dark light

SpudmanWP

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,741 through 1,755 (of 4,849 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Su-35 versus F-35 in command sim #2193448
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I had assumed that he was talking about a Block 4 timeframe since there are not that many SU-35s flying anytime soon anyways.

    On the RCS issue, just like all the other KPPs, the RCS spec is what it needs to be “after” a lifetime of use.

    in reply to: Su-35 versus F-35 in command sim #2193459
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Some things I found odd

    One oddity, for example, is the gunpod which was included as the standard F-35B LO air superiority load-out with four internal Meteor missiles.

    The gunpod is primarily for A2G and is certainly not “standard F-35B LO air superiority load-out”. Given that, how did the gunpod affect maneuverability and detection range?

    9.) At about 76 nautical miles away I finally am able to classify the threat as an F-35 using my IRST.

    Published info from the mfg says <=35km for detection range, let alone identifying it as a F-35. No way in hell you ID it at 76nm (140km) which is greater than 4x the listed detection range.

    Forget tracking it till you get to 20km thanks to your short ranged laser rangefinder.

     AWACS was able to direct the F-35s to classify the hostiles as Su-35s at a range of around 96 nautical miles using their passive ETOS.

    In the same spirit as above, forget an IRST at 96nm. They could do it safely with radar & ESW at that range however.

    Lastly, it seemed to not treat the F-35’s LPI radar any differently than the SU-35’s and did not talk about the F-35’s jamming capability at all.

    OLS IRST info here –> https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2013/12/28/ols-35-irst/

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    lol, even without access to classified info and not having a clue on many fronts, the F-35 still comes out on top :applause:

    in reply to: Build a 6th generation fighter. go #2194472
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I don’t think so.

    The low cost of current UAVs is due to low performance & expendability.

    If the 6th gen fighter is a high-tech machine, then it’s going to have the high-tech maintainability that goes with it (RAM, Avionics, engine, etc).

    The only thing you will save on is pilot related expanses like oxygen systems, helmets, ejection seats, etc.

    in reply to: Build a 6th generation fighter. go #2194977
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I even wonder about the possibility of converting existing F-35s into UCAVs in the 2030’s. Replace the cockpit with a HEL or more fuel. That would give massive operational saving and increased service life.

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]239709[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: Oops! #2195597
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Not cool.

    She’s smiling 🙂

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]239658[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: Oops! #2195626
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Lucy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    You got some splaining to do :applause:

    Here is the source and it was done as a test (which failed).

    http://atomictoasters.com/2012/11/startup-fire-suppression-air-force-syle/

    The Air Force doesn’t screw around. OK, well sure most of the time it’s all Top Gun moments and officers screaming “Maverick!”, but they don’t like it when their stuff catches fire. To make sure that doesn’t happen, fires in hangars are quickly extinguished with foam dispensed from vents in the ceiling. Sometimes, these systems have to be tested, and this is what it looks like: a nightclub party. Cleanup looks like it’s a party, too. Check out these good folks in Minnesota, revealing a fleet of Sikorsky UH-60 “Blackhawk” helicopters after a test of the fire suppression system.

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Your totally misspelling you’re 😉

    Correct Link
    http://nationalinterest.org/feature/new-super-f-35-rule-the-us-military-11892

    in reply to: Solomons pacific war senario #2196130
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Artificial reef?

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    … such as modifs to the EOTS for IR pointer {Likely a software change to use the existing laser pointer}, ROVER capability {the F-35 uses software based radios}, modifs to the internal bays to be able to carry 8 SDB2s. And check the upgrade path, it includes crypto upgrades {Again, software based}, ICP upgrades for communications {Already part of TR2}, power/thermal management improvement, link-16 to VMF update {Again, software based radios}, wideband com phase infrastructure {Software}, PMA{Software}, ALIS phase II{Software}. All those look like hardware to me.

    Note also the huge costs of the F-22 upgrades. Hopefully the F-35 upgrades won’t cost anywhere as much but they will cost a significant amount probably.

    The F-22 cost SO much for upgrades due to 2 main reasons:
    1. The F-22 was not developed with upgrades as a high priority
    2. Economy of Scale

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    It is not as bad as I thought but the F-35Bs still won’t be useable for a2a for the next 3 years.

    2AIM-120C7 missiles is not good enough for you? Remember that is what most F-16s are caring around and is much better than what the Harrier has now.

    The block 4 upgrades will include several hardware changes so they might cost quite a lot too.

    $4 mil is nothing and unless something unexpected comes up, TR2 (which is part of 3i) includes all anticipated hardware for Block4 upgrades.

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    USMC was always to declare IOC with Block 2. Later, they decided to split up Block 2 into A/B.

    Who cares?

    Since Block 2 was a limited block and so is 2B… What’s your point?

    Here is what the USMC wanted in Block 2 (before the 2A/2B split and note the extensive use of the word “Limited”.)

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]239604[/ATTACH]

    This is on TOP of what they thought was going to be in Block 1

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]239605[/ATTACH]

    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Probably the first block 2Bs won’t receive the block 3F until 2019.

    All but 1 one of LRIP 2-8 Bs are planed to be Block 3F but the end of 2018. All Post-LRIP8 are produced at Block 3i until 3F is released

    This is the flow:
    2017/2019 – 32 Bs become 3i starting in Q1 2017 (Quarterly plan = 2-4-7-7-3-3-3-2-1)
    2018 – 50 (32 from above + 18 produced at 3i) Bs becomes 3F starting in Q2 2018 (Quarterly plan = 16-16-17-0-1)
    2019 – The last B Block 3F upgrade is in Q2 2019

    (Note: There are 6 Bs that were also planned for conversion to 3F in FY16/17 as part of the SDD & OTE fleets)

    http://www.dtic.mil/procurement/Y2016/Navy/P40_0592_BSA-1_BA-5_APP-1506N_PB_2016.pdf

    This doc also has the complete Concurrency list.

    I’d have to do some checking but from my understanding is that the move from 3I to 3F is simply a function of installing the software, so its not as much about how fast they go from 2b to 3F but how fast they go from 2b to 3i. From what I remember, the new F-35B deliveries are with 3I so those aircraft would be moving much faster to 3F.

    Yes, 3F is mostly software. Look at the above PDF and you will see that it costs less that 1 mil per airframe and that’s mostly labor.

    I know of no fighter in recent years that has entered service with so many restrictions and without any public acknowledgment of its limitations. (The French, by contrast, were entirely open about the limited role of the Rafale F1.)

    The F-35 is the most open and scrutinized fighter program ever, period. The limitations of Block 2B were known and accepted by the USMC from the very onset of the program.

    Let me stand corrected. The limitations have been acknowledged in one program document that about 0.00000000001 per cent of the public knows about, released several years ago.

    Is it the fault of LM, the JPO, the USMC, etc that most people are apathetic?

    in reply to: Solomons pacific war senario #2196522
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Once again, VLO & SA are the “dominating” factors, not the “only important” factors.

    You still need a certain level of speed to get to the AO (ie, respond to threat, support call for CAS, etc) in a timely manner.

    You also need a certain level of maneuverability to perform CAS, dodge incoming fire (AAA, SAMS, etc), WVR furballs, etc.

    in reply to: Solomons pacific war senario #2196683
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Except for the A-10?

    Every fighter… including the A-10.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,741 through 1,755 (of 4,849 total)