F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread

[Air Force Brat]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

Correct answer would be none - production of F-22 is halted But, as you said yourself, we have 3 countries with definite flying prototypes . Some small changes could happen but overall pattern is clear. As for LRIP of F-35, we shall see what would become of current examples . There are lot of rumors about combat capabilities of current lot. Also, we should not forget countries like India and Japan with their own 5th gen programs .
Well, you basically prove the point of F-35 critics , F-35 could not achieve air superiority on their own It is a strike aircraft with secondary fighter capability, nothing more, nothing less.

Well chief, LRIP stands for Low Rate Initial Production, that is in production ace, just as surely as China's J-15 is IN production. Now is it a real fifth gen, NO, and neither is PAK-FA, and the jury is out on the J-20, but it is close enough to fifth gen for the USAF to classify it as fifth gen, and they outrank you and even the Air Force Brat..as to your last point the F-35 is comparable to the F-16, the F-16 as you should recall, (yes, you're a geezer too), was de-clawed in its initial deployment, because it was putting our little jet jockeys to sleep, yes it will pull Gs, and the F-35A has been flown to 9.9 Gs with NO ill effects, it has also been flown to a 73 degree angle of attack and recovered, without departing. It will no doubt hold its own with most 4 to 4.5 gen aircraft, the Eagle and the Flanker are likely exceptions....in spite of our best attempts to give you a few hints, you continue to "plow" with your little Ford 8N and a two bottom plow. Heck even if your as old as I am, the least you could do is upgrade your "software".

 

[Air Force Brat]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

Like I said many times in ANY military projects...it's all about the program, just as the article pointed out. But comparing a stealth fighter program to a submarine program is like comparing apples and oranges. The JSF started from scratch while the Virginia class sub was derived from the previous LA class submarine platform to worked on.

That's correct, and the most maligned, yes its expensive, and yes its sophisticated, and yes the stealth coatings are a pain in the butt, and yes its had its share of troubles, but the F-22 will still kick the KRAP out of anything else on the planet, ANY day of the week. and twice on Sunday, PAK-FA, and J-20 will join that list when they enter production, and I'm sure the F-35 is on that list, but it will give the Raptor a run for its money in Leap-Year, and on the dark of the moon? I'm the King of KISS, but there are exceptions, the Raptor and F-35 will work, and work well, they will have to be maintained and paid for, but then all super-models require a little attention and cash??? NO???? ask Mirage Driver, he knows???

 

[thunderchief]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

Well chief, LRIP stands for Low Rate Initial Production, that is in production ace, just as surely as China's J-15 is IN production.

I know what LRIP stands for, but I have my doubts about current examples of F-35. IMHO many of so called LRIP aircraft would never be deployed operationally and a reason for that is major redesign of engines that would have to be performed.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

I know what LRIP stands for, but I have my doubts about current examples of F-35. IMHO many of so called LRIP aircraft would never be deployed operationally and a reason for that is major redesign of engines that would have to be performed.

I know you do, and I know that you're likely more knowledgeable than myself about many areas and design concepts, but the F-35 is set to be our go to Fighter/Attack aircraft for some time IMHO. It would serve both of us to maximum advantage to "accurately" assess her true capabilities and weaknesses, if you will note, the 58 fixes to the B model, that John A Tirpak writes about in the AFMs Daily Report, some ARE VERY SERIOUS, but some are line maintenance items that Must be taken care of, and they will be. The engine requires a seal redesign, with a groove machined in to prevent friction from creating heat, heat that caused an engine to come apart because of stress fractures, and rupture a fuel tank, causing a fire. A relatively simple redesign, in order to prevent a recurrence, a crisis, yes, but a manageable crisis that is already well on the way to being history....

To be honest, I have shared all of your concerns, and several more, I think there is a lot of complexity here that is costly, and only incrementally more capable, but that's where we are, we can't afford to critique our next gen F-16 to death, we NEED to fix it, and fly it, and we will! The utter stupidity that cancelled F-22 production, and it is stupidity to the point of absurdity, MUST not be repeated here on this aircraft, and will not be repeated, the lesson of the F-22, and the failure of USAF "leaders" to defend the most important air superiority aircraft in history is shamefull.... That the joint chiefs and politicians bear the ultimate responsibility is a gross example of "leading from behind". This airplane, that is a shadow of the F-22, must step up and fill those shoes, those who love this country are now realizing that, and the hard hitting leadership to fix the F-35 is right on target.

 

[Scyth]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

Soviets would guide fighters to approximate coordinates of the target. IRST would still have to acquire said target in fairly wide search area . Modern IRSTs are even more capable, they could operate independently much like mechanically steered radar . But you don't even have to do that . In close combat IRST and radar could be locked on target with HMS .



Yeah, and if you add 2xAIM-9 and 2xAIM-120 , suddenly your F-16 becomes unmaneuverable piece of junk

Good luck guiding a bunch of fighters towards an approximate location of a flight of stealthy JSF/ F-22s with stand-off jamming support.

4 AAMS + missile pylons will zap some of the aircraft's performance, one way or another. There is a reason why those 4 AAM stations on a Eurofighter airframe are semi-buried.

Yeah, and British, being incredibly stupid, will continue to fund both obsolete Typhoon and ultra-modern F-35. In fact, instead of buying superior F-35A , they would procure more of completely inferior Typhoons

Not relevant. Can use it too. The USA, UK, Italy, Netherlands and all other partners and procurers are being stupid for buying an aircraft that can't handle previous / existing threats.

Money blown on F-35 would be better spent on 3 things : 1) upgrading current F-16 fleet to be able to perform most of F-35 tasks against most of the opponents 2) purchasing new and improved 4.5 gen version of F-16 based on Super Viper version offered to India (F-16 IN) and block 60 3) restarting F-22 production .

Not relevant. The money is already spent. Spending another bunch of money to upgrade current F-16 fleet (remember those canopy cracks?) and buy 4.5 gen fighters will cost more than continuing the JSF program. Think of all the contracts that need to be bought off.

As for US vs Russian claims, funny thing is both sides could be right . But there is no doubt that radar technology has improved significantly in last decade . F-35, being late , could arrive at significantly altered battlefield , one it was not designed to fight on .

Then the F-16 etc. weren't designed for that battlefield at all.

As I said before, stealthiness could be useful in some circumstances but completely useless in other . To give you an example, machine-gun on the tank is useful against infantry, but almost completely useless against other tanks . Russian PAK FA , even without stealth, is still kinetically superb airplane . So is F-22 . F-35 - I don't think so .

Similar argument back, speed and turn rates could be useful in some circumstances but completely useless in other. To give you an example, a F-18 Hornet has a much lower acceleration/ top speed compared to the F-16 and Mig-29, yet it still managed to defeat those aircraft in excersises.

 

[Jura The idiot]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

I know you do, and I know that you're likely more knowledgeable than myself about many areas and design concepts, but the F-35 is set to be our go to Fighter/Attack aircraft for some time IMHO. It would serve both of us to maximum advantage to "accurately" assess her true capabilities and weaknesses, if you will note, the 58 fixes to the B model, that John A Tirpak writes about in the AFMs Daily Report, some ARE VERY SERIOUS, but some are line maintenance items that Must be taken care of, and they will be. The engine requires a seal redesign, with a groove machined in to prevent friction from creating heat, heat that caused an engine to come apart because of stress fractures, and rupture a fuel tank, causing a fire. A relatively simple redesign, in order to prevent a recurrence, a crisis, yes, but a manageable crisis that is already well on the way to being history....

what I don't understand is the talk about the fix(es) when the "root cause" hasn't been established yet ... or has it? or I misunderstood, quote,
Bogdan declined to specify how much it will cost until the root-cause analysis is completed.
end of quote from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

?
I don't mean to criticize anything or anybody (certainly not you, AFB , am just asking

 

[Air Force Brat]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

what I don't understand is the talk about the fix(es) when the "root cause" hasn't been established yet ... or has it? or I misunderstood, quote,
Bogdan declined to specify how much it will cost until the root-cause analysis is completed.
end of quote from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

?
I don't mean to criticize anything or anybody (certainly not you, AFB , am just asking

No problem Jura, my understanding is that the turbine blade rubbed the seal creating a temperature spike from 1000 degrees F to 1900 degrees F, resulting in cracking when the aircraft was Yawed with the Rudder during a roll etc, just to see how it would behave. The Case halves are joined at the seal and flexed. The solution is to machine a light groove into the seal in order to eliminate rubbing. Make no mistake Chris Bogdan is a salesman and politician, hes holding back a little.

in the meantime, the fix is to intentionally induce enough rubbing to create a groove by maneuvering the aircraft, and intentionally inducing the flex in a controlled manner..

 

[thunderchief]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

Good luck guiding a bunch of fighters towards an approximate location of a flight of stealthy JSF/ F-22s with stand-off jamming support.

4 AAMS + missile pylons will zap some of the aircraft's performance, one way or another. There is a reason why those 4 AAM stations on a Eurofighter airframe are semi-buried.

First, you would need effective stand-off jamming support (something not related to F-35) . Second, if you have stand-off jamming powerful enough to blind enemy defense why would you need F-35 for ?

Missiles on Typhoon are semi-buried to decrease frontal RCS.

Not relevant. Can use it too. The USA, UK, Italy, Netherlands and all other partners and procurers are being stupid for buying an aircraft that can't handle previous / existing threats.

Well, UK is buying F-35B to replace Harriers (sound decision) , Italy also has Typhoons and would buy small number of F-35s for political reasons (same as Netherlands) . US will invest huge amounts of money in a mediocre aircraft .

Not relevant. The money is already spent. Spending another bunch of money to upgrade current F-16 fleet (remember those canopy cracks?) and buy 4.5 gen fighters will cost more than continuing the JSF program. Think of all the contracts that need to be bought off.

US would certainly lose money on this, but refurbishing and upgrading F-16 fleet is lot cheaper then buying new F-35s . Heck, even buying new F-16s is cheaper then buying new F-35. As for those contracts, good prosecutor with free hands could make a career reviewing them (my personal opinion) .

Then the F-16 etc. weren't designed for that battlefield at all.

True, but they would do fine job in less demanding environments . And for really though opponents you would need something like F-22 anyway.

Similar argument back, speed and turn rates could be useful in some circumstances but completely useless in other. To give you an example, a F-18 Hornet has a much lower acceleration/ top speed compared to the F-16 and Mig-29, yet it still managed to defeat those aircraft in excersises.

It also lost in exercises against those. What is the point of having 5th gen aircraft with no clear advantage over 4th gen aircraft it supposed to beat ?

 

[Scyth]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

First, you would need effective stand-off jamming support (something not related to F-35) . Second, if you have stand-off jamming powerful enough to blind enemy defense why would you need F-35 for ?

Because the F-35 is part of an entire warfare system. It doesn't need to do everything, though it can do a lot.

The F-35 can jam radar systems itself too and more effectively than older gen fighters because again of stealth. And again it's not either stealth with no jamming or 4th gen with jamming. F-117s went in with jamming support and lack of jamming support was supposedly one of the reason why one got shot down.

Missiles on Typhoon are semi-buried to decrease frontal RCS.

And drag.


A Dutch F-16 pilot who is now converting to the F-35 said: "a clean F-16 would achieve around 1.5 mach. When you put bombs on it, the first question becomes where is the tanker?"

Same thing (a bit less though) applies when you hang missiles on it.

Well, UK is buying F-35B to replace Harriers (sound decision) , Italy also has Typhoons and would buy small number of F-35s for political reasons (same as Netherlands) . US will invest huge amounts of money in a mediocre aircraft .

Political reasons...that's a good one. That also applies to Saudi-Arabia buying Eurofighters and the Eurofighter consortium buying their own fighters.

US would certainly lose money on this, but refurbishing and upgrading F-16 fleet is lot cheaper then buying new F-35s . Heck, even buying new F-16s is cheaper then buying new F-35. As for those contracts, good prosecutor with free hands could make a career reviewing them (my personal opinion) .

If you also agree on that the US would lose money on this, then we'll put that to rest.

True, but they would do fine job in less demanding environments . And for really though opponents you would need something like F-22 anyway.

So you admit that the F-35 is better than older gen fighters except for maneuverability, which is my point all along?

It also lost in exercises against those. What is the point of having 5th gen aircraft with no clear advantage over 4th gen aircraft it supposed to beat ?

It has a clear advantage in survivability, stealth and sensors. An Eurofighter Typhoon pilot said: "Any self-respecting fighter pilot doesn't want to get into a dogfight, he wants to go up there launch missiles and run away bravely and be home in time for supper". That reflects why again a "junk" F-35 with the maneuverability of a brick (according to you ) may still be able to gain a better kill-ratio compared to non-stealthy, but maneuverable fighters. The F-35 was designed as a Strike Fighter, bombing stuff first then fighting off other planes. So less demand was put on making it near/better than the F-22 in maneuverability, which may be also the reason why the F-35 is being exported and the F-22 isn't, which means that the design objective of "only" F-16/ F-18 like was sufficient.

 

[strehl]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

I wonder what the field of view of an IRST sensor is? I'm referring to the instantaneous FOV and not the field of regard (ie, gimbal slew). Just doing some rudimentary numbers gives you some tracking precision estimates. For example, a 20 degree IFOV is about 350 milliradians. If you have 1000 pixels across each side (1 million total), at 20KM you get a resolution of about 7 meters. Also, your diffraction limit (small aperture vs range) adds more blur. Is that good enough to fire a missile?

On the issue of detectivity, those little track ball type IRST sensors don't have a large aperture so their light gathering capability is going to be limited. I would guess maybe 37mm diameter? The bottom mounted pods have much larger input optics. Again, for shorter ranges that is probably OK. Signal drops as 1/range squared so OK dimishes rapidly.

The thing is, people who are paid to think along these lines and have some money to do some modelling and field tests should have done so long ago. Wouldn't we be seeing a mad rush for IRST sensors on everything if the results indicated a significant negation of stealth? For example, ground based AAA using IRST trackers would be a cheap way to threaten stealth platforms. I doubt if these types of studies ever see the light of day but you have to assume they are performed.