Not necessarily (yet it’s obvious) but my point was that the jurno’s reporting of this report kept making the erroneous conclusion that all the planes were ranked the same save for State-on-State action.

btw, Further reading puts the charts into simple terms:
Operational Assessment = How well it can do the job (SA, survivability, lethality,e tc)
Critical Enabling Factors Assessment = How well it can keep doing it’s job (sustainment, upgrades, maint, etc)
Integrated Mission Risk Assessment = The first two charts put together.

So, if there were one chart to pay attention to, it’s this one:

And this phrase:

It’s obvious that for all but the most benign of missions, there is a great divergence in risk, especially when the lifetime of the aircraft is taken as the driving factor.

In a real war all these aircraft will be shooting long range CM carried under the wings…including the F-35…and if they want to survive any IADS they will have to fly fast and low…like in the 1980s…

So let me get this straight… The only way the F-35 is better is if you actually have to take it to war?

Gee, why would anyone consider war performance when selecting a weapons system?

Dumbasses

You get it wrong…all aircraft (even your precious F-35) were considered high risk in peer on peer war after 2030…http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/canada-rates-f-35a-rivals-equal-on-most-missions-407025/

He just took an utterly idiotic and childish source and pasted it here. Don’t bother..

Do you need to talk like that to outher people…
If you dont like what i write dont read it…

On top of that the DIRCM system is not a requirement on the F-35 and is not in any official plans to be instaled in the plane…it will have also a version for the F-16 and other legacy fighters 🙂 http://aviationweek.com/defense/northrop-develops-laser-missile-jammer-f-35
NG hopes that there will be a requirement in the future and hopes that it will fit inside the plane…then there is the question of the external oppenings for the system and what it will do to the rcs…

Yes but FACs don’t fly at treetop level. They have to fly high enough to see a wide area and slow enough to identify targets and call them out to strike aircraft. At least with a 2-seater the back seater can use binoculars so they can be higher / farther away.

True Phaid…i belive that is the way the USMC does it with the F/A-18D…fastFAC 🙂
They should buy new F/A-18Fs to replace the legacy Hornets…

You are correct. Nonetheless, my point remains that single-seat aircraft make poor FACs, slow-moving aircraft are too vulnerable, and fast-moving aircraft have too little endurance and situational awareness of the ground to be effective at this. The most effective FACs would be something like OV-10 Broncos, but using those would just about guarantee some would get shot down. If they were able to hit an F-15E with flak they would have no trouble hitting something slower.

Consider this :http://youtu.be/L5L6vDPZJ2k
And now this:http://youtu.be/XLBuvK9_rPY
Now tell the truth…wich would be easier to hit if you had one of these: http://youtu.be/T2f2e8eYGTE

i’m assuming F-35 will integrate most weapons, and unlike the rest of you, i think it will commonly carry externally,
like the rest of us

So,even less range and worst agility for the JSF…no RCS advantage…no reason to buy it…