A forty year old airframe that does more than the newer airframes are doing now and would have adequately bridged the gap until the real replacements came online, which are not the F-35. The USAF gave up capability in order to keep its ATF budget then its JSF budget, in that order. With these smaller units we require more stepping stones to reach globally. It’s already a struggle to keep the stepping stones open across the world. If global opinion hadn’t swayed our way from the 9-11 incident the trend would have continued the closure of bases on foreign soil.

To intercept an F-111, first you need to know that its coming. If your ground based radar doesen’t know its coming or the direction, then no interceptors are scrambled. That is the whole point of flying nap of the earth. No other aircraft does it better! And yes, it can sustain M1.25 at 200ft for a considerable time. Low and fast was US strike doctrine for 40yrs, they don’t need it anymore because they have VLO and air dominance.

The F-111 could have been given slep’s with F110’s like the F-14D. With the Navy giving up the F-14D they could have taken the APG71’s and migrated them to the F-111 fleet for strike purposes. Not so sure that a pair of AMRAAM weren’t warranted for self defense, considering they already had a Sidewinder-compatible forward-bay design and all of the models since the inception retained wiring there to use the Sidewinder. If you couldn’t have fit the AMRAAMs internally then put it under the chin kind of like the F-8 carried its Sidewinders or the EE Lightning carried its Red Tops. Even with the bomb-bay filled by electronics it still had adequate power AND space under its wings for a pair of GPU28 or GBU15 and four smaller complementary weapons.

Does no one remember the x-32? It had a huge gaping intake, yet it was judged to be as stealthy as the x-35. It did not lose the JSF competition for lack of stealth.

No, it lost because it sucked.

I’m pretty sure their team proposed the X-32 to be more X-35 like if it won. They stuck with their original design through the competition, but it would have changed in production. It had great potential as a stealth, with its fewer moving surface. It lost more because of the VTOL competition than any other factor. VTOL decided the competition, which is stupid.

I personally felt the competition should not have included a VTOL design, because quite frankly they are not worth the effort. The program costs of a VTOL can quickly exceed that of the heavier twin engine jets. And the operating costs aren’t very cheap. It’s a luxury they could have passed upon and moved the money to support keeping the F-111’s alive, especially moving all the surviving airframes to the Raven role. Makes more sense than giving wings to the Marines.

It would be a shame if their minisubs suddenly began to explode in dry dock.

So the morale of the story is evade the Typhoon with a quick change of controled flight in a downwards pitch.

Too bad they cannot use those wingtip stations for fuel. You could tame the vortex and lug something useful at the same time.

Wrightwing-

That’s not proof. Supercruisers use minimal control surfaces. Stealth use minimal control surfaces. It’s not that canards are inferior, it’s about reducing elements contradictory to the performance goals. Canards on otherwise conventional designs is unnecessary complexity and added reflective surfaces (while manuevering) and drag. We have no public claims that a canard layout is any less feasible than the conventional layout. But we do know the flanker family was not dependent on it’s canard foreplanes, therefore it would be natural to eliminate them.

The sidewinder was possible from the seventh F-111A on. The retractable rails were not used on production aircraft but they left the wiring harness in there. The M61 that was installed on the eleventh used the same location, so it was an either-or situation.