re: F-35
« Reply #275 on: May 14, 2014, 10:58:24 AM »
The biggest question I have regarding these aircraft (RAFALE, F22, F35, Eurofighter Typhoon etc) is that the requirement for a stealthy air superiority fighter is speculative at best.

Whilst I am sure that the powers that be (and possibly Vraciu) know more than the rest of us, I struggle to find a potential enemy right now that has any legitimate air force whatsoever.

The UK have scrapped Harrier, and Tornado, which were two prime IDS and Ground Attack/Close Support platforms, and introduced the Typhoon :headscratch:

We are supposedly buying F35's but how they will be of greater use than the Harrier is beyond me :old:
"You kill 'em all, I'll eat the BATCO!"
The GFC

"Not within a thousand years will man ever fly" - Wilbur Wright

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: F-35
« Reply #276 on: May 14, 2014, 11:14:51 AM »
We are supposedly buying F35's but how they will be of greater use than the Harrier is beyond me :old:

Sqdn. Ldr. Jim Schofield can answer that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLSsLCMsCrM
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: F-35
« Reply #277 on: May 14, 2014, 11:24:28 AM »
The people who get to fly the F-35 love it. The critics and their criticisms are political.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vwuyT2wFxQ
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline danny76

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2583
Re: F-35
« Reply #278 on: May 14, 2014, 11:29:13 AM »
I think my point was: lets buy something else before we get rid of the thing wea lready has that does the same job.

F35 is damned sexy though :old:
"You kill 'em all, I'll eat the BATCO!"
The GFC

"Not within a thousand years will man ever fly" - Wilbur Wright

Offline Changeup

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5688
      • Das Muppets
Re: F-35
« Reply #279 on: May 14, 2014, 11:34:30 AM »
The biggest question I have regarding these aircraft (RAFALE, F22, F35, Eurofighter Typhoon etc) is that the requirement for a stealthy air superiority fighter is speculative at best.

Whilst I am sure that the powers that be (and possibly Vraciu) know more than the rest of us, I struggle to find a potential enemy right now that has any legitimate air force whatsoever.

The UK have scrapped Harrier, and Tornado, which were two prime IDS and Ground Attack/Close Support platforms, and introduced the Typhoon :headscratch:

We are supposedly buying F35's but how they will be of greater use than the Harrier is beyond me :old:

I believe it has more to do with the predicted wars of the future.  Localized conflicts where immediate control of the airspace is paramount.  The Harrier and any ac with like-mission profiles wouldn't/have t be sent in unless two very important conditions were met:

1.  The opposition has no hardware to compete with the close air support ac tasked;
2.  Airspace during ingress/egress/on-station is in complete allied control

Slow ac like the Harrier/A10 et al are ducks in open space down low.  That's why the transition of the 16 was so awesome yet unexpected.  It's ordnance load out allowed it to run close air support without the conditions above because at its peak, it was more than capable of defending itself and provide dirt moving services to boots on the ground.  

With NATO, countries can economize by making operational decisions ahead of their involvement based on future threatcons and predicted threatcon.  With the awakening of the Russian bear, the English leopard will not allow the mistakes of the 30's to be repeated.

My hats off to them.  They recognize the need to change their power projection platforms now.
"Such is the nature of war.  By protecting others, you save yourself."

"Those who are skilled in combat do not become angered.  Those who are skilled at winning do not become afraid.  Thus, the wise win before the fight, while the ignorant fight to win." - Morihei Ueshiba

Offline Vraciu

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14139
Re: F-35
« Reply #280 on: May 14, 2014, 12:10:38 PM »
There are 187 F-22s, plus 2400 expected F-35s to be purchased through 2035. [Base on the 2005 GAO eprot] don't know if that's still the correct number.

The enemy has NO stealth aircraft. When they do, they will be produced in much smaller numbers as well because of cost.




There are only about 94 combat coded F-22s.  Not 187.

And if you think China, being funded with our reckless debt policies, cannot afford all the PAK-FAs it wants then you are smoking some powerful stuff.

Maneuver Warfare.  It is standard Marine doctrine for combat.  You know, that thing Pierre Sprey's buddy John Boyd invented.  The guy who saved the F-15 from becoming a "Five-Percent-Better-F-111".  
« Last Edit: May 14, 2014, 12:13:21 PM by Vraciu »
”KILLER V”
Charter Member of the P-51 Mustang Skin Mafia
- THE DAMNED -
King of the Hill Champ Tour 219 - Win Percentage 100
"1v1 Skyyr might be the best pilot ever to play the game." - Via PM, Name Redacted

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: F-35
« Reply #281 on: May 14, 2014, 12:38:34 PM »
And if you think China, being funded with our reckless debt policies, cannot afford all the PAK-FAs it wants then you are smoking some powerful stuff.

Actually Russia has refused to give China the Pak-FA, for obvious reason - they might be friends but they are not lovers. Besides, China has its own Stealth plane its been tinkering with, Chengdu J-20. While its a first generation stealth plane, the Chinese believe it or not have no interest in the PAK-FA.
Whether its actually a true stealth plane is a major question (britain believes no and does the USAF) on the J-20, but considering China still upgrades Mig-21's, its not hard to say they haven't been trying their best, you can bet China will be cranking these planes out if it does infact work.

JG 52

Offline Vraciu

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14139
Re: F-35
« Reply #282 on: May 14, 2014, 12:47:19 PM »
I am sure China will reverse engineer it eventually. 
”KILLER V”
Charter Member of the P-51 Mustang Skin Mafia
- THE DAMNED -
King of the Hill Champ Tour 219 - Win Percentage 100
"1v1 Skyyr might be the best pilot ever to play the game." - Via PM, Name Redacted

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: F-35
« Reply #283 on: May 14, 2014, 12:49:44 PM »
I am sure China will reverse engineer it eventually. 

I looked at the J-20, its nose looks aweful close to an F-22, however the rest of the plane looks really ugly as hell.
JG 52

Offline ACE

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5563
Re: F-35
« Reply #284 on: May 14, 2014, 12:50:40 PM »
I believe they will be produced more than you think vinkman. I.E china. Tons of workers. I'd imagine they do not have the same labor laws as we do. You get what I'm trying to say?  I could be wrong though.
Sixth Tri-Annual Dueling Bracket Champion

The Few

-Spek