Come on guys, lets the kids have their fun. Ofc the F35 wins every competition without any form of bribery, because Lockheed never engages in that.

It has never been the case in Korea http://www.contractormisconduct.org/index.cfm/1,73,222,html?CaseID=225
…or in Japan http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/21/local/me-kotchian21
…or Canada http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/f-35s-don-t-meet-military-s-requirements-documents-show-1.1264278
…or Norway http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/fordon_motor/flygplan/article3195658.ece (devil is in the details…) Here are some actual references and from the bribery and political pressure http://www.svd.se/naringsliv/sverige-grundlurat-av-norge-vid-jas-affar_5770547.svd

Every critique of LMs methods, questioning the motives for buying stuff airforces barely will afford (like Norway, the Netherlands etc), questioning the rationale behind the seemingly irrational multi billion dollar decisions… well, that’s all because we are sore losers, french or retards.

Heck, even questioning if marketing claims are true or not is evidently proof the same.

I guess this post will have the kiddos call me a conspiracy theorist, hater and or stupid. …Just because I think history, physics and economics are important. At least this is what I have learned from the past pages in the thread.

You don’t think you are a conspiracy theorist? What would you call someone that will accept no explanation other than a conspiracy? (and bribery on the scale necessary to sway a contract like this would most certainly require a conspiracy)

The sad thing about this reflexive need of some around here to attribute the F-35’s win to anything other than performance is that it deprives you and those like you of an opportunity to build a working understanding of what is actually happening. This is once again an exercise in finding ways to dismiss evidence you don’t like more than it is one in seeking to expand your knowledge.

The idea that “US pressure” or bribery must be responsible doesn’t even hold up to a cursory examination. The F-35 was always the presumed frontrunner. The Koreans had to repeatedly restructure the contest just to make sure other bidders could take part, but ultimately chose the aircraft they wanted at the start. How does that sound like bribery or a product of outside pressure?

A far stronger case for something happening behind the scenes could have been made if a dark horse like Eurofighter won. (who also have a rather colorful history of bribery as it turns out…) That at least would have required some explanation, but the F-35 was always the frontrunner. Now suddenly a victory by the obvious choice requires conspiracy theories?

:rolleyes:

I find it pretty much impossible that you have learned firsthand some information entirely contradicting to what I have learned, from the same pool of people. And since I know 100% that my talks with the BAe guys genuinely happened, I must assume that you are a f*cking liar.

I was actually going to say the same thing, but instead am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that the person you were talking to didn’t actually have any insight into what happened in Korea. I know my guy did and have complete confidence in him.

Well, this is a difference between someone like me who came here to read something new and evtl. inform others about something he has learned firsthand due to nature of his job and someone like you who only came to compare d!cks.

What do you mean? I thought I would share some information I learned first hand as well.

Looks like the Koreans aren’t planning to waste any time. You have to respect them for pursuing the aircraft they evaluated as the best, even if that means over-ruling the accountants and/or embracing a creative approach to the procurement.

Too often capabilities are left by the wayside as procurement programs are tied up for years amid endless bickering. (see India)

Standby for the usual suspects to claim the Koreans don’t know what they are doing, or are being bribed, or pressured by the US, or don’t know that BVR missiles don’t work, or that stealth will be obsolete next Tuesday… :rolleyes:

Exclusive: South Korea nearing decision to buy F-35 fighters

WASHINGTON/SEOUL (Reuters) – South Korea is nearing a decision to buy some Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jets, but will likely keep its options open for a limited purchase of Boeing Co’s F-15, sources familiar with the country’s fighter competition said on Wednesday.

South Korean officials could announce their plans as early as November to secure the funding needed to ensure initial deliveries of the F-35 in 2017, according to multiple sources who were not authorized to speak publicly. They cautioned that the decisions were not yet final, and an announcement could still be postponed if the decision-making process hits a snag.

…

South Korean officials have said they are examining a mixed procurement approach that could help Seoul maintain sufficient numbers of fighters in its fleet if the F-35 runs into further delays. They are also looking at scaling back the size of the order to 40 or 50 planes.

Analysts say Boeing is now offering Seoul a range of options for an upgraded F-15, instead of the more expensive Silent Eagle variant the company initially proposed, although the Silent Eagle version remains an option.

South Korean officials are under pressure to commit to at least some F-35 purchases soon, given their own budget deadlines, and the need to start buying certain “long-lead” materials needed for any jets that would be delivered in 2017.

http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCABRE99M0ZL20131023

Some years ago i read an official statement that F-22 had been capped to M1.83 due to buffeting on the vertical tails,
that statement was erased from internet within a week after published, never to be found again,
no other statement was also not released that restriction had been lifted,
so my take is Nr 1

Let me get this straight, you remember reading an “official statement” years ago that the F-22’s speed had been capped, that was subsequently “erased”… nevermind. Carry on! :very_drunk:

Drop the absolute. I don’t believe anyone is claiming they simply don’t work.

They are however, not nearly as effective as the manufacturers (and proponents of BVR warfare) would have you believe.

Hard to say anything one way or the other about this since it isn’t clear to me what you believe “manufacturers (and proponents of BVR warfare) would have you believe.”

At this point every modern force has embraced BVR warfare and makes it a major focus of their air to air training/doctrine.

There is a substantial amount of historical evidence to back this up.

From 30-50 years ago mostly, yes. The most recent data points available have shown a substantial growth in the employment of and effectiveness of BVR combat. (at least with Western weapons)

For example – have the Russians designed PAK-FA to perhaps not have first look, or even first shot, but have excellent MAWS with the kinematic performance to both fire off return missiles and achieve evasion? etc etc

No, if that was all they wanted to do then they would be going with the Su-35…

The problem with missiles and missile effectiveness is that equally matched opponents will never be able to fire their missiles in optimal conditions (like in videos). I mean an F-15C going againist a MiG-21 will easily achive kills. Not only because MiG-21 has insufficient maneuverability and equipment, but because F-15C will be able to close enough to a range that its AIM-120 missiles will be very effective. However when going againist an Su-27, both will need to fire missiles(AIM-120C and R-27REs) at their extreme ranges, and both will be easily evaded. Second, third, fourth missiles, and all the BVR missiles can accomplish is to deplate some energy/fuel before WVR. Same happened in eritia war, of dozens R-27R/T missiles fired, only one actually hit (or rather, detonated), and it only damaged, not downed the MiG. I dont say missiles will never hit, but not in pk ratios where it can be called effective. Then WVR missile’s effectiveness is also related to firing position and energy state of the opponent. If, again, both sides are evenly matched, they will need to fire their missiles at their kinematic/gymbal ranges and they will also have much reduced effectiveness then advertised.

However on a theoratical situation where Su-27 doesnt carry BVR missiles, F-15C can fire AIM-120 missiles at their effective (rather than maximum) ranges, surely missiles can achive BVR kills.

This is true and it is where tactics and other enabling technologies ultimately come into play. One USAF pilot likened BVR combat to a rock fight… you need to get close enough for your missile to be effective while avoiding letting your opponent from taking an effective shot against you.

One approach is obviously stealth… if you can effectively track your opponent but he can’t do the same to you then the advantage is yours. Without stealth good tactics can still carry the day, particularly when you consider that situational awareness will tend to degrade during the course of a fight.

Another possibility is third party targeting where an aircraft can turn cold immediately after firing its missile, which enables it to take its shot closer and still escape a possible enemy missile. (A similar though diminished advantage of this type can be achieved with radars with extremely wide fields of regard as in the case of the PAK-FA, Su-35, Eurofighter AESA, Gripen NG, and F-22 if it ever received flank arrays.)

Of course yet another possibility is just having the better missile.. Meteor, AIM-120D, etc.

There is also jamming/EW and RWR/ missile launch/approach sensors to be considered.