dark light

SpudmanWP

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,966 through 1,980 (of 4,849 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: A NATO Fighter? Airbus Military Chief has some thoughts #2256103
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    F-35 doesn’t meet the requirements laid out by USAF nor USN in the early 1990s.

    Do you have those handy?

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2256500
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    @Jay

    Perhaps you should go watch CSPAN for a while.

    Members of the military are always in front of Congress, answering questions. Politicians do not embed either themselves or members of their own staff in DoD programs. Instead, they ask for reports from the Military directly or from Civilians that are tasked with that kind of duty (ie GAO).

    I am sure that Israel does it in a similar manner.

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2256507
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    ONE of the reasons is the denial to acess source codes?

    This is another reason why this guy is uninformed.

    The Partners knew, from the beginning, that they would not have access to the codes. If they did not have access to the F-15/16 codes, what makes them think they get access to the F-35 codes?

    Besides, the F-35 is designed for, and will include, client specific equipment through various APIs (UAI, etc). This, combined with Partner specific programing labs will allow the Partners to maintain geographic control over info in their own F-35s.

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2256554
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    The 10,000 pages come from the JPO, which Israel is a part of, not “just” LM. It’s also not just “PowerPoint”, but reams of raw test data.

    As far as what the Politicians know or don’t know.. you would have to take that up with them as they would need to meet with members of their own military for a briefing. Remember, it’s members of the respective military branches and assigned civilian contractors that are members of the JPO, not politicians.

    From the gist of the original article, it seems that in the minister’s stated quest not to be a “rubber stamp” for the military request, that he purposefully went outside the available (and official) information sources in his gathering of information. While I have no problem with this, in and of itself, I (and others) take issue with his use (and reliance) of the oldest and most irrelevant information available.

    The cynic in me would almost say he did this on purpose in order to validate his unstated goal of cutting the program back even before the request came in. In other words, he went back, way back, in order to find info that fit his narrative.

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2256570
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Israel paid to be a Partner, just as the others did but to a lesser degree. They are considered a “security cooperation participant” (SCP) level Partner and have been for 11 years.

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2256636
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    @Jay

    All JSF Partners do have 1st hand knowledge as they are embedded in the JPO.

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2256639
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Canada, and every other JSF partner gets over 10,000 pages a month in Program data.

    They know as much ans anyone else what the capabilities are.

    btw, that PDF is not loading..

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2256998
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Israeli Panel Rejects Proposed Increase Of F-35

    An Israeli cabinet panel has rejected a decision of the defense minister to procure an additional 31 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters and limited the procurement of Israel’s second batch of JSFs to only 13.

    http://aviationweek.com/defense/israeli-panel-rejects-proposed-increase-f-35

    That cabinet has now had its “jump the shark” moment.

    Leading the surprising opposition to the F-35 deal was Minister for Intelligence Yuval Steinitz, who declared: “We are not rubber stamps for the [ministry of defense] and air force.” In five different meetings of the panel on defense procurement dealing with the JSFs, Steinitz presented several articles published in Aviation Week from 2003 and 2008 raising doubts on the effectiveness of the F-35.

    That’s right, he ignored virtually the entire SDD test program to date, JPO documents and went with public info that was between 6 and 11 years old.

    in reply to: F-35 News, Multimedia & Discussion thread (3) #2258984
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Do you really believe it when they say that the Gripen E has 1/3 of the O&M costs vs 1st gen jets and 1/4th of the cost of 3rd Gen jets????

    I’d love to see the data behind that logic :very_drunk:

    in reply to: Shenyang J-21/31/F-60/AMF thread part 1 #2259707
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    SAPIR is an ADD-ON systems to PAWS and is not flying on Israeli F-15/16s (that I have seen) and is tailored for the short-ranged helicopter environment, not the longer ranges that a jet fighter has to deal with.

    SAPIR collision alert system as part of IR MWS suite for helicopter fleets

    SAPIR system provides a suite of IR based situation awareness functions offered as add on system for ELISRA PAWS family of missile warning solutions.

    http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/proceeding.aspx?articleid=823834
    Google Cache:
    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PWsBFrp0XIMJ:www.spiedl.org/data/Conferences/SPIEP/20004/72981L_1.pdf+&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

    More info from the MFG:

    SAPIR- Situational Awareness Panoramic IR Add –on Power for Mission safety
    SAPIR makes a unique contribution to mission success. As an add-on module for Elisra’s PAWS family or as a stand alone panoramic vision pilotage and situational awareness system, SAPIR adds a critical dimension to mission safety and increase the probability of successful mission completion.

    In other words, it’s a separate systems of sensors or possibly an addon to process MAWS data.

    in reply to: Shenyang J-21/31/F-60/AMF thread part 1 #2259819
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Nice try….

    There are over 100 F-35s flying today, 60+ in production, and the exact hardware & software that will go IOC with the USMC is working & flying today.

    What I asked is who is even flying SAPIR today. Good luck even Google’n SPAIR and getting anything more than a brief blurb.

    in reply to: Shenyang J-21/31/F-60/AMF thread part 1 #2259901
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    And who is flying SAPIR?

    in reply to: Shenyang J-21/31/F-60/AMF thread part 1 #2260062
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    It’s not just the sensitivity, but the processing power, software, & datalinks that handle the data from the EODAS units that make them what they are.

    A good example of this is the DDM NG of the Rafale. While the sensor itself processes what it is sees as an IIR image, it cannot provide any new functions over what the classical DDM. This is because DDM-NG was designed as a drop-in replacement unit that gave it better detection and false-alarm rates, but did not provide new funcitonality.

    The avionics of the Rafale would have to be upgraded to allows for new functions to be added later.

    Let me be clear, I am not saying that EODAS will always have these unique features, just that it does have them now.

    in reply to: Shenyang J-21/31/F-60/AMF thread part 1 #2260087
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    The EODAS can detect, classify, track, geolocate, and share that info with everyone on the network. It can do that now with planes, AAMs, SAMs, and AAA with TBMs, arty, mortars, and tank fires coming in a likely Blk4/5 update.

    Current MAWS/MLD systems can only give the warning of a launch (AAM/SAM) and a maximum of a vector for the AAM/SAM. They don’t track anything (except maybe the active radar MAW of the Typhoon) , especially other planes. They also do not have the capability to EVER detect/track planes, ground fires, AAA, etc.

    in reply to: Shenyang J-21/31/F-60/AMF thread part 1 #2260269
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Rockets were detected using unaided eye at more than 1,500 miles distance.

    But can the unaided eye classify, track, geolocate, and share that information without any help?

Viewing 15 posts - 1,966 through 1,980 (of 4,849 total)