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

[Air Force Brat]

Mr. Brat in my view your reaction is highly misplaced. A F-35 cost approx. $250 million each (incl R&D). In contrast, a F-15 SE is close to $100 million.Justifying how capapble the F-35 airframe is for that extra $150 miilion will always be a loosing narrative. The program is to deliver a platform that can operate inside a highly contested threat bubble and to prevail. For example, if tomorrow a decision is made to kick the Iranian mullah's butt the F-35 can fly through and over whatever S300/400 that they may have and get the job done and return the planes and pilots safely. This is what $250 million buys you. A platform with the stealth, sensor fusion and EW capability to do the job. It is not about how manueverable or not. In contrast the F-15 SE will not be able to execute the same mission sets with equal impunity and will not offer the same survivability to its pliots. You might say what about the inevitable air to air combat. Recent history tells us 65 % of air combat engagements are won through better SA and by way of BVR. Future trend will extend that percentage even more. The F-35's stealth and superior SA will ensure it prevails in those scenarios and and not because of its manueverability. That leaves us with the 35% or less scenarios. Frankly when you run out of missiles and if you have a choice I would simply turn in for the day rather than engage in a knife fight. The reasoning is as clear as daylight.. In a phone booth, it boils down to training, tactics and luck. In short, the chances of success is no more thn a coin toss. This type of odds is simply unacceptable. You choose your battles when you have clear adavantage. When the cost of planes to your adversaries is around $70 million, you will loose the war simply through attrition based on those odds.
The article has a mountain of words talking about how wonderful the futire EW brings to the platform but yet you choose to take offence over two words. Frankly I think you are barking at the wrong end of the spectrum.

So Mr. Brumby, if someone baked you a whole pan of "brownies" and only put one tablespoon of POOP in them, you would "chow down"???

Mr. Tucker's thesis statement is the F-35 "can't" outmaneuver any of its likely aerial opponents, now that is either gross ignorance, or a "damnable lie". He does this in order to "hook" you into reading his boring little article? The same lie our buddy Pierre Sprey continues to propagate in order to "lift his own stature" in the aviation community, which by the way has cast him aside as a "bloviator"??? and no he is not an aviator, nor is he the designer of the F-16.

No need to attempt to conflate the F-35s aerodynamic performance with its relative pricing, and yes pricing/costing is relative. Our 120 thousand dollar airplane is much better than anybody's 70 thousand dollar airplane. I believe if you will go back and read my several articles about 5th Gen aircraft, I almost always offer the disclaimer that 5th gen is "very expensive". If you don't believe me, please ask the Russians or the Chinese??? and NO they are NOT getting as big a bang for their buck, but if you look at the standard of living in each of those two specific countries??? they are each paying a LOT MORE for their respective fifth gen aircraft.

And, as an afterthought, fighter pilots do not have the option to turn and run?? they are under orders, and it is incumbent on them to fulfill their mission, the F-35 will give them at least some hope of being able to do so and live to tell the tale, and that honestly is what its all about. We ask them to put it on the line, and they have a reasonable expectation that we will do our best to give them a "winning ticket home".

 

[Brumby]

So Mr. Brumby, if someone baked you a whole pan of "brownies" and only put one tablespoon of POOP in them, you would "chow down"???

Sorry but that is a false choice reasoning. This is same fallacious reasoning that Sec Kerry used on the U.S. public when confronted over the Iran nuclear deal. .He said the alternative is war. There are always other choices. I would picture it as a chef producing a wonderful dish but comes with a set of side condiments that would enhance the food experience except one of it is life threatening because you are allergic to peanuts. There is always the option of just ignoring that add on but still enjoying the fine dish. It is a choice.

No need to attempt to conflate the F-35s aerodynamic performance with its relative pricing, and yes pricing/costing is relative. Our 120 thousand dollar airplane is much better than anybody's 70 thousand dollar airplane. I believe if you will go back and read my several articles about 5th Gen aircraft, I almost always offer the disclaimer that 5th gen is "very expensive". If you don't believe me, please ask the Russians or the Chinese??? and NO they are NOT getting as big a bang for their buck, but if you look at the standard of living in each of those two specific countries??? they are each paying a LOT MORE for their respective fifth gen aircraft.

There is no conflation to be had and neither is any apologies needed that it is an expensive airplane. It is expensive but yet is worth every cent because it can perform like no other out there. Its capabilities are unmatched and its effect will be transformational. However if you focus the nature of the conversation on maneuverability you will loose the narrative because the US taxpayers did not pay $250 million a pop for this attribute. .

And, as an afterthought, fighter pilots do not have the option to turn and run?? they are under orders, and it is incumbent on them to fulfill their mission, the F-35 will give them at least some hope of being able to do so and live to tell the tale, and that honestly is what its all about. We ask them to put it on the line, and they have a reasonable expectation that we will do our best to give them a "winning ticket home".

Do you expect the F-35 pilot to ram their plane unto the opposition so that their self sacrifice better serve their nation? That might win a battle but that will loose the war because you don't simply throw away a valuable asset. Also note I did specify a qualifier i.e. given a choice. .

 

[Brumby]

F-35 angel or devil depends the feeling



I am not agree Brumby and F-15SE is not a true stealth aircraft in more
Despite get some interesting specifications especially a big range and payload but not able as F-35 vs ennemy AD.
.

I agree. The comment I made pertains to maneuverability and not stealth i.e. the F-15 will clearly match the F-35 in that respect but yet will cost a lot less. As you said, the F-35 ability to perform in a denial environment is because of stealth and hence the fixation on maneuverability is missing the point.

You factor total F-35 price for MOD with all modifications for the first, spares and repairs, RDTE, also follow on dev nothing to do with purchase price, in 2015 :
F-35A : 142 mill $/Fly away 120
F-35B : 221/160
F-35C : 219/155
Average : 182/145

A big difference with 250 !

You are totally spot on. The $250 million number was based on memory but is not a source I can now attribute to and neither I can validate such a high number against CRS and GAO. In short, the $250 million is highly over stated by me after back tracking on my notes I am unable to conclude that the number is so high. The R & D on the program constitute approx. $22 million per plane as an add on to the cost. Therefore the true cost for a F-35B is $160 (per your figure) plus $22 excluding spares and other ancillary cost.

 

[Brumby]

Trouble ahead with software testing.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The actual contents of the DOD are more troubling. The solution ahead is a circuit breaker and not down playing the issues. The issues between 2B, 3i and 3F are inter connected and cascading in effect and if not addressed properly will have a snow balling effect ultimately into 3F and the fixes eventually will be much more painful.

 

[Air Force Brat]

Trouble ahead with software testing.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The actual contents of the DOD are more troubling. The solution ahead is a circuit breaker and not down playing the issues. The issues between 2B, 3i and 3F are inter connected and cascading in effect and if not addressed properly will have a snow balling effect ultimately into 3F and the fixes eventually will be much more painful.

View attachment 24249
View attachment 24250

Now here, I completely share your concern. However there is also a balancing viewpoint of rebuttal?? I do believe that the software development needs to be fully tested.

 

[Jeff Head]

Moving along:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

22 JANUARY, 2016

BY: JAMES DREW
WASHINGTON DC

The US Air Force has for the first time successfully test fired a Raytheon AIM-9X passive infrared missile from a Lockheed Martin F-35A over the Pacific Sea Test Range.

According to a statement from Edwards AFB, the 461st Flight Test Squadron’s AF-1 flight sciences aircraft fired the short-range weapon on 12 January at an altitude of 6,000ft.

US Air Force/Lockheed Martin

The test firing moves integration of the AIM-9X forward, with introduction across the F-35 fleet expected in Block 3F in 2017. Block 2B and 3i aircraft carry only the basic complement of GPS- and laser-guided bombs and Raytheon's medium-range AIM-120C.

Approval has also been granted by the US Navy for full-rate production of the latest AIM-9X Block II version, adding a new electronics package and datalink for lock-on-after-release engagements.

Meant for close-in kills at high off-boresight angles, the AIM-9X is a heat-seeking alternative to the radar-guided Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAM, which is susceptible to advanced electronic countermeasures, such as digital radio frequency memory jammers.

The F-35 is designed to carry two AIM-9X missiles on its wings and four AIM-120s internally.

The navy wanted to extend the range of the AIM-9X by 60% under a Block III programme for beyond-visual-range engagements, but the project was cancelled in the fiscal year 2016 budget, with only an “insensitive munitions warhead” side project carried forward.

US Air Force/Lockheed Martin

Separately, under a $14 million contract awarded on 20 January, Raytheon will begin exploring new missiles under a research and development programme called Small Advanced Capability Missile (SACM).

A second project, called Miniature Self-Defense Munition (MSDM), is perhaps more game-changing – giving fighter aircraft the ability to target incoming missiles, like a ballistic missile defence system.

The air force has said that these small self-protection munitions could be a bridging capability as it develops 360° laser shields for future fighters and bombers, targeted for rollout in the late 2020s.

“SACM will support affordable, highly lethal, small size and weight ordnance with advanced air frame design and synergistic control capabilities for air dominance, enabling high air-to-air load-out,” the contract notice says.

“The MSDM will support miniaturised weapon capabilities for air superiority by enabling close-in platform self-defence and penetration into contested anti-access/area denial environments with little to no impact to payload capacity.”

 

[strehl]

Edwards AFB has its' own 2015 year end highlights for the F-35.
At 1:39 mark you see what may be an EOTS image of the airfield along with another F-35 flashing by.
At 2:48 mark a comment directed at critics.
Towards the end, some discussion of data fusion and weapons fire using it. This is one of the Air Force requirements for IOC next year. All in all, a more interesting video than the one from Lockheed.

 

[FORBIN]

F-35 in Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF)

Few 37 for replaced 61 F-16, in 3 small Sqns despite remains possible some in more after, helpfull for increase the size of Sqns.

Dutch Lightning testers – part 1, 2

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[siegecrossbow]

Moving along:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

[/U]
22 JANUARY, 2016

BY: JAMES DREW
WASHINGTON DC

Will AIM-9X be carried internally once the necessary hardware is integrated?

 

[FORBIN]

No problem definitely not before Block 3F or 4.

The reason is for A2A combat the F-35 is used by USAF to BVR range or it takes advantage of its stealth then right now AIM-9 it is not necessary the F-35 is only armed internaly with AIM-120, employment, tactic matter.