Tu22mThe F-35 is in her pimply youth. Now we have the internet. Her every flaw is visible to all can get on the computer and Google her.
Legends like the F-14 and F-15 went though rough patches when they were new. That is especially true of the F-14 as she hobbled along with the Pratt and Whitney TF-30.
Even the F/A-18 Hornet was unimpressive at the outset. But she has matured into an excellent weapons system.
But the F14, despite being a beauty with some impressive features, was never worth the cost.
On land she was beaten by the F15, at sea the FA18C/D was just too equal at a much lower cost and higher availability. Over all the FA18 performed as advertised at a very early stage and beat the requirements on things like weight and cost. And the FA18L was just an amazing concept.
Tu22mThis picture has revealed 1,676 modules. Fell free to count ๐
Isnt antenna size (per individual element) relative to wavelength also a factor in range? I remember reading that is isnt good to make antennas too small unless the frequencies are adjusted accordingly.
With that said, it seems to have an amazing resolution with high power output and large aperture size. Ie perfect for tracking stealth targets… ๐
Tu22mCome on, TU-22 the Marine IOC with 2b software is not the same as the USAF IOC with 3i, but the weapons are the same. It’s been posted multiple times, what weapons are cleared with basic war fighting 2b/3i. The right question would be, “what about the progress of the full warfighting software 3f with the delays to 3i integration”
The Marines seem cautiously optimistic about 2b software being ready for IOC. The software roadmap was laid out awhile ago so it’s not like the lack of software support for the gun till 3f is a surprise.
The right question is if this has changed?
Executive Summary
Air Force F-35A initial operational capability (IOC) shall be declared when the first
operational squadron is equipped with 12-24 aircraft, and Airmen are trained, manned, and
equipped to conduct basic Close Air Support (CAS), Interdiction, and limited Suppression
and Destruction of Enemy Air Defense (SEAD/DEAD) operations in a contested
environment. Based on the current F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) schedule, the F-35A
will reach the IOC milestone between August 2016 (Objective) and December 2016
(Threshold). Should capability delivery experience changes or delays, this estimate will be
revised appropriately.Marine Corps F-35B IOC shall be declared when the first operational squadron is
equipped with 10-16 aircraft, and US Marines are trained, manned, and equipped to conduct
CAS, Offensive and Defensive Counter Air, Air Interdiction, Assault Support Escort, and
Armed Reconnaissance in concert with Marine Air Ground Task Force resources and
capabilities. Based on the current F-35 JPO schedule, the F-35B will reach the IOC
milestone between July 2015 (Objective) and December 2015 (Threshold). Should capability
delivery experience changes or delays, this estimate will be revised appropriately.Navy F-35C IOC shall be declared when the first operational squadron is equipped
with 10 aircraft, and Navy personnel are trained, manned and equipped to conduct assigned
missions. Based on the current F-35 JPO schedule, the F-35C will reach the IOC milestone
between August 2018 (Objective) and February 2019 (Threshold). Should capability
delivery experience changes or delays, this estimate will be revised appropriately
http://breakingdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2013/05/F-35_IOC_Joint_Report_FINAL.pdf
Is the gun part of CAS capability or is it a mix of kemikazee and JDAM/SDB that is the requirement?
Tu22mSorry, but that is not what the article is claiming.
Here again in the title of the article.
There are two glaring errors in that sentence alone:
1. It’s gun will be fired from an airborne F-35 likely by mid to late 2015.
2. The 2019 date (IOC) has nothing to do with a “latest Technical Problem”.You & I both know that the 2019 date is IOC and that they could be used in combat prior to IOC (as they have previously stated).
My point is that this article is a blatant hit piece completely lacking in facts or supporting sources.
Is it possible to claim it is mature enough for the IOC status if it cant fire its gun? Part of the IOC definition is capablity to perform CAS (Gun + at least one guided bomb) amongst other things… SO IOC is pushed to 2019?
Tu22mMax dry cruise:
Rafale: unspecified “supercruise.”
F-35 M1.2
It’s the other way around.
Rafale with 6 AAM: Supercruise at M1.4
F35 with 4 AAM: can stay supersonic (M1.2) for 150 miles without ab, unclear if it’s level flight etc. After all, even O’Bryan calls it “technically not supercruising”…
Either way, if we are really nice and prop up the F35 as much as possible it still is slower than the Rafale with similar loadout on dry thrust.
Tu22mOnly if the Rafale and Eurofighter are flying clean.
The Eurofighter has reached mach 1.6 with 3 drop tanks รก 1000 liter with the old engine. I think its fair to say that with AA missiles and the new engine it could get a bit faster.
Andraxxus did some calculations a while ago: http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?123370-F-35-Debate-thread-(2)&p=2035684#post2035684
Toan also mentioned sources from EADS claiming that a Eurofighter with 4 BVRAAM + 2 WVRAAM climbs as fast as an F16 with 2 WVRAAM (ie clean envelope).
I think it is fair to say that at least the Eurofighter can achieve speeds of, and speeds greater than, mach 1.6 with payload.
Tu22mThe F-16 had an engine failure. Can’t quote source, take it or not. Merry Xmas.
Sounds plausible. Both US and Jordan officially claims it was not shoot down so… the alternatives are engine problem or… bingo fuel/fuel problem?
Either way, I hope the pilot returns to Jordan alive and in one piece.
Tu22mI think this table shows that medium-weight fighters are hard to sell.. You get the complexity and cost only marginally lower than Su-30/F-15E class while parameters like range or payload suffer.. why anyone decided to put the F-35 exactly in that category is beyond me…
Nice to see that partner nations are excluded for the Eurofighter. (Only Austria and SA included)
So in the case of the JSF sales we only have Japan, South Korea and Israel who arent partner countries. And in two of those cases one can argue how legitimate they are as “sales”.
Tu22msays hopsalot.. I don’t remember a single statement of you regd. the F-35 which didn’t turn to be bollo*ks sooner or later.. what are you still doing here, at all?
Trolling?
Tu22mWow… :stupid:
Now lets remove those sales that took place before the F-35 was even available…. and those “sales” that haven’t happened yet… and those sales that never could have happened.
I mean really? Gripen leases? “Likely to get T1 Eurofighter?” China, Argentina, Russia… counting Poland as “F-35 not affordable?”
I know this is the internet, but is it really so painful to just back off a stupid statement instead of trying to defend it?
F35 is too expensive for the allocated polish budget. So it is out. I dont set their budget.
Switzerland chose Gripen, but didnt agree on the financing. They will buy something in the next 10 years, F35 isnt on the map. Its Rafale or Gripen… or UCAVs.
Greece wont afford the F35. They will choose something else.
South Africa might have been a stretch due to the timeline.
I find it humorous how you always turn agressive when you are out of your depth. There you have 24 competent airforces that will use something other than the F35. You asked and the internet delivered. Be greatful.
Tu22mCome on guy, its christmas
From sea to valve ceiling on the bridge: 36 meters, height of airplane (belly to hor stabilizer) 4 m giving +/-16 meters in the center or +/- 12 meters at the ends as margin of error (flying side by side the went in on the low end)
Draken (again)
Tu22mTo find out this high quality extension from 800 m( 2,650 ft) in Sweden roads that has been suited for its task would not be a problem, since it were built for this purpose in case of war, and this were used for the fighters STOL AJ/SK/ JA 37 Viggen before the JAS 39 Gripen.
In other countries the Sweden system from dispersed fields could found out harsh problem to be implemented, once due at the lack of this structure from roads, or then its structure should be built for this purpose, so this also would be an additional cost for it fully implementation.
Bro, its a regular straight road, 800 meters long (semi flat) with hardened and flat ground nearby. You have plenty of areas like that in Brazil.
For instance, Finland and Russia also have road base systems. These are a bit more complex though (simply because the fighters are larger –> more fuel needed and in Finlands case they also need wires while the russkies use brake chutes… Gripen does not)
Here are two roadbases, one from Finland and one from Russia.
Lets start with Russia where the road quality simply is to crappy. From ะััะปะพ-2007:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234086[/ATTACH]
From http://oplatsen.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/en-rysk-vag/
And below is a road of good enough quality… from Finland:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234087[/ATTACH]
From http://www.stratpost.com/fa-18-can-operate-off-roads-too
Here is a high quality road in Brazil, with some preparations for a fuel depo and hardened shelters in the woods nearby (buy 3 acres from a farmer and start building) and its basically game on.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234088[/ATTACH]
What is often forgotten is that the roadbases alone arent enough. One also need SHORAD, logistics to support it etc etc. But it is cheaper than the alternatives and offers better redundancy. Regarding what is needed I suggest you look at this clip below where you have a walkthrough on bunkers, parking lot, logistics and ofc road quality that is up to standards for a war base (its not all straight road…).
There are also the simpler ones where you just change pilot, refuel and rearm and get off. This one also had hangars.
Tu22mSo I will repeat… why not name the two dozen professional air forces you claim have bought something else. It shouldn’t be hard since we both know you wouldn’t go making things up again.
:eagerness:
Russia – Pak FA
China – Mixed
India – Rafale
Belgium – Probably Gripen or F16V
Czech R. – Gripen
Slovakia – Gripen
Bulgaria – F16 or Gripen
Romania – F16 (third hand)
Hungaria – Gripen
Switzerland – Gripen sleected but unfinanced
SwAF – Gripen
France – Rafale
South Africa – Gripen
Thailand – Gripen
Brazil – Gripen
Argentina – Unlikely to even consider F35 or be considered as buyers
Venezuela – Su 30
Saudi Arabia – Eurofighter
Croatia – (Likely Gripen)
Greece – Likely to get T1 Eurofighters ๐
Austria – Proud owners of Eurofighter
Poland – Will buy 64 new fighters, F-35 not affordable ๐
Spain – Pulled out of F35
Oman – Eurofighter
Roughly a handful wouldn’t be allowed to buy the F35, most are NATO members or buy western fighters. There are some more but the list is 24 now. The only unprofessional air forces would be Romania ans South Africa due to sh!te politics, but I think the air force personell is quite decent and professional.
Tu22mAppears the radarwizards in Scotland have over delivered: ( https://twitter.com/GripenNews/status/546576352368156672 ):
“The #Gripen NG #AESA #radar to #Brazil will be 30% more capable than config offered in 2009 proposal. via COPAC public hearing Dec-2014”
That’s how it is supposed to look. Hopefully more details on what the capability improvement stems from will emerge.
Tu22mSo is the Gripen, especially the E/F, which may be why there’s so much unfair sniping at it.
The only problem for the Viggen was that the F16 was cheaper, had more payload and had better flying characteristics. Partially because it is a more modern design.
What made Viggen stand out was the road base system, the impressive STOL and datalinks. And the avionics that made it awesome came in 1979 in the JA version. If the F16A would have shipped with the avionics from Viggen (datalinks, digital map, shared radar screen etc) it would have been amazing.
Sign In
