maus92Now why the vietnamese sources are “less reliable ” than the american ones ? Giving the benefit of the doubt ( i meen, starting from the premise that they are always fair and square) how would the americans even know for sure which AD system shot down a specific aircraft, especially with a crew MIA/KIA?
From those 382 F-105 lost by all causes , it can easily be that twice as many as the americans say were shot down by Migs!The vietnamese shot the aircraft down over their land ,many time under GCI supervision ,by their fighter pilots. Surely it must be actually easier for them to quantify how many they shot down.
Anyway sorry from derailing from this topic subject, just wanted to make a point.
Fair point. However, claims of kills have been known to be inaccurate: a pilot lies, a seemingly critical hit did not result in a loss, and exaggeration for internal and external political purposes. US aircraft losses can be verified objectively in my view. Aircraft records are maintained for many reasons, including analysis, so they tend to be fairly accurate.
As far as how does anybody know what caused the loss when the aircrew is KIA/MIA, remember that most USAF aircraft operate at least in elements of 2, but usually 4 or more aircraft are involved in a strike scenario. Plenty of witnesses – but maybe not always. The aircrew themselves self-report their situations – in your example, the crew could have reported the cause of their demise.
In context of the F-35 argument, even if using the the number of F-105’s shot down as claimed by the NVAF, the vast majority of losses were still caused by ground fire, SAM’s, accidents, etc. – not by A-A action as stated by Sprey.
maus92Is 4nm really BVR? Ok its a BVR radar guided missile, but a kill at 4nm doesn’t really qualify for BVR …right ?
As for the F-105 air to air kill/losses ratio, presumably that figure comes from american sources? 🙂
Re: 4nm… yes and no. They were detected and determined to be hostile at BVR, but 4nm could be WVR if conditions are CAVU. I can find another example easily enough if you are unconvinced.
The F-105 numbers I state do come from American sources. The Wiki article mentions that the NVAF reported more than twice that many F-105’s killed. The problem with that scenario is that US aircraft are meticulously tracked, so tracing aircraft history by serial numbers could done quite easily since it is public record – but that would be a waste of time in my opinion. I believe the American numbers.
maus92Can someone cite successful BVR real life engagements? didnt F-14s and F-15s have success during GW1? what about Bosnia? what are these guys drinking?
I also did a quick fact check on the F-105 via Wiki. The F-105 was a low level penetrating nuclear strike aircraft, designed to fly in a straight line very fast. 382 of 833 produced were lost in combat – most from ground fire and SAM’s – not from MiG-17’s as implied by Sprey. It managed 27.5 MiG kills to 17 lost (~1.6/1 k/d).
Wheeler has compared the F-35 Lightning II to the P-38 Lightning of WWII fame, disparaging both – however the P-38 was not so bad considering the the US leading ace of WWII claimed 40 kills flying the P-38.
Both seem to be a little loose with the facts.
maus92Can someone cite successful BVR real life engagements? didnt F-14s and F-15s have success during GW1? what about Bosnia? what are these guys drinking?
Found two, but there are more.
1989, Gulf of Sidra – VF-32 2xF-14A kills 2xMiG 23’s. Kill#1: F-14A 207 fires 1xAIM-7 at 13nm – miss. 207 fires 1xAIM-7 at 8nm – miss. F-14A 204 fires 1xAIM-7 at 4nm – hit/kill. Kill#2: 207 fires AIM-9 at 1nm – hit/kill.
1991, Desert Storm – 58th TFS F-15C kills MiG-29. F-15C at 30K gets a spike on his RWR, and locks a contact at 40nm and 7K. Calls check Mode 4 on strike. The pilot determines that the bogey qualifies as a bandit (AWACS couldn’t/didn’t declare) F-15C fires at bandit, now at 17K, range unspecified – but BVR (this is ~0300L). F-15C looses spike at 10nm and missile timeout, sees purplish-blue flash on the horizon. AWACS later confirms the kill.
maus92Can someone cite successful BVR real life engagements? didnt F-14s and F-15s have success during GW1? what about Bosnia? what are these guys drinking?
There have been some – I’ll have to look them up. Look, these guys are old school – and are trying to remain significant in a field where design technology has pretty much left them behind. The more they prattled on, the more obvious it became. But they both have had significant impact on US aircraft design until the 1970’s
maus92Just got back from the AFA show in DC. The most interesting F-35 related kit were the ACES 5 ejection seat and the incredible L-3 panoramic touchscreen cockpit display which is installed in BF-4 and subsequent airframes.
The seat has passive restraining systems to prevent leg and arm flail, and a “basket” that catches and restrains the pilot’s head (remember that the pilot is wearing the huge and heavy HMD) as it snaps back while ejecting. The seat is a zero-zero, 0-600kt design.
The panoramic display was simply amazing – very crisp and (potentially) infinitely configurable. The display was programmed in a loop for the show, demonstrating different configs for the F-35 – and for the F-15 (it can mimic displays for any plane you want – potentially useful for transitioning to a full glass cockpit.) The F-15 depiction looks exactly like F-15 displays / instruments. The gentleman that demo’ed it for me said that the display is also integrated in Thai F-5’s, and the display is used for LSO platforms on carriers. I think the USN should retrofit it into the F/A-18 fleet and use it in all future F/A-18’s, and for that matter, any future cockpit upgrades in any aircraft.
maus92I’m not saying that F-35s won’t ever use their guns, but that it’s not necessarily more vulnerable than any other aircraft would be, from AAA.
Considering the amount of ammo carried, there aren’t going to be many gun runs, in any event. AC-130s and helicopter gunships are better at that role anyhow.
Agreed.
maus92That makes no sense. While the B has had some parts issues, it only missed it’s August goals by two flights (26 out of 28). Conversely, the A nearly TRIPLED it’s goals and even the C exceeded it’s flight test goals.
Given the complaints about Blk3 not being “fully functional”, I do not understand the “defers follow-on software development” issues either.
“Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, subcommittee chairman, said the JSF cuts are warranted because the program is behind schedule. “I would inform my colleagues that the Defense Department has not yet awarded a contract to build 30 aircraft which the Congress funded nearly a year ago.”
From the Navy Times: http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/09/defense-senate-appropriations-bill-markup-091410nt/
maus92F-35 Haters video
From the DEW Line blog:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/09/videos-dutch-tv-with-f-35-hate.html
maus92Not sure if this has been linked yet:
“Defence review: ‘Carriers give politicians options – not dead ends'”
maus92As for F-35s getting hit by AAA- I don’t see them getting down in the mud, when they can use stand off weapons from safer distances.
Which is what F/A-18’s are doing today: getting down in the mud and using their 20mm cannon with good effect and excellent precision. Are we going to restrict the F-35 from low altitudes? That doesn’t work for the CAS / FAC-A role. (Personally, I’d like to see some AT-6B’s doing some of this work in A-Stan, but that deserves another thread.)
maus92While I will wait until the contract is actually signed to completely believe it, but LM said recently “Burbage stuck to the company’s line that the final price of the airplanes will be roughly 20 percent below Pentagon estimates from December 2009, which predicted the jets would costs as much as $76 million each in 2010 dollars”.
That makes the price roughly $61 million a plane if you reduce the price by 20% in 2010 dollars, I suspect this is the average for the entire LRIP and that the F-35A will be cheaper than this and the F-35B is more expensive, but it does suggest the price difference between the F-35 and the F/A-18 will be marginal.
The latest on the LRIP-4 negotiations from Frank Kendall’s (OSD/DoD) viewpoint talks about a savings of about 6% per airframe – with no mention about the basis/price per airframe. A bit different from LM’s Burbage.
Source: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/09/08/osd-squeezes-harder-on-jsf-costs/
Also, the Senate Appropriations Committee defense subcommittee funds a total of 32 F-35 aircraft (6 Navy, 10 Marine Corps and 16 Air Force planes), deleting 10 aircraft from the requested 42 in their markup. It also defers follow-on software development for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, reduces Navy test funds due to under-execution, and includes no funds for F-35 Joint Strike Fighter F136 alternate engine development. (A markup is not a final vote, so funding could be restored.)
Source: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/09/14/sac-d-rejects-f136-dough/#ixzz0zbWMeP21
maus92How about a meat pilot and a remote WSO running sensors and weapons from the other side of the planet. Anyone ever considered something like that?
Three negatives come to mind: Bandwidth, emitting, and enemy ECM. The value of the second crewman are his eyes and brain – removing him from the cockpit defeats the purpose, in my view.
maus92If it works as marketed (stealth and all systems), 65 mil US makes it a good bird. Range is good, stealthy internal load-out is decent. Non-stealthy external/internal load-out is very good. Good motor, the promise of the avionics is compelling. 65 mil, what are the odds?
The future: 2 seats, TVC ( I know, be’in greedy, i’m really hopin for a super-man. 35 one day,).
Betting on 65m… With pricing numbers all over the map, and 65m being one of the lowest, I’d gamble on the plane coming in for more than that.
Two seats would make it a real strike aircraft. It would be curious if that development would happen with this airframe. It won’t happen with the -B.
TVC? Not needed IF the AIM-9X Block II works as advertised.
maus92What would render the f-35 a great fighter for its buyers? Price, inhanced wvr capabilities ( TVC), etc..?
Stealth sets it apart from the competition – arguably justifying it’s rather steep price tag. Aside from that, a similarly kitted SH (or plug in your favorite 4G airframe) can do much the same work – provided that an adversary’s air defense have been sufficiently attrited. A rather large provision.
Sign In
