dark light

SpudmanWP

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 976 through 990 (of 4,849 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2182297
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    While there are pop-up type SAMS, the oft touted “anti-stealth” type systems are very large, not very mobile, etc.

    If the target is thought to be protected by these kinds of systems, there will be an active campaign to track their locations for target prioritization.

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2184937
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Clap, clap, clap.
    At long last its delivering, good, very good.

    It did very well considering that they were carrying dummy warloads and are still limited by the Block 3i CLAWS & Software.

    Red Flags starting in 2019 should see the appearance of Block 3F jets.

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2185429
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Well guess again.
    Why would we learn anything that happen at RF’s?

    I meant “we” as in the guys running the place, not “we” Joe Q. Public.

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2185761
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Lockheed credits Trump’s involvement in deal for 90 F-35 jets

    “President Trump’s personal involvement in the F-35 program accelerated the negotiations and sharpened our focus on driving down the price,” the company {Lockheed} said in a statement. “The agreement was reached in a matter of weeks and represents significant savings over previous contracts.”

    The latest “contract is a good and fair deal for the taxpayers, the U.S. government, allies and industry,” Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, F-35 program executive officer, said in a statement. “We continue to work with Industry to drive costs out of the program.”

    http://thehill.com/policy/defense/317792-lockheed-pentagon-reach-deal-on-next-90-f-35s

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2185839
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I wonder how 4.5 gen a/c like Rafale with weapons like AASM would have done in such a scenario… we may never know.

    Guess we’ll find out the next time the French send the Rafale to Red Flag.

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2185932
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    The Lot 10 contract represents a $728 million reduction in total price when compared to Lot 9. The approximate per variant unit prices, including jet, engine and fee are as follows:

    F-35A: $94.6 million (7.3% reduction from Lot 9)

    F-35B: $122.8 million (6.7% reduction from Lot 9)

    F-35C $121.8 million (7.9% reduction from Lot 9)

    In addition to procuring the air vehicles, this contract funds manufacturing support equipment and ancillary mission equipment.

    https://www.f35.com/news/detail/agreement-reached-on-lowest-priced-f-35s-in-program-history

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2186259
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Red Flag 2017 30 minute debrief (sorry about the Audio.. )

    Details of Red Flag 17-1

    Red Flag gives F-35A its toughest test yet

    By: Valerie Insinna, February 3, 2017

    NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE, Nev. — What happens when the F-35A goes to its very first Red Flag, the Air Force’s premier air-to-air training exercise?

    The answer, according to U.S. military and international participants, is that the event itself becomes more challenging than ever, with a greater number of more capable aggressors outfitted with advanced weaponry.

    Although the Marine Corps operated its short takeoff, vertical landing variant in the event last year, Red Flag 17-1 marks the debut of the conventional F-35A operated by the Air Force. After almost two weeks, 13 joint strike fighters from Hill Air Force Base in Utah have flown 110 sorties, said Lt. Col. George Watkins, 34th Fighter Squadron commander.

    “It’s a much more difficult adversary that we are fighting against here as a team than we would have fought against a year and a half ago, when I was here last,” Watkins said, referencing his previous Red Flag event, which he flew in as an F-16 pilot.

    “They have stepped up the number of red air that we’re fighting — the number of aggressor aircraft that are fighting against us — the amount of jamming and stuff that they’re providing against us, the skill level of the adversary that they are trying to replicate, as well as the surface-to-air missile threat.”

    Fifth-generation aggressors will not be introduced during this Red Flag, but the sheer number of fourth-generation adversaries have posed a problem for participants. Up to about 24 adversaries can be in flight at the same time and can regenerate three or four times after being shot down, Watkins said.

    The F-35A’s kill ratio stands at 15 aggressors to 1 F-35 killed in action, but because Red Flag is a training exercise, the fighter shouldn’t have a perfect record, he contended.

    “If we didn’t suffer a few loses, it wouldn’t be challenging enough, so we’d have to go back and redo it. So there are some threats out there that make it through because of their sheer numbers and the advanced threats that they’re shooting at us. So we have had one or two losses so far in our training,” he said. “That’s good for the pilots.”

    Once the F-35 reaches full combat capability, it will be more lethal, Watkins pointed out. The fighter is currently limited to an internal missile loadout, but will be able to carry a full complement of weapons — including external stores — as early as 2018 in Block 3F.

    For many pilots of other aircraft, the exercise was their first opportunity to fight alongside the joint strike fighter. Lt. Col. Charles Schuck, an F-22 pilot and commander of the 27th fighter squadron, agreed that this year’s Red Flag featured a larger number of skilled adversaries with advanced capabilities. But his squadron’s experience partnering with the Marine Corps’ F-35Bs last year helped them understand how the F-22 and F-35 could augment each other, he said.

    “Getting to work with them gave us a little bit of an advance leg up this time to know what kind of questions to ask our Air Force F-35s so that our knowledge was there,” he said. “And it put us a little out in front in getting ready for the Red Flag, so we didn’t have to start from square one on the very first day.”

    Lt. Col. Dave DeAngeles, an F-35A pilot who commands the reserve detachment at Hill AFB, said the mission-planning sessions were critical for understanding how to best utilize the unique capabilities of each asset to cooperatively defeat a threat.

    “I’m able to sit with my [E/A-18 Growler] partners and just say: ‘How are you able to go and fight different threats, and how are you able to jam them?’ And I’m able to share: ‘This is how I would fight with my F-35,’ ” he said.

    “Then, using the Link 16 network, we’re able to kind of pass each other targets as well, so in certain scenarios where they say we need to take out a high-threat [surface-to-air missile] we’ll work closely with the Growlers,” he said. While the E/A-18s suppress the threat by jamming and other electronic attacks, “we’re able to go ahead and take it out.”

    The F-35 has particularly excelled in missions where the enemy can launch advanced surface-to-air missiles. Previously, in scenarios with those weapons, blue forces, or friendlies, would put all their energy into taking them out with standoff weapons such as Tomahawk cruise missiles.

    “We’d have to start from that, and then we’d peel back from there,” Watkins said.

    This year, Red Flag participants have encountered three or four different advanced surface-to-air-missiles in one scenario. In those situations, cyber, space and signals intelligence assets like the Rivet Joint partner with the F-35 to fuse together targeting information. Then, the F-22 uses its standoff weapons to bring down aggressors while the F-35’s stealth capabilities allow it to slip undetected within range of the missile system, where it drops munitions.

    It would be too dangerous for a fourth-generation aircraft like an F-16 to get that close, Watkins said.

    http://www.defensenews.com/articles/red-flag-gives-f-35a-its-toughest-test-yet

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2186266
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Speaking of refueling….

    Marines Want to Cut Back on USAF Refuelings During Long Hauls

    —BRIAN EVERSTINE2/2/2017
    The Marine Corps is looking to change tanker plans for long-distance F-35B sorties after a recent flight to Japan required too ​many refuelings, the head of Marine aviation said. In early January, the Marine Corps permanently deployed a squadron of F-35Bs to MCAS Iwakuni, marking a major milestone for the program (the first F-35s to be based overseas.) Four Air Force KC-10 Extenders helped the strike fighters make the long trip across the Pacific. The F-35s followed Air Force plans, which included flying through Alaska and not using drop fuel pods for the long distance flight. This, along with extended flight with the F-35Bs’ refueling probe exposed, meant the jets needed multiple refuelings, said Lt. Gen. Jon Davis, the deputy commandant for aviation for the Marine Corps. Davis said the total number of refuelings was about double what he thought was needed. Going forward, the Marine Corps wants to work with USAF to update their plans and procedures for refueling to try to decrease the number of refuelings necessary, Davis said. A similar issue arose last summer when the Marine Corps sent an F-35B to Europe for the Royal International Air Tattoo in England.

    The deployment to Iwakuni has been a success so far, with aircraft currently at a mission capable rate of 70 to 80 percent, Davis said. Six more F-35Bs are expected to arrive at Iwakuni this summer.

    http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pages/2017/February%202017/February%2002%202017/Marines-Want-to-Cut-Back-on-USAF-Refuelings-During-Long-Hauls.aspx

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2189987
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I was not a “high priority” within the context of the entire JSF program mainly due to the F-35C not declaring IOC till Block 3F while the F-35B & F-35A declared IOC at 2B/3i.

    It’s a “to fix” item in context of Block 3F, ie the completion of the SDD program (Spring/Summer of 2018).

    in reply to: 2017 F-35 news and discussion thread #2190666
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    EMAILS will have….. not getting EMAILS

    Isn’t auto-correct a bitch :applause:

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2192050
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    The full datasheet is the last page of this PDF. No mention of IR

    https://product.tdk.com/info/en/catalog/datasheets/e9e_bdj_003.pdf

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2194914
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    I thought that the bolded part was known fact?
    Russians do have very good understanding of stealth technology.

    lol.. Go look at a pic of a Kirov and then try and tell me that.

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2194998
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Interesting, thanks for the imagery.
    Any chance the blocker petals are variable?

    Not likely

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2195058
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    How severe is the thrust penalty from those rear radar blockers on the F-35?

    No way of knowing but not insignificant. The F-22 has similar rear blockers.

    Now that we know what the F-35’s rear-blocker looks like, we can actually see it’s pattern in AB flame.

    https://i.imgur.com/QSEaBwA.png

    in reply to: The PAK-FA News, Pics & Debate Thread XXV #2195074
    SpudmanWP
    Participant

    Russians were using stealth shaping and materials in F-117 era. They opted to experiment with it on the water. And some of the mathematics for it was done first by Russians but they ignored it. So no.

    So you are equating theoretical research an mock-ups (none of which were fighters) to 30+ years of operational experience?

Viewing 15 posts - 976 through 990 (of 4,849 total)