F-16 and F-15 had no data fusion to speak of..

as you said, “all you need is…” the problem is essentially that they’ve found as a way around the problem to shut down other sources of information, but then your data fusion doesn’t exist anymore as you have nothing to fuse

if your aircraft is to operate by using only one single source of data, it will be blinder than the F-16s and F-15s it is called to replace, as they can use several sources as they aren’t correlated and the results are displayed separately.

You’re basically implying that the pilot cannot selective turn off SAR mode on the radar (which would allow him to rely on an unimpeded EOTS for A-to-G). So what are you basing this on?

@ VNomad

the problem, from what’s been said, is not to link them, but to put the information correctly into a single picture, rather than multiplying the same contact as different ones as it is confirmed by separate sources (like one tank seen by IR and Radar become two tanks, then comes the same tank over L16 and there you have three tanks (for still only one on the ground), and so on…)

All you need to form that single picture is a working EOTS and a GBU-12 which all Block 2Bs have. SAR is useful but far from essential in this kind of combat theatre.

Yes.. if you have warehouses full of LRUs.. except most countries won’t..

So those LRU stocks can be taken along to Japan but not to tent-dweller Bahrain or Kuwait.

Those figures are only good for laugh.. the reaction of politicians clearly shows that there is much missing in those FRP numbers.. no one would call the F-35 very expensive due to $10mil difference towards the Super Hornet which is generally considered affordable..

Those FRP figures include everything that the SH’s URF does. And yes only those ignorant of the $10 mil difference would call it very expensive. Even at its current price point it compares well enough to the larger Eurocanards.

Don’t be naieve, the F-35 desperately needs some good PR.. I have never seen an aircraft with such totally fxcked up reputation.. this is not about MSphere, it’s about LockMart.. they surely wouldn’t miss a chance to demonstrate the F-35 to its potential customers if there was anything to demonstrate at this point..

I’m sure they’ll make a note of your oh-so-well-intended PR advice. But just FYI address your suggestions to the USAF Combat Command not to LM.

Since LRIP 9 the F35 costs are much clearer: 200 million per bird. Operating costs also higher than legacy fighter according to Pentagon.

Or $250 million. Or even $300 million to be ‘clearer’ still. After all, when you’re making up numbers why aim low..

Of course they are preferred.. Pilots are ballerinas, they come to the jet, do some flying, test some cool gizmos, then land and go to the pub.. they don’t have to spend night shifts checking, testing and maintaining the thing for hours before it can get back in the air.. even less they have to pay for it..

The maintainers prefer to to 4th gen jets as well. Costs about the same as competing 4th gen jets.

Ask your pilots, if they would take the jet to a combat zone, on some forward deployment base, within the range of enemy cruise missiles, with limited access to maintenance, without a nearby LM facility covering your a$$ by sending you new parts daily and cheques worth dozens of millions to your dear taxpayer.. where one blue screen means ejection over a territory full of head choppers..

LOL. How desolate do you think Qatar, Bahrain, UAE & Kuwait are?

The F-35 has clocked over 80,000 flying hours. How many aircraft have crashed from a ‘blue screen’?

look how long did it take to USAF to send the F-22 to actual combat.. if they take the F-35 over Syria, then I take it as a sign of confidence in the capabilities of the jet.. that’s what means combat capable to me..

If gaining your confidence was a priority… :shrug: Then again, if it were deployed in the Gulf you’d be calling it an unnecessary publicity stunt diverting focus from the effort to replace the USMC’s flogged out F-18s.

Training can be done on older types just as it’s done today. Like the non-combat coded F-22 fleet used for training.

The 4th FS received its first Block 10 jets in May/June 1980 so they were on strength when they declared IOC. Whether or not IOC was declared only with Block 10 jets I can’t say but wouldn’t rule it out.

Receiving the first As in May/June & first B in Nov, the squadron couldn’t have been IOC-ready in Oct without holding Blk 1 & 5s in its inventory. And if the squadron declared IOC with a mixed inventory, then by definition the Blk 1 & Blk 5 were part of the IOC.

And there’s nothing particularly controversial about it anyway. The Belgians, for example, declared IOC with early Blk aircraft as well.

The basic point is, the Blk 1, Blk 5s were upgraded to Blk 10 standard, clearly demonstrating an acceptance of post-induction retrofits as part of the F-16 program. The Blk 15s too were put through the OCU refresh after just 5-6 years of service.

You understand the moment Vnomad has nothing to say when he starts writing about the Rafale in a F35 Thread.
If you have nothing to say you can stay quiet you know.

In contrast, to your highly intellectual argument vis a vis the 2B F-35? :rolleyes:

You seriously consider the IOC… based on 2B version is ready for military operation ?
If yes congrats… LM succeeded to fool you !

If you have nothing to say you can stay quiet you know.

Either make a proper argument or accept that what’s sauce for the goose (Rafale) is sauce for the gander (F-35).

You seriously consider the IOC… based on 2B version is ready for military operation ? 😮

Its about as funny as the Rafale M IOCing in 2001-02.