jackjackcan you edit your post to include all of what i posted, it will answer your point
jackjackthere is a us/aussie scramjet partnership and is 7th gen and it is rcs stealth too, isnt it
jackjackand you know all about it and do have full access to it ?
so you are saying russia china usa etc and all the f-35 partners and future buyers are stupid and should listen to the [insert your nationality]
jackjack[I]“There is no opinion, however absurd, which men will not readily embrace as soon as they can be brought to the conviction that it is generally adopted.”
so this explains why the nations that arent going to 5th gen are discounting its benefit as a group
there was strong resistance from some groups to go from piston to jet engines too, jets were just a passing fad
jackjackyeah good idea, it will balance out the risk for the escort
aussies and french have a pacific military agreement and if you ask nicely we could be tempted to just use our f-35’s buddy refueling as tankers for the rafale, we wouldnt want to impose on something the french need no assistance for
http://www.globalcollab.org/Nautilus/australia/apsnet/policy-forum/2009/Australia-France-Agreement.pdf
http://www.asdnews.com/news/22329/Australia-france_Defence_Cooperation_Agreement_Enters_Into_Force.htm
Defence is pleased to announce that the Agreement between Australia and France regarding Defence Cooperation and Status of Forces (DCA) entered into force on 7 July 2009. This development is in keeping with the Australian Government’s wish to deepen and broaden its close and productive ties with France.
The DCA will enhance bilateral defence engagement by facilitating cooperation in a range of mutually agreed fields including, the conduct of military exchanges, exercises and training, defence materiel, logistics support and capability planning, activities to enhance and broaden the interaction of our respective military cultures, science and technology and the exchange of space-based information, including military geospatial information.
Australia and France have an active defence relationship. In Afghanistan, Australia works alongside a French Operational Mentoring and Liaison Team in Oruzgan Province. Australia and France actively contribute to maritime surveillance, humanitarian disaster relief assistance, and support to regional defence and police forces in the Pacific and Southern Oceans. Australia and France also share concerns over global threats to security and both contribute to international security efforts.
jackjackthis is starting to go platform vs platform, DACT isnt and is about interoperability and systems
“Typically, the threat capabilities will start out low short range missiles and very benign tactics, then increase as the exercise continues, as long as the blue air players are learning something and they are ready to progress to the next level. If the blue air fighters are getting their butts handed to them, the threat level will remain low, but if they are doing well, the threat capability will increase so the training is useful.”
jackjackI hope we’re not talking about active cancellation again?
,
no thats just the french and sweetman
what ya do is take a 4th gen platform with the rcs of a brick and a refueling probe swinging in the breeze
but dont worry, it becomes invisible when we sprinkle it with ac pixie dust
jackjackhey mig, aussies have got one too, they were both done at the same time and are supported by both the US republicans and democrats
the uk and au are the seppo’s bitch, but there are advantages to being a ‘tier one bitch” 😀
as far as source code goes, thats different, its usa and all partners f-35 agreement, my understanding is like microsoft and our PC’s
uk is getting more but we arent getting it all, just sub systems, codes that are needed to play with toys and library, au are just getting and just wants the code to the library and supports this, AFAIK
but if you know some chinese hackers, there might be a spare copy 😮
jackjackAs said before: such huge and complicated programs tend to run late and over budget. It would be miracle, a statistical outlier, if this one didn’t.
It’s more about accepting that the work is either bigger and more complicated than originally anticipated, and/or requirements changed during the process, and/or one had too optimistic plans in the first place. The last one is more common than many people want to acknowledge.
If company A tells the customer that “it will take 15 years and cost 100 billion to make this” whereas company B says “it will take 10 years and cost 75 billion to make this”, now; do you think company A or B would get the contract? :diablo: Company B just needs to “keep going” until point of no return where the customer cannot pull out.
I don’t know what the explanation for delays are/will be on this project. I simply note that there have been delays already, up to and including last year, and that all the external committees (JET and some others as well) have concluded that even the latest revised plans are too ambigous and not very realistic.
Anyway, it’s pointless to discuss this further. Let’s wait and see. If we are still both on this forum in one year, one of us can say “see, what did I tell you” and the other can say “yes, but just wait and see what will happen in 2011”.
nar, i only care about ~2014, when we are buying 14 bk3 lot 6, until then they can be 1bn a plane and fall from the sky like rain
FYI what i read was the current delay was to redesign & rewire current test planes when one did a roll and the engine cut out because of too close a wirer gap in the junction boxes or something like that
jackjackAre you saying that rcs reduction is only achievable through shaping?
physical radar cross section, is this clearer? no sense we start talking ecm where the good stuff isnt public anyway
and the VLO platforms will be using it too and magnifying the beneficial effect
jackjackIncorporating stealth technology in an airframe can mean electronic / software rather than pure airframe shaping, which is what most rabid “stealth” advocates seem to be using as a definition of stealth.
Airframe shaping limits your options and compromises the utility of the design.Secondly what is your defination of an “effective” weapon?
You haven’t taken into account the context of the employment what you are actually using the platform for.
i think most want to keep it simple and are talking rcs only
jackjack
First, by your definition of “stealth”, ECM is the ultimate stealth instrument.
A single plane (EF-111) can electronically “stealth” a group of cheaper, non stealth planes (F16) on the way to target and back.
This was proven on multiple real-war occasions.
Can F22 or F35 do the same?
what, do you think they wont use ecm with 5th gen ?
Second, there is no day one.
Again, you’re parroting PR, without insight on the matter whatsoever.
So, if you want to go bust S-300 sites, with JDAMs or such, you’ll surely need LO plane, but Europe (f.e.) built Taurus and StormShadow/SCALP for that purpose, which will do the job equally (if not better), but at a higher cost per launched weapon.
That’s it and don’t get carried away by the idea that USAF can do combat missions, RuAF, Luftwaffe, AdlA, RAF or such, can’t.
i bet you like this quote then
http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/455/
MT: Are you worried by the competition by the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter?
Casolini: Not really. The Eurofighter and the F-35 are aimed at different sectors of the market. Actually, we feel that the very presence of the F-35 will turn the Eurofighter into the veritable “Coalition Fighter”. Despite claims by the manufacturer about air combat capabilities, it is pretty obvious that F-35s deployed in their primary attack role would need to be protected from the possible presence of enemy fighters – and with the F-22 programme terminated at 187 aircraft, there is no way the US Air Force could extend its air superiority umbrella to cover allied/coalition attack assets in addition to its own. Some countries that are currently considering the possible purchase of the JSF, basically in that it would enable them to participate to US-led coalitions, will soon discover this basic point. This is for instance the case with Turkey or Japan, which would eventually want to deploy the same mixed fleet of Eurofighters and F-35s as Italy and the UK.
i want to be a fly on the wall and see their faces when the ef and rafale pilots are told the good news
“in this mission the f-35 wont be running top cover for themselves and will go in as a protected strike asset, now it is your job to run top cover for them, you are going to suck up all the su’s and sams for them while they run a stealthy attack”
jackjackWell, the other experts evaluating this disagrees with LM. And so far it seems they have been right and LM wrong. Let’s see how it goes in 2010.
how much extra money do they say LM needs to meet its goal
and what plan do they propose, or are they just pis*ing in the wind
jackjackWill any major companies Russian/US/china/india/japan/etc….. invest billions of dollars in a new future airframe that does not have stealth technology? I highly doubt it… thus a 4th gen airframe is becoming old tech and obsolete. It is still useful and imo more attractive than the current 5th gens, but doesn’t change that its not as effective as a weapon. We are talking fighters/strike fighters here btw, not CAS aircraft and the such, obviously they still have their place in conflicts such as Iraq/Afghanistan
day 1 is different to day 2 requirements
“Russian/US/china/india/japan/etc” are any of these not getting 5th gen for day1 ?
jackjackI would not discount the possibility that it could become 2 years late (compared to the current plans). Why should I trust LM — did they tell anybody one year ago that they would complete only 10% of the test flights in 2009? Nope. Either because they surpressed information, or because they expected a different outcome…. which means that they are not really on top of things.
The problem with delays is that many countries (including Norway) is currently flying old F-16 that are becoming a very expensive nightmare to maintain. So if the delays become sufficiently large we are faced with a difficult choice: Buy expensive F-35 or keep expensive F-16 flying even longer.
Looking at big defence projects, a 2-year delay is not that extraordinary. I would say, almost to be expected. Look at NH-90. And A400M. To be honest if they can deliver with only 2 years of delay that is not too bad IMHO.
LM is confidant the extra 3bn will put them back on track for 35A ioc in 2013, until this is shown to be wrong there is no delay, it they thought they needed more money for this, they would of asked for 10bn instead of 3bn
Sign In
