Yep if LockMart is out and Boeing is out, this tells you there ain't no money to be made, this is still the old Popular Mechanics cover picture jet, telling its story for the 12,999 th time. GROUNDED!
US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
Yep if LockMart is out and Boeing is out, this tells you there ain't no money to be made, this is still the old Popular Mechanics cover picture jet, telling its story for the 12,999 th time. GROUNDED!
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
It's a bit of a numbers game Brat.
F35 is still in the works and will enter full production for A and B variants in 2020 numbers will be iffy for a few years.
F16's are on the phase out the last units will are scheduled for retirement in 2025. That number may change though due to delays so i figure closer to 2030, I hope the USAF will pick up a couple F16E models for use as Aggressors.
F22 numbers were locked to a ridiculously low figure because of Absolute Stupidity.187 Birds and those have limited life spans.
F15 is a good bird with good numbers but a fatal flaw. The upper longerons have defects in a number of models The E model is the most sound. Original plans were to keep eagles in service until 2040 but with issues the E may be the last bird standing.
A10 is the critical here a little under 300 A10C have let the F16's and F15E's have the leeway to do Air superiority.
The Soonest PCA six gen could arrive is 2025.
T-X is a trainer and will be needed to replace the 50+ year old T38 Talon and be used to Transition pilots from Vipers to Lightnings and Raptors as they never built 2 seaters for the fifth gens. So That leaves a bit of a gap.
Now above that in ground attack you have the B21 Raider which will replace B1 and B52 units.
With the A10 gone, F15C's potentially pulled for issues, That would place a lot of stress on F35, F22, F15E and F16 stocks. With F16 phasing down and F35 production and transition it gets tight. If F15C is pulled or limited F15E would be the second best Air superiority option for the USAF but that would mean losing 213 attackers to Air superiority roles.
OA-X is meant to narrow that gap. 300 light attackers, The want is an off the shelf development something the USAF doesn't need 5 years to develop but can make a investment to open a line and patch in what systems they want. A filler to allow the 16's to retire, 35's to build up let the F15C's be fixed or retired, Allow PCA to come online more smoothly. and keep the Raptors in Air superiority with the Strike Eagles doing what jobs it needed.
OA-X is not in any way a fighter nor a dedicated A10 Tank buster. It's a light patrol/CAS machine.
I think Boeing pulled out because, they didn't have any options that wouldn't syphon there comercial and existing military contracts or bid. their main offering the Bronco X was a good ship but dated. They are biding for T-X, and are working on Sixth gen programs as well as pushing to try and unseat F35C.
Lockheed has nothing in inventory for the Job, The T50 doesn't meet the runway needs and again concentrating on T-X besides they also are working on sixth gen and F35.
Northrop Grumman may have an option of the Ares or some other option.
Textron Airland have options but the Scorpion is almost purpose built.
13,000 th! and to be honest the F-15 doesn't have a fatal flaw?? that's overstating the issue entirely, so for my benefit and other who might?? (but probably aren't), would you post your source in order that we might formulate our own assessment?
I am and have been aware of the Missouri National Guard lad who tore one in half, and indeed there was a serious manufacturing defect in that particular aircraft.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
This is EXACTLY why I'm not necessarily a big fan or ultra expensive hardware. You get a LOT less of them! There HAS to be a mix of high-low but it appears we're going only HIGH-ZERO.
While supporters may claim a 150M fighter can replace 10 $25 M ones in capability and on it's own merit it is true.. the fact is in some if not most modern day scenarios you can deploy 10 LOWs to 10 different geographical locations. You can't with one HIGH no matter how sophisticated it is.
the MIC complex and the mentality of those decision makers is flawed because they are always thinking about fighting previous wars instead of thinking of fighting the next war.
In LIC quantity is more important than quality. 10 A10s are a hell more effective than 1 F35 when doing bombing, strafing runs and doing CAS. just ask that company of Marines stuck somewhere in the desert surround by Charlies.... if they prefer 10 A10s or a single F35 coming to save their @$$?
That's right or 4 Wasps as opposed to 1 Ford! Right??? Heh, Heh, Heh,, just waiting for that autonomous robotic carrier bro,,,, but Kwai, the real question today is "what, will the Sailors call the Ford" nicks not proper name?
and Kwai, wasn't Charlie the bad guy 55 years ago??? that was the "last war two wars ago babe"???
The Marines love their Bravo, and they can't wait to get their Charlie's and no doubt the Marines will be happy to be surrounded by Charlies??? my point is don't saddle these poor aviators with last centuries tired junk,,,, those F-18s are very, very tired, they are old airplanes, and those SHornets are not much cheaper than an airplane designed for the job of tomorrow.
Nobody wants to be riding on the front end of a sitting duck!
Last edited:
Yes Sir ! don't need a small number of expensive ultra sophisticated toys better have decent but in number
For F-35 no naysayer here but a bit curious laborious ! for each udapte, new weapons it is long ! when i see it I do not say it by chauvinism the warfighter get what he need in time and not billions...
The METEOR air-to-air missile is integrated on Rafale
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/france-military-news-reports-data-etc.t5867/page-130#post-447042
It was the mood of the day
kwaigonegin
Colonel
I think you misunderstood my point.. I'm saying still stick to high low just not all high.
I have nothing against F35 but I do have a problem with JUST having F35s at the expense of other makes which can be made in higher quantities.
Same with USN as well. We have a lot of Burkes and that is awesome however Burkes are getting to be ridiculously expensive as well and so are the LCSs. Perry class was great and we were able to built them in much higher quantity due to much lower cost.
At the end of the day $$$ counts and it doesn't make sense to rob peter to pay paul. The only other solution is to increase defense spending as per percentage of total GDP but that's an entirely different topic altogether.
Here are three posts full of Ford Class Trials pictures. Some you have seen, others will be brand new. I thought they caught the feel of the Ford departing to sea. We will have to wait on the US Navy to gt some of the high speed and other photos of her out to sea:
