F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Jura The idiot
General
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
Italy has two carriers that can only launch STOVL fixed wing aircraft. They are buying their F-35Bs for those reasons...to launch from those vessels. Not for political reasons.
As to the F-35As they will buy...I believe the Italian analysts and planners know a thing are two. For example, like the F-35As are going to be a lot better than you imagine Thunder. Actually their off angle/departure characteristsics are very good. Their sensor fusion is going to be unequaled.
Given those things and their stealth, my guess is that they are, like the F-22, going to have to be significantly constrained in exercises pitting them against other aircraft. If you constrain the advantages they have enough, you will certainly find that OPFOR aircraft will best them. but that is not the way they will fight.
I contend that once the policies, procedures, and strategies are all developed, and pilots are trained accordingly to take advantage of the unique capabilities ...the F-35s are going to be fairly awesome 5th generation strike fighters.
Be that as it may...notice I said Strike Fighters. They were never designed to be air superiority/air domincance fighters cruising along on super cruise at high altitude wating to own enemy fighters. That is simply not what they were intended for. Will they be able to very effectively defend themselves? Absolutely...far better than I believe most will imagine for the reasons I just gave. But are they meant to fly high and do the air dominance role? Nope.
Time will tell.
Say what?
Italy has two carriers that can only launch STOVL fixed wing aircraft. They are buying their F-35Bs for those reasons...to launch from those vessels. Not for political reasons.
As to the F-35As they will buy...I believe the Italian analysts and planners know a thing are two. For example, like the F-35As are going to be a lot better than you imagine Thunder. Actually their off angle/departure characteristsics are very good. Their sensor fusion is going to be unequaled.
Given those things and their stealth, my guess is that they are, like the F-22, going to have to be significantly constrained in exercises pitting them against other aircraft. If you constrain the advantages they have enough, you will certainly find that OPFOR aircraft will best them. but that is not the way they will fight.
I contend that once the policies, procedures, and strategies are all developed, and pilots are trained accordingly to take advantage of the unique capabilities ...the F-35s are going to be fairly awesome 5th generation strike fighters.
Be that as it may...notice I said Strike Fighters. They were never designed to be air superiority/air domincance fighters cruising along on super cruise at high altitude wating to own enemy fighters. That is simply not what they were intended for. Will they be able to very effectively defend themselves? Absolutely...far better than I believe most will imagine for the reasons I just gave. But are they meant to fly high and do the air dominance role? Nope.
Time will tell.
Last edited:
thunderchief
Senior Member
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
Jamming is a battle between electronic systems. When you start jamming you could win or you could loose badly, revealing your own position. One thing is certain - when you start jamming you could kiss stealth goodbye . And that is one of the reasons F-117 was not equipped with jammers. Also, if you relay on jamming , better buy some Growlers instead of F-35 - they are much better at it and much cheaper too.
Yes, we know, F-16 was such a lemon
We should believe anonymous Dutch pilot over official F-16 specs
Well, Saudi Arabia depends lot more on US then on EU . You would think they would prefer F-35A to Typhoon
F-35 has better avionics then most of the 4th gen fighters, but you could negate that advantage with retrofitting older aircraft with newer avionics. After that, only advantage F-35 has is stealthiness (dubious advantage if I may add)
Well, any self-respecting fighter pilot would not want to go to war against highly sophisticated opponent, but sometimes you do what you must do. If your plane has clear advantage in close combat, then you will try to get close.
And yes, F-35 was designed as strike aircraft with secondary fighter capability (I told you that numerous times ), but in current situation it will serve as air superiority fighter (or even worse as strike aircraft without escort) , something it was not designed to do .
Jamming is a battle between electronic systems. When you start jamming you could win or you could loose badly, revealing your own position. One thing is certain - when you start jamming you could kiss stealth goodbye . And that is one of the reasons F-117 was not equipped with jammers. Also, if you relay on jamming , better buy some Growlers instead of F-35 - they are much better at it and much cheaper too.
Yes, we know, F-16 was such a lemon
We should believe anonymous Dutch pilot over official F-16 specs Well, Saudi Arabia depends lot more on US then on EU . You would think they would prefer F-35A to Typhoon
F-35 has better avionics then most of the 4th gen fighters, but you could negate that advantage with retrofitting older aircraft with newer avionics. After that, only advantage F-35 has is stealthiness (dubious advantage if I may add)
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
Well, any self-respecting fighter pilot would not want to go to war against highly sophisticated opponent, but sometimes you do what you must do. If your plane has clear advantage in close combat, then you will try to get close.
And yes, F-35 was designed as strike aircraft with secondary fighter capability (I told you that numerous times
), but in current situation it will serve as air superiority fighter (or even worse as strike aircraft without escort) , something it was not designed to do .
thunderchief
Senior Member
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
Putting F-35B aside , why would Italy want to buy both Eurofighter and F-35A (and spend lot of money on maintenance of both aircraft in current dire economic situation) , especially if F-35A is so much better ? Only reason I could think off is that they, like UK, want to strengthen ties with US and at the same time use F-35A primarily as strike aircraft and retain Typhoon as air superiority fighter.
Putting F-35B aside , why would Italy want to buy both Eurofighter and F-35A (and spend lot of money on maintenance of both aircraft in current dire economic situation) , especially if F-35A is so much better ? Only reason I could think off is that they, like UK, want to strengthen ties with US and at the same time use F-35A primarily as strike aircraft and retain Typhoon as air superiority fighter.
Jura The idiot
General
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
I didn't think I would join this discussion, but since Italy's been mentioned in several posts ... let me remind you Italy will host a unique facility to support F-35s "European and the Mediterranean" according to
you may check also
and
My point is "Italy is not just yet another buyer".
I didn't think I would join this discussion, but since Italy's been mentioned in several posts ... let me remind you Italy will host a unique facility to support F-35s "European and the Mediterranean"
according toyou may check also
and
My point is "Italy is not just yet another buyer".
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
No, Italy has made a very firm commitment to the F-35, and with a maintenance facility will be a prime player of getting the F-35 up and running and keeping it up and running. and if someone actually read the article about the Typhoon and F-35 interface, it makes a great deal of sense,,,,,,,,, to those who aren't "stuck" in the 60's?
I didn't think I would join this discussion, but since Italy's been mentioned in several posts ... let me remind you Italy will host a unique facility to support F-35s "European and the Mediterranean"
you may check also
and
My point is "Italy is not just yet another buyer".
No, Italy has made a very firm commitment to the F-35, and with a maintenance facility will be a prime player of getting the F-35 up and running and keeping it up and running. and if someone actually read the article about the Typhoon and F-35 interface, it makes a great deal of sense,,,,,,,,, to those who aren't "stuck" in the 60's?
SouthernSky
Junior Member
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
I mean the F-35 could more effectively jam radar systems if it was tracked by one compared to a 4th gen fighter. Not meaning that the F-35 would need to take over the role of a Growler. Jamming and stealth don't exclude each other, but complement each other.
Those "official" specs are put into context by that fighter pilot. Sure the F-16 can reach mach 2.0, but under what circumstances and for how long? Reading between those lines, one can simply deduce the fact that a clean f-16 would outaccelerate, outmaneuver the JSF and has a higher top speed. Yet, again this is not realistically how those fighters go into combat. Citing that the F-16 can reach mach 2.0 and the JSF is only limited to Mach 1.6 is like naïvely believing that a certain smartphone will absolutely in reality meet all those battery specs that are demonstrated in factory conditions.
It's also pretty interesting how you on the one hand cite LM official stats of the F-16 and use it as an argument for your anti-JSF discussion. Yet, you dismiss all statements made on behalf of LM/ the military by those who fly/flew the F-16, F-18, Harriers, Eurofighters and the JSF.
That Dutch pilot was not anonymous, I think you'd be able to google his name on the internet, because the Dutch airforce is pretty small.
Maybe they do, but don't forget not everyone is allowed to buy the F-35 yet even if they got the money. The US don't want a second Iran episode.
Let me give you another example. Israel complained to the US about Saudi-Arabia getting more (advanced) F-15s. This complaining stopped when the US promised Israel they could get the F-35. This must be a sign that Israel too views the F-35 as better than anything that's 4.5 gen. The Israeli's are top notch in the EW department (Operation Orchard should be an example of this). They too can upgrade their F-15s and F-16s with top notch EW equipment to defeat SAM threats and fighter threats, but they rather get the F-35.
First it depends on the model of the aircraft. The F-15s and F-16s aren't designed to house so much electronics/ displays and therefore you can't just plug new hardware in. After all these years, the room for upgrades is really limited. Furthermore, in the case of the F-15Cs and also partly of the F-16Cs up to block 52 or so, if you don't have the interface there to take advantage of the sensors, you won't gain the same level of capability.
Building new F-15s etc. with a redesigned cockpit and redesigned internal structure to create space for all the new hardware willl bring more costs that'll increase the price of these fighters. It may be even so that some additional flight testing need to be done because the redesign led to a change of the center of gravity.
Stealth means a reduced visibilty on radar for certain frequencies/ distances. It's not how the media present it, as a Romulan cloaking device. We can agree on that, but the fact that almost everything that is now designed to fly (cruise missiles, UAVs, aircrafts etc.) have some degree of stealth incorporated reflects on the benefits of reduced radar visibility.
Exactly that: "try".
That's why the USA required stealth as a capability for its fighters. Don't let them be able to get close easily and take them out before they can even see you. Ofcourse, there are tactics to force the merge, but quite a lot of enemy fighters should have been shot down BVR before it comes to that. You may lose some in WVR, but most of them should be destroyed in BVR. A "good" trade-off I suppose.
Training excersises revealed that even F-15s could be easily defeated by lower tier fighters like the Mig-21 in WVR, because during these dogfights where a lot of planes are flying, you'd lose track of the entire picture so some could sneak in and kill you. This means that maneuverability is important, but situational awareness and the ability to 'reach out and touch someone' are even more important.
It's well in its capabilities to defend itself. Especially in the BVR arena. Studies are underway investigating the possiblity to increase the amount of AAMs upto 6 internally. This would give the JSF extra shots to take out enemies at long range.
I mean the F-35 could more effectively jam radar systems if it was tracked by one compared to a 4th gen fighter. Not meaning that the F-35 would need to take over the role of a Growler. Jamming and stealth don't exclude each other, but complement each other.
Yes, we know, F-16 was such a lemon
Those "official" specs are put into context by that fighter pilot. Sure the F-16 can reach mach 2.0, but under what circumstances and for how long? Reading between those lines, one can simply deduce the fact that a clean f-16 would outaccelerate, outmaneuver the JSF and has a higher top speed. Yet, again this is not realistically how those fighters go into combat. Citing that the F-16 can reach mach 2.0 and the JSF is only limited to Mach 1.6 is like naïvely believing that a certain smartphone will absolutely in reality meet all those battery specs that are demonstrated in factory conditions.
It's also pretty interesting how you on the one hand cite LM official stats of the F-16 and use it as an argument for your anti-JSF discussion. Yet, you dismiss all statements made on behalf of LM/ the military by those who fly/flew the F-16, F-18, Harriers, Eurofighters and the JSF.
That Dutch pilot was not anonymous, I think you'd be able to google his name on the internet, because the Dutch airforce is pretty small.
Well, Saudi Arabia depends lot more on US then on EU . You would think they would prefer F-35A to Typhoon
Maybe they do, but don't forget not everyone is allowed to buy the F-35 yet even if they got the money. The US don't want a second Iran episode.
Let me give you another example. Israel complained to the US about Saudi-Arabia getting more (advanced) F-15s. This complaining stopped when the US promised Israel they could get the F-35. This must be a sign that Israel too views the F-35 as better than anything that's 4.5 gen. The Israeli's are top notch in the EW department (Operation Orchard should be an example of this). They too can upgrade their F-15s and F-16s with top notch EW equipment to defeat SAM threats and fighter threats, but they rather get the F-35.
First it depends on the model of the aircraft. The F-15s and F-16s aren't designed to house so much electronics/ displays and therefore you can't just plug new hardware in. After all these years, the room for upgrades is really limited. Furthermore, in the case of the F-15Cs and also partly of the F-16Cs up to block 52 or so, if you don't have the interface there to take advantage of the sensors, you won't gain the same level of capability.
Building new F-15s etc. with a redesigned cockpit and redesigned internal structure to create space for all the new hardware willl bring more costs that'll increase the price of these fighters. It may be even so that some additional flight testing need to be done because the redesign led to a change of the center of gravity.
Stealth means a reduced visibilty on radar for certain frequencies/ distances. It's not how the media present it, as a Romulan cloaking device. We can agree on that, but the fact that almost everything that is now designed to fly (cruise missiles, UAVs, aircrafts etc.) have some degree of stealth incorporated reflects on the benefits of reduced radar visibility.
Exactly that: "try".
That's why the USA required stealth as a capability for its fighters. Don't let them be able to get close easily and take them out before they can even see you. Ofcourse, there are tactics to force the merge, but quite a lot of enemy fighters should have been shot down BVR before it comes to that. You may lose some in WVR, but most of them should be destroyed in BVR. A "good" trade-off I suppose.
Training excersises revealed that even F-15s could be easily defeated by lower tier fighters like the Mig-21 in WVR, because during these dogfights where a lot of planes are flying, you'd lose track of the entire picture so some could sneak in and kill you. This means that maneuverability is important, but situational awareness and the ability to 'reach out and touch someone' are even more important.
And yes, F-35 was designed as strike aircraft with secondary fighter capability (I told you that numerous times
It's well in its capabilities to defend itself. Especially in the BVR arena. Studies are underway investigating the possiblity to increase the amount of AAMs upto 6 internally. This would give the JSF extra shots to take out enemies at long range.
Last edited:
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread
Planned from block 3F or 4 ? 2 AIM-120 on the main hardpoint in internal weapons bays on a adapter, with 2 others total 6 internally also 10 under wings max.
I have yet posted a view for this adapter but many post to find.
Planned from block 3F or 4 ? 2 AIM-120 on the main hardpoint in internal weapons bays on a adapter, with 2 others total 6 internally also 10 under wings max.
I have yet posted a view for this adapter but many post to find.