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

[FORBIN]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

I ROFL: people who follow this thread know Lieutenant General Bogdan is the head of the F-35 program, and Sergey Bogdan (sorry I don't know his rank) is the test-pilot of the Su-35 who flew to Zhuhai 2014 (if I understood this article in Spanish:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

You do well to prevent, do not get the wrong name

 

[A Bar Brother]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

Just mentioning the term DEAD in my view can mean different things to different people because it depends on the SAM systems behind it. Dealing with a S-300 or S-400 is different from that of other less serious area denial. When Corcoran talks about the fact that only the F-22 that can kick down the door it is true if it is concerning an IADS built around S-300 or S-400. F-35 is not expected to survive against such area denial. When Hostages talked about DEAD, he could be referring to lesser systems which the F-35 can handle. Both of them need not necessarily be making conflicting statements. Obviously a certain number of air assets are required to do the job because there is an individual cap on weapon load out but central to it is that the platform must be able to perform in a denial environment and frankly in certain ones only the F-22 can handle the task. This is purely a function of its all aspect stealth and its RCS profile which enables it to knock out the threat before they are detected.

If it's not a S-300 or S-400 level system, then even 4th gen aircraft are good enough against such a SAM.

I hardly doubt Hostage would come up on stage and talk about systems that are less capable than the 16-year-old SA-20.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

I had a look at the reference link on Hostages. My read is that Hostages is performing what a politician does best; be sufficiently ambiguous but enough to get the PR side out and try to downplay if there is any misstep. You will have to read between the lines to actually understand the meaning behind the words. So my comments are :

(i) His comments "If I do not keep that F-22 fleet viable, the F-35 fleet frankly will be irrelevant. The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform. It needs the F-22". That is simply the truth but obviously for countries without the F-22 but are prospective F-35 customers, that doesn't send a comforting message. Unfortunately that statement is pretty accurate even if he might have to do some damage control.

(ii) He described a mission set requiring F-35 that would be prohibitive for other air assets. I noted that intentionally he left out whether it is a IADS or non IADS environment. He is inferring some kind of threat that the F-35 can handle. This is what he said "“I’m going to have some F-35s doing air superiority, some doing those early phases of persistent attack, opening the holes, and again, the F-35 is not compelling unless it’s there in numbers,” the general says. “Because it can’t turn and run away, it’s got to have support from other F-35s. So I’m going to need eight F-35s to go after a target that I might only need two (F-22) Raptors to go after. But the F-35s can be equally or more effective against that site than the Raptor can because of the synergistic effects of the platform.”

Unfortunately his statements are incoherent because of their conflicting nature as he is saying the mission set requires 8 F-35 as opposed to 2 F-22's but yet the F-35 is more effective. No wonder Sweetman at the onset of the article said this : "The first observation to be made is that the Air Force might be able to use an Eng Lit 101 course." It is also interesting to note that he said " it can’t turn and run away (the F-35)". This maybe because as the F-35 is not all aspect stealth, the side and rear has a higher dBm reading than the front and would be more vulnerable if it turns. It may also mean that a straight line sweep requires more asset deployment than a 360 degree sweep. Who knows what is going on in between his brain and lips.

(iii)I think this one beats it all when he said "The F-35′s cross section is much smaller than the F-22′s. “The F-35 doesn’t have the altitude, doesn’t have the speed [of the F-22], but it can beat the F-22 in stealth.” Now Sweetman comments on this said it all "Now, we all know that a lot of things can go happen between the interviewee’s brain and the interviewer’s keyboard, but the idea that the F-35 is stealthier than the F-22 contradicts pretty much everything that has been said about the program for the past 20 years, including the reporting of my former colleague, the usually well-informed Dave Fulghum." In other words this Hostage is full of "s**t"

Careful there little fella,, General Hostage is still the foremost authority in the world on Air Combat, and he is deliberately ambiguous, you don't give the bad guys all they need to "know"? do you? If that is Sweetman's quote, I hope its his and not your's, I would make it very clear that everyone knows he said it, I/You didn't. He is combat qualified in the F-22, he does "know" more in the tip of his little pinky, than anyone who has ever posted on the Sino Defense Forum. What he says makes perfect sense to those of us who understand what he is talking about, unfortunately our little Bar Brother, (is that the TWO DOG BAR and GRILL?) doesn't understand, and misquotes or misunderstands? sorry little brother???

 

[Jeff Head]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

It's fine. I wasn't offended or anything.

Fine. Case closed.

The rest is conjecture. There are no operational PAK-FA, T-50. There are a few prototypes. Same for the J-20. The proof will be in the pudding.

I have no doubts about the Russian designers ability to develop very good aerodynamics. History tells us that. History also tells us that their electronics are almost always significantly less capable than their claims.

As I said, we are years away from that being proven one way or the other. Same for the J-20. Years away.

People tend (IMHO) to underestimate the capabilities of the F-35...which at this stage and with the types of politics that surround it, is only natural. It is has not achieved IOC itself...but it is on the cusp and about 150 operational aircraft have already been built and deployed and are being tested more than any other aircraft in history.

In the end, the F-35 will be recognized, precisely because of the new technologies built into it, and the development of and taking advantage of those capabilities in conjunction with its other capabilities...as I said, I believe it will be recognized as the pre-eminent 5th generation strike fighter. Not without peer...but without a peer who will be able to take that position from it.

I believe the same will be said about the F-22 in terms of air superiority/dominance.

I do believe that ultimately some of the major powers will develop, and perhaps improve their initial developments, until they begin to equal them...but by that time the US will be moving on to 6th generation aircraft.

Time will tell.

 

[Jura The idiot]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

...


He says 8 F-35s are needed to match or exceed 2 F-22s. Now what if the bad guys bring in 8 F-22s? Will I have to bring in 32 F-35s then?

...

if you believe in

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

then, qualitatively: you'd need to come with more than the initial ratio (here more than 4 times 8)
but, quantitatively: it depends ... now I toyed with the attrition coefficients to annihilate all 8 Red at the expense of 1 Blue, ran the simulation for 8 Blue:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and the answer is: 49 Red needed to take down the 8 Blue ... but to achieve this, you would loose 21 airplanes (ca. 40% of your initial force)

check the thread 'Mathematical model of air-to-air combat and loses' if you happened to be interested in how this is done LOL

 

[A Bar Brother]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

What he says makes perfect sense to those of us who understand what he is talking about, unfortunately our little Bar Brother, (is that the TWO DOG BAR and GRILL?) doesn't understand, and misquotes or misunderstands? sorry little brother???

Then it would be great if you explain it rather than resorting to personal attacks.

 

[A Bar Brother]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

Fine. Case closed.

The rest is conjecture. There are no operational PAK-FA, T-50. There are a few prototypes. Same for the J-20. The proof will be in the pudding.

I have no doubts about the Russian designers ability to develop very good aerodynamics. History tells us that. History also tells us that their electronics are almost always significantly less capable than their claims.

As I said, we are years away from that being proven one way or the other. Same for the J-20. Years away.

People tend (IMHO) to underestimate the capabilities of the F-35...which at this stage and with the types of politics that surround it, is only natural. It is has not achieved IOC itself...but it is on the cusp and about 150 operational aircraft have already been built and deployed and are being tested more than any other aircraft in history.

In the end, the F-35 will be recognized, precisely because of the new technologies built into it, and the development of and taking advantage of those capabilities in conjunction with its other capabilities...as I said, I believe it will be recognized as the pre-eminent 5th generation strike fighter. Not without peer...but without a peer who will be able to take that position from it.

I believe the same will be said about the F-22 in terms of air superiority/dominance.

I do believe that ultimately some of the major powers will develop, and perhaps improve their initial developments, until they begin to equal them...but by that time the US will be moving on to 6th generation aircraft.

Time will tell.

Fair enough. Open competitions and exercises may reveal a bit more about the F-35's capabilities.

 

[HMS Astute]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

I think the issue is not so much with the F-22 but with the F-35 as only the US has the Raptor. The rest of the allies has to make do with the F-35 and it does have serious competition now with the SU-35S.

UK has Typhoon for air superiority role and backbone of the RAF.

The only advantage with the F-35 is its stealth as you can't kill what you can't see.

There are many advantages the F35 offers over many other aircraft around the world. Stealth feature is just a bonus among others, but even this capability can be detected by advanced radar of the Type 45 destroyer for example. Having said that, F-35 is a phenomenal aircraft.

 

[A Bar Brother]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

if you believe in

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

then, qualitatively: you'd need to come with more than the initial ratio (here more than 4 times 8)
but, quantitatively: it depends ... now I toyed with the attrition coefficients to annihilate all 8 Red at the expense of 1 Blue, ran the simulation for 8 Blue:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and the answer is: 49 Red needed to take down the 8 Blue ... but to achieve this, you would loose 21 airplanes (ca. 40% of your initial force)

check the thread 'Mathematical model of air-to-air combat and loses' if you happened to be interested in how this is done LOL

I wasn't talking about 32 F-35s duking it out with 8 F-22s. I was talking about an enemy commander being given 8 F-22s in his theater of operations and the USAF commander matching that with 32 F-35s in his theater of operations. The differences are more into economics and logistics. How much would 8 F-22s cost to maintain and operate versus 32 F-35s. How easy is it to transport and deploy 8 F-22s compared to 32 F-35s. What if the enemy commander is also given 32 F-22s. And so on.

Hostage has only spoken about 8 F-35s and 2 F-22s when it comes to SEAD/DEAD, not other roles.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Thread

Then it would be great if you explain it rather than resorting to personal attacks.

To start with, I did not attack you personally, nor will I, but when you misquote General Hostage, and misunderstand what he is attempting to communicate, and then make some grand pronouncement based on your misinterpretation, and misunderstanding, it comes off as a kind of "know it all attitude"!

Neverless my brother, I dare say that I am the first Sino Defenser, who has sent you a friend request, and I hope you will agree to be my friend. I sent it a day or so ago, please check your IN box? and now for you, and everyone else on the Sino Defense Forum, my most humble apologies, I am bowing toward Asia, very deeply and sincerely, and begging your pardon sir??? If you will post a link here to the article, maybe highlighting General Hostages statements that are in question, I will either A. acknowledge that you are right and the AFB made a mistake, or alternately, B. Politely suggest where you may be misinterpreting General Hostage----"who is one of my personal heroes", along with General "Hawk" Carlisle

sorry, I really didn't want to hurt your feelings, (or, I wouldn't have sent a friend request), I am happy you are quoting General Hostage--he is VERY CREDIBLE, I do see a lot of promise for you here on the Sino Defense, and again my apologies.

I was "on a tear" and I do get a little "collegial" with my buds, and they get just as bad with me?? well not really but anyway,

"Welcome to the Sino Defense Forum, stick around, we will be great buds, I promise, brat.