jackjackYou guys can deny the advantages of stealth all you want, but to do so makes you look like a complete fool. Do you really think LM and the U.S/JSF partners have invested all this into something that doesn’t give a great advantage? This is completely different than BVR back in the 60s and 70s. Its funny to read the denial in here. Do you really think that all these countries that have F-35s on order and would love to get their hands on the F-22 are just full of brainless idiots that just go with the stealth because it was a cool marketing slogan? Why is the PAK-FA being developed? Why does everybody want to get in on stealth and why has every 4th gen plane that has been upgraded to a 4.5 gen status gotten bolt on RCS reduction… yeah because it is a tactical advantage to have a lower RCS. Maybe it will be obsolete one day, but for now it does change how you approach a conflict from both combatants perspectives.
its only the fools from countries that arent building or buying 5th gen
russia china usa see value in building 5th, a few countries want to, but dont have the tech or money to do so and are buying
jackjackWith all due respect that last part “…4th gen is ‘almost’ obsolete as a day one platform” is un-supported and un-supportable bunk.
All developments are countered, as drabslab eloquently pointed out.
Any platform with excellent kinetic performance that can be upgraded to accomodate future developments is in no way going to be obsolete as quickly as your stealth fanboyism wishes.
Edit: The stealth fanboy day one wet dream of their invisable uber fighters whacking all and sundry without being detected and targeted by anybody whilst creeping / whooshing around directly overhead the bad guys secret lair is pure marketing guff.
usn is out of D1 4th g strike fighters about 2025, usaf earlier as are many allies, i consider that 4th g is an almost obsolete day1 fighter, the almost is almost here
jackjackSame garbage for the BVR tale from the 60-70-80-90 and 00’s
Stealth is the new cool phrase from the 80’s
no, read the whole post, stealth is the new cool phrase from ww1
jackjackIndeed and I am surprised that has not been discussed more in this forum.
Only 10% of the test program was completed for 2009. Does this not mean that things are quite far behind schedule?
yes, thats why an extra 3bn into R&D testingAll this talk about cost make me head spin — it’s too complicated to follow. Costs will come down, but how rapidly? That depends on the progress, and how big the delays of the R&D program will be.
they still say IOC 2013 for AI have said this before and Spitfire9 I think expressed it a bit more clearly: Countries that had planned to buy in the not to distant future may need to pay a very high price (pun intended) for their a/c if they buy at the steep slope of the price curve. Which they can easily end up doing.
Assume a 2-year delay. What will the F-35 then cost in 2018?
if you buy LRIP, you pay more, if you dont want to pay more, dont buy LRIP
why assume a 2yr delay, LM doesnt
the cost in 2018 will be full production and about 70mn in 2014 $
jackjackI tend to agree with you that better EU collaboration would be an enormous advantage for EU military. I guess that the best practice that we can refer to is the EU collaboration on civil aviation. The many suffering european civil aviation companies formed an EU company (Airbus) which is effectively able to compete with the best world competitors.
But i dare to question that the EU should concentrate on stealth which seems to come at the expense of many other fighter requirements.
In times of net-centric warfare, stealth becomes obsolete as soon as someone discovers an effective countermeasure, even when that countermeasure equipment would be the size of a football field.
The core question for me is: what is the F-35 (or F-22 for that matters) worth if its stealth is compromised. Will it stand against a modern day gripen, su-27-31, rafale, typhoon… or can its fighter characteristics, like some sources (including airforces monthly) suggested be compared to an outdated F-105 or old-fashioned buccaneer
stealth is an evolving process, in ww1 there were aircraft covered with transparent skin for stealth
there will be a ng stealth, its probably already developed as a black project or usa wouldnt be releasing 5th gen stealth to the world
as much as the fanboys wish it weren’t true, 4th gen is ‘almost’ obsolete as a day one platform
jackjackIIRC the leading contender for the F-35’s DIRCM is a Australian firm.
oh ok, i was just being agreeable, there is a bit of aussie tech on the f-35
one of the funny bits was that we were told that a tech was too sensitive for non us firms, we had to remind the contract section that it was infact OUR tech we wanted to bid on
jackjackjust to clarify, i’m not talking about fighters, there is nothing i have heard about from us on that tech, scramjets, subs, othr are another thing though
the main problem with euro as i see it, is that everyone is looking after their own backyard, if there was a eu program where each member put in 0.1% gdp for 10 yrs, you will have a decent 5/6th gen design
jackjackI dislike the one-way nature of most of those military ties. I’m content to be allied to the USA, but not for my country to be a US auxiliary.
i can only speak for australia/usa, it is very much a 2 way street and both usa has benefited from aussie tech and aussies have benefited from usa tech
we have found them very generous, to the point of even financing our IP that they have liked, which we own and sell, how much better do you want it
jackjackThey wanted land attack ability but the US refused.
they wanted jassam but were refused on regional inbalance grounds, they do have land attack
Are the LRIP F-35’s that are being built and ordered just now the complete final aircraft
this has a good set of docs on whats happening and you will get sensible answers to your questions
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewforum-f-22-sid-6db0b587a53a0526f5b629b5dae43dc0.html
Something i have considered is with the F35 is, are nearly all known weapons going to be integrated onto it as standard as has been said a few times or will the customer pay extra for each one they want.
usa is paying for the fitting of their weapons,
the uk for example is paying for the fitting asraam, if another country wants to use assram, they need to deal with the uk for costings
the same would apply to other non-usa weapons
jackjackWeapon Sys Cost
226.34 1810.69 237.23 1660.63I do read a rise per unit from that, despite the promised “gains” in the learning curve.
ok, i’ll take the bait, can you explain what you mean by comparing lowering building costs with that years weapons cost
or is it that you are whipped on building costs and thats the best you can come up with
jackjackjust so we are all perfectly clear in what i think, i quite like a bit of trolling and a rant or two from the 4th gen fans, who if wish fulfillment worked, the f-35 would be a bil each
other than the trolls, most accept that the price is falling, i really dont care what the early LRIM costs are, come 2014-18 when aussies are buying their planes is the only cost i care about, but in the mean time i’m happy to play your nonsense
even then if the trolls dreams do come true and final price of a f-35 is a $150 mil instead of 70-80mil on a “paid price to capability comparison”, it will still be cheap compared to a rafale or typhoon for 60-70 mil + 5 yr inflation
so anyway you want to cut it, as i see it aussies will buy 100 f-35’s
jackjackyes, its a shame that fixed price didnt go ahead, i know aussies was interested in it and saw it as viable
jackjackThe article is a decent attempt to explain some aspects of “DACT”. Unfortunately, the author gives the impression that DACT is a large scale exercise…it doesn’t have to be. DACT is only one form of air combat training…it is Air Combat Tactics (ACT) flown with two or more different types of aircraft under ROE that is less restrictive than ROE in Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM) and Air Combat Maneuvers (ACM).
I do have experience in air combat training (US and NATO) both as a participant and instructor. Let me assure everyone that only a fool ignores ROE. There is no place for a “cowboy” attitude in air combat training. When ROE is violated, either intentionally or unintentionally, bad things can happen. I speak from experience on this having survived a DACT mid-air that was caused by a ROE bust. The other pilot was killed.
.
thank’s for posting, its a pleasure to read from guys who have been there, done that
some dont realise professional pilots are just that and dont behave like school boy fantasies
the guys post was directed at large scale dact because that was the topic from which it was copied from the useual nonsense, blue teams planes had a higher LER, so therefore x-plane is better than y-plane
they leave out that reds y-plane was flying restricted as an early mig
the best example is within the same squadron training where both red and blue are flying the same plane but with different ROE and have a LER of 12:1,
which only in fanboy dream world means a typhoon better than a typhoon etc
jackjackit is coming down, but LRTP are dear and i dont think anyone expects anything different
untill it enters its multi-year price, then we will have a definite price for the future
australia is buying 14 of block 3 lot 6 ~2014, we should have a better idea by then
jackjackSo who is this expert?
Whilst the article is very interesting and seems to make a whole lot of sense it is anonymous, thus do you really want to stake your life / reputation etc. on it as the holy grail without being able to verify the source and thus the sources knowledge?
Secondly you are refusing to acknowledge the point that Sens is making re it apparently being a US centric view / method of DACT; as Sens points out there are other ways of skinning that particular cat.
i dont know, gf re posted it and he didnt say, you could go to the link and ask him
i too thought it made sense, i’m sure if you googled there would be other information on how dact is organised
i think Sens seemed to state his opinion with our reading and debating what was in the post, the same as cole did
i think a valid point was …
In most exercises there will be a threat aircraft and weapons designated as the training aid for the other side. In U.S. exercises such as Red Flag, this will be something like a MiG-29 with aa-10s and aa-11s, and will be referred to as opfor or red air. Red air will usually consist of F-15s or F-16s (or whatever they can get) and will do their best to simulate that threat by limiting their radar modes, lock ranges, tactics, etc.
killing a f-15 acting as a mig, isnt really killing a f-15, is it
Sign In
