MarcellogoLet’s say that no one of this deficience seems something so big to cast a doubt about the whole of F-35 program but thirteen of them in a row is definitively something to worry about and surely is something that would advice strongly against any early mass order.
MarcellogoWhat is point of putting dogfighting missile in F-35 storage? Other stealths have dedicated storage for dogfighting missiles, with small doors which open and close fast and drag impact isn’t no where near as when you open F-35 storage.
Much better solution would be small underbelly multirole pod, it can carry two HOBS missiles and DIRCM.
I also think that’s this will be the best solution for ALL 5gen planes: stealth pods for carrying light and medium AAMs and leave bombs bays for heavier ordnances.
MarcellogoI think that the evaluations in the report are the result of the sum of result of several different pilots of a certain plane, made in different times, vs F-35.
So we didn’t know if the pilots were flying an older model or a newer one, in case of F-15C, the update is very recent and still not completed so it could be that the majority just didn’t have made the shift a.t.m. they tried the Lighting II.
In case of F-15E ones ,that has completed transition years ago , their pilots evaluated their own radar as SUPERIOR, by a little, to the F-35’s one.
Halloweene is just poisoning debate there with his rantings about the Rafale,still everyone seem to fall in his trap.
.
MarcellogoHow do you define conventional? F-15C and F-15E are constantly upgraded with state of the art, top notch avionics , and it has great advantage thanks to the size. F-15’s radar is far more powerful than Eurofighter, Gripen and Rafale’s radar
More than the radar Iwas referring to the whole complex of avionics, It was Halloweene as usual that mash up things.
In the same panel that you have published, we can eagerly see how its exactly the radar the point in which the evaluation of the avionic hardware (while Visibility and Ergonomics/ease of employment are about man/machine interaction) in which the F-15s score high (the F-15E get even a more positive vote from its own pilots).
Conventional means also that sensor/data fusion and situational awareness that are an HUGE part of the F-35 thing were simply not even existent as a concept when the avionic suites of the legacy USAF planes were implemented, so even installing the same exact hardware on them would hardly give the same result (unless to completely revolution their own computer dotation, wiring, to change all their cockpits and rewrite millions of lines of specifically designed software…).
And, let me repeat, my own post were related to a complete different set of issue between the many that were earnestly exposed and discussed in this report.
And the fact that this report went in depth, collected a large amount of data, published them in their entirety in an easily consulting mode and , above all, was not shy at all in highlighting also the actual issues and the inevitable limitations that the F-35 (like ANY military plane) has, that make me conclude that is an honest one and a precious source to enhance our knowledge of the plane this tread is dedicated to.
MarcellogoIs LRASM fully intgrated in F-35? Afaik it was mostly tested on B1B
@marcello by alleveidences, the very poor radar rating of F-15C is due not to have aesa. Whay not compare it with a sopwith camel?
Nvm, this is not a µRafale thread. I just brought here storm shadow as an example of F-35 limitaitons. (PS SS speed is 0.95 mach depending on altitude)
Hallowene, I ‘m really worried by the fact that seemingly my post are not understood, i’ve just talked about manoeuverability and now you are replying me about radars…
To be more clear I was talking about diagrams on page 6 and 7 while in post # 825 is shown the one of page 9, this one and the ono in page 8 I’ve just gave a peek before go sleeping, because saying that the F-35 has in absolute terms a state of the art, top notch avionics in absolute terms and even more compared to the one, upgraded but still conventional, on legacy fighters is IMHO to be considered a total non contest.
MarcellogoHave you finished the report?
[ATTACH=JSON]{“alt”:”Click image for larger version Name:tCapture.PNG Views:t0 Size:t89.3 KB ID:t3863471″,”data-align”:”none”,”data-attachmentid”:”3863471″,”data-size”:”full”}[/ATTACH]
No, and I have clearly written it in my post.
I’m quite busy, also because i’m politically active and in this days there have been the European parlament elections.
And the fact is that in said posts I have STILL not taken any position , so someone think I’m criticizing F-35 and others think insted that I’m trashing legacy USAF fighters…
Maybe turning off the automated self defense mode could be useful for a more healthy discussion.
F-15 sustain turn rate at altitude is the same as F-22.
F-15 and F-16 still have among the best acceleration.
Compared to what?
And infact F-15C pilots are the ones that have given more negative than positive points to the F-35 when it comes to basic manoeuverability points.
Still they prefer it to their own in the overall evaluation of the same parameter and most interesting thing of all, they gave to the F-35 the highest evaluation of all in the other two points.
Between the various F-15C and F-16 in service the USAF ones, being older frames, have among the best performances in that regards given that they have had not much weight added, like it happened to Block 50+ or Block 60/70.
MarcellogoRight, like no US 4gen fighter got any upgrades and doesn’t have sensor fusion, rewired to fiber optics, AESA radar or even much better IR sensors – for example F-15E and SH.
And we already have British or Italian pilots flying Typhoons and F-35… But right they flew old obsolete versions or theirs sensor fusion doesn’t match planes like Rafale or Grypen…Nothing makes stealth obsolete quickly, it takes years to develop, train and fully field nature system (or even upgrade old ones) in meaningful numbers, not to talk on different ways to counter it. And F-35 will be most rapidly updated fighter on market to counter that…
I’m referring to page seven and eight diagrams referring to direct comparison between planes ACTUALLY IN USAF ACTIVE SERVICE (F-15E is however included in the comparison) to F-35 so all upgrading that have been already implemented are obviously considered.
Still, seems me that you have not given even a simple look to such document or you would have been noted that those comparisons were centered exclusively on their respective performances in the field of aerial manoeuvrability, so nothing that sensor fusion, Aesa radar, fiber optics or others you have possibly mentioned could improve in any way…
And no, more advanced versions of the above mentioned planes (that the USAF are not adopted at all) have not improved situation in such an aspect in a significant way: actually in many cases the contrary happened as such new iterations of old planes have added a lot of weight without compensate it with a comparable grown of overall wing area or the adoptions of LERX/TVC/Canards…
MarcellogoI have given a look to the report and seems me an honest one to say the least,
I am however only get at page 7/8 and so I’ll reserve myself to end it before writing about it
.
Certainly the best consideration already done is that the comparison with the other planes resent from the fact they are the USAF legacy ones i.e. strictly 4.0 gen whose frames were introduced in service during the seventies (and kudos to the authors to have clearly pointed out this point) and reflect the tactical conceptions and the technical limits of the period.
Kudos also to have made a comparison of several different point relative to the overall performances related to each different plane, so we will finally get a
trough this an overall description of the performance range of the F-35
MarcellogoEarly Warning is another thing also, such radars are the long wave ones used to became aware of an incoming menace at way greater distance than the ones a multifunction radar would allow to but lacking the necessary precision to engage them directly.
In case of Su-57 we would have the L band radar for this role the X-band one for conventional role and the K band one as MAWS: given that they have low power emitters, even when they are in active mode trying to get their signal trough ESM could be not just difficult but even dangerous, given that could put you well into the range of the other above mentioned radars.
They are also not a substitute for RWR at all : so in most of cases they would not be switched in ON mode until some warning would have already been received by them.
MarcellogoThe radar MAWS we are talking about are not the main X band radar but the smaller K band ones making part of the Himalaya suite, although active they have a way lower emission power and range because function trough the doppler effect principle i.e. signal coming from an object approaching at great velocity see their RCS magnified of a great extent.
Obviously such an effect wouldn’t help to locate an object heading in a completely different direction, so it would be an excellent self -protection device but not a recon one like EODAS is.
MarcellogoProbably the range of frequence used by the F-35 and the same decision of using IR depend exactly by the fact they want a picture-like image something that actually just IR can afford.
Otrer modern US and Nato planes, beginning by F-22 have UV Maws also, so let’s avoid of making it an Us vs You fanboy thing, ok?
MarcellogoWhy do you think the Su-57 is optimized against MANPADs and not AAM? The plane is not even thought to do CAS, so I very much doubt MANPADs have a big role in the requirements of the plane. But the DIRCMs of course could take care of them, as they would do with IR-AAMs launched by other fighters.
IR missiles will be detected by the 101KS-U due to the engine plume all around the plane, the radar missiles once beyond the burn time of their rocket engine either with the active radar in all of the front hemisphere (actually the FOV of the X band radar is something like 300º) or due to guidance link / ARH by the ESM onboard.
An EODAS system like the one on F-35 is clearly very cool and probably a future standard, it does not mean it is a must now. I think in fact such system is specially useful for CAS and in general A2G roles, rather than to detect incoming missiles.
I think EODAS and MAW are something like the difference between the FLIR and the IRST, one give you a picture-like image while the others are concentrated on giving the vectorial data of the incoming missile/planes.
It decisively an useful innovation but hardly a game-changer, plane would still need to turn toward the detected object and use the main sensor to engage it.
MarcellogoThe whole story about the prices is simple. Russia do not buys the jets, Russia produces them. So for internal customers costs of acquiring are equal to costs of production with little if any profit to production companies. So foreign contracts are not relevant here.
Add that the contract, made with the KnAAPO reflect only the Fly-away + post production cost (and we didn’t know at what extent), development cost are covered with contracts made with the “Design Bureau” Sukhoi i.e. another legal entity and the first serial planes (i.e. let’s repeat the cost of setting up the serial assembly line and to test it with the building of the said two planes) are covered by another one. Those 76 would so be a mature product built in a large series using a serial assembly line working at its full capabilities.
MarcellogoYes, I eagerly confess how I prefer the way, although somewhat baroque and time consuming, in which Russian proceeds in their own long time acquisition programmes an hundredfold better than your own country had after the end of the Cold War.
Same politically talking, I as an European would eagerly prefer a multipolar world, as contemplated in the so called Primakov doctrine than the unipolar world that sprang forth from the end of such period with only a Power at the helm of it.
And yes, I eagerly think that your own country is absolutely not fit for such a role, if any would ever be.
Said so, I consider the day the berlin Wall fell one of the best days of my whole life(also because the Soviet Empire was just another thing than today’s Russia, like a.t.c. Reagan’s America was completely another one, in positive, than Trump and Clinton’s one).
Only one thing, just look the number of posts I made there compared to the ones I made in Russiadefense. and you would see the difference of partecipation.
What I like in Russiandefence is the fact that they follow in depth every item (and they have alot of them, surely more than what would be optimal if they were not the gargantuan sized nation they are). of a giant sized and multifaceted re-armament program and even have several threads covering the process as a whole, something you cannot fully grasp following the single, although excellent RuAF thread on this forum.
So, please avoid to consider this, as you have made in one of your posts I found particularly offensive, like some sort of betrayal of the Holy NATO alliance pact.
What make me wonder the most about the peculiar type of national Chauvinism, always present in such discussion threads, of your country is the apparent lack of criticism toward your own political, military and industrial establishment americans seems to show, Russians could be nationalist at an absurd level but they are also critical, even biased sometimes. when it come to evaluate the decision of their own leadership.
On America’s side , considered a beacon of democracy, free thinking and liberty of speech, a deafening silence if not even an acritical defence of everything , even the most evident bullshit that is said.
So,let’s play a game: I will began to criticize what I consider wrong in Russian (or even my own country ) defence situation and you made the same about the defence extablishment of the country you pay your tax into…
You said that F-15 substitution is a complex defence and political issue, so what made it such? A defence secretary that was nominated at the begin of this year or the ones that failed to address it when it begame evident that F-22 production would have been totally insufficient to cover the issue?
MarcellogoThat is you projecting your opinions. “They” knew an F-22 restart was going to be prohibitively expensive and counterproductive for the eventual PCA requirements. “They” also planned on longeron replacement, IRST, and EPAWSS to keep the F-15C fleet until at least 2035.
The reason for this was that near term F-35 production was to replace the 600 F-16’s that weren’t projected to receive SLEP, several hundred A-10s. There was simply no way to procure enough F-35A within the 2010’s-20’s to replace the F-15C fleet too. The F-16 block 32 and below were considered in more dire need of replacement than the F-15C fleet.
FBW, I don’t understand because you seems to take every single post I make as a sort of personal offence…
What exactly are you contesting me ?
The fact that they, intending with this word the one in charge of your own country long term defence planning, weapon development, acquisition and maintenance never intended the F-35, when they begun the relative program as a substitute for F-15 A to D version for the simple fact that even before it performed its first flight (2006) they were already acquiring the F-22 for this precise role?
When the ATF program was initiated it was intended to acquire 750 planes, progressively reduced in a series of successive steps until the 187 that were finally produced but even such a reduction of orders doesn’t deterred “they” in their infinite God-awarded wisdom, to retire not just the 445 F-15A&B built in the 70ies but even 2/3 of the fleet of the 575 C&D built in 1979-1985 (and relegating more than half of the remaining in the ANG) BEFORE the F-35 even reached IOC and I’m the one that is projecting his own opinions?
Feel however fully assured that the idea of a possible restart of F-22 production NEVER EVER entered in my mind.
I can assure you, it was not me that stored away in Alaska the serial assembly line tools, just in case; it was definitively not me that debated on the national press or even in your own country Congress about such a ludicrous proposal and finally it was not me that produced a formal cost-evaluation study about the subject: those were all things that came from your own side of the Atlantic, sorry…
Do you feel somewhat insulted by the fact that a strangers has the gall to insinuate that the ones designated to rule the long term weapon development and acquisition of the Godly-appointed mighty America may have maybe, possibly made some marginal, errors like trashing the 8/10 of their own Air Superiority Fleet, without even thinking to any feasible alternative (and let’s repeat. the F-22 restart was an absolutely ludicrous one) while “waiting for Godot”?
Well, keep on feeling that way because the more you reply me with such scandalized, self-righteous tones, the more my (absolutely personal,I eagerly concede) opinion that not just “they” have failed you (not you as a person but all the american taxpayers) great time all along the last 30 years and even more that they will keep on doing such with almost absolute impunity if your public opinion would keep on being made, as it unfortunately seem given the results, by persons showing the same level of chauvinism and lack of self- criticism and public awareness you unfortunately seems to fall into more than often, will only grown stronger and stronger.
Sign In
