Yeah I was kidding, you should know that by now 🙂

Phew…

I managed to restrain my more basic instincts in replying to that post, if that counts… 😀

I believe the MiG 5th gen fighter did some high speed taxi trails a few years back, does that count? Oh and the FSW flanker did some pretty airshow routines.

Taxi trials?

You are kidding, aren’t you?

Airshow routines? Well obviously performing acrobatics is all it takes to produce a successful combat aircraft. ‘

Hence why you see see Airforces lining up to buy SU-26 Sukhois instead of SU-30 Sukhois…

Sorry
But I must say, what with the dog breakfast called the A-12 Avenger II, and the continues delays and cost blow outs of the F-35 program, I am amazed that the U.S Navy has allowed itself to be without the range and payload delivery capability of the likes of the Intruder since February 1997!
Regardless of all the hype about fighter escorting and EW support aircraft, the wars that the United States has been envolved since 1997, would still have been served more effectivly by the Intruder (even if upgraded to A-6F standards) until the F-35 Lockheed Martin, and politicians finally gets their acts together and put it into service.
10+-years without this capability is quite pitifull!
And before everyone jumps on the band wagon – no the F/A-18E/F has not replaced the Intruder or its capabilities!
At the end of the day the U.S Navy has a lot of questions it should be answering, in regards to what it has and is doing!
They are not doing themselves to many favours

Regards
Pioneer

Looking at fas.org and comparing internal fuel, payload, MTOW and everything is very interesting, but it is only a small part of “capability”.

USN thinks of sortie rates, not paper statistics.

It’s sortie rate today is FAR greater than when it carried F-14 and A-6/A-7’s on it’s flat tops and the ROE (rate of effort) is undeniably greater when you factor modern weapons into the scenarios.

Yes, you can argue that modern weapons, sensors etc could have been added to older platforms, but cost and the effort needed to support such endeavours eventually reigns in such aspirations…

In this day of modern precision guided weapons many of which feature extended range, airframe range and payload is not as important as it once was.

Hence why the F-35 is going to be such a game changer…

Guess what at the time of designing the Raptor, LM has had no experience in 5th generation fighters, as well. By your own logic, the plane must be crap like hell, then.

Rubbish. L-M has more experience in designing VLO aircraft than any other manufacturer on the planet and a history of fighter designs as good, if not better than anyone.

The USA also has an unparalleled budget for research and development. No other manufacturer in the world can boast the same.

The F-35 will be outclassed by PAK-FA at least by a margin F-16 was outclassed by Flanker series.The PAK-FA might come at least a decade later but in 20 years no one will give damn about what came at what date.

On the contrary, that is an absolute certainity.

On the contrary. L-M has it’s history of VLO aircraft designs, which now includes successful 5th Gen VLO fighter designs.

Any other manufacturer is attempting to play catch-up whilst L-M is happily plugging along on it’s second 5th Gen fighter design.

No other manufacturer or Country has yet shown ANYTHING near to that which the USA and L-M have achieved.

Assuming from marketing brochures of a paper design that hasn’t even been seen in public, let alone flown, is a massive leap of faith.

Maybe Skoda might win the Formula 1 championship next year, too… :rolleyes:

If you ordered F-35 as an export customer today, what would be the first possible delivery date?

2012, based on the planned first delivery of production aircraft, however if you were NOT a part of SDD, then I expect you’d have a bit of negotiating on your hands (not to mention be willing to pay a fairly hefty price) to persuade SDD members to give up their production slots for you…

Every SDD member has aging fleets of aircraft that need to begin being replaced from around the commencement of F-35 production examples. It’s going to cost them significantly to delay those acquisitions, so I expect they will want PLENTY in return…

No it’s not common sense. Because the development curve is different. It’s also going to take until the 2020s until the F-35 gets a electronic attack capability and much of the other feautues often marketed but not available for the early block versions. F-35 will initially be a JDAM bomber with a pair of AMRAAMs. That is the common sense.

Gripen NG builds with experience on already highly advanced Electronic warfare, Datalinks and a number of radar projects that will be followed by the latest technology, with high speed computers and databuses from the best suppliers in the world for a air force jet 2015+. It’s not like Lockheed is sitting there developing new computers and other systems for each new jet that rolls out the line. They source from sub-contractors just like Saab and if the development curve is different then so will the delivered capability be. Gripen 39C/D was for instance designed for an airforce 2006+ so they took the bold move to 100% digitalise the instrumental displays before anyone else. It’s all relevant for when the jet is about to enter service and what capability is planned for that first stage. Gripen NG will pack more capability by 2015 than F-35 by 2015.

And Sweden has no problems what so ever to get the best equipment from the US. We have agreements to work on R&D projects in the defense industry without political interferrence. This has enabled succesfull programs like EXCALIBUR grenades or the SAAB radars to LCS. Specially designed Raytheon AESAs to the Swedish research etc. We don’t even need to notify congress when we buy their weapons.

People who see this as a US vs Sweden thing is so very mistaken… Saab has US partners and they offer the best of what they got or Saab will find someone else. Which is why Eurojet was consulted and studied EJ200 for Gripen. GE decided to enter as a risk sharing partner and offered engines and people. Same with Rockwell-Collins, Honeywell etc. They are financial risk sharing partners. US companies betting on Gripen.

Sweden doesn’t have JDAM on the Gripen… 🙂

“”The Joint Strike Fighter could be upgraded to carry up to six internal AIM-120 AMRAAM Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles, according to a Lockheed Martin executive. “Our spiral development program includes the ability to carry up to six internal AMRAAMs”, G. Richard Cathers, senior manager of Lockheed Martin’s strategic studies group, told the IQPC Fighter Conference in London on Wednesday. “It’s a capability second only to the F-22.”””

The word “COULD”… as opposed to… WILL BE was used.
So again… The F-35 is limited to 2 large AG weapons and 2 AA weapons internally.

No it isn’t, especially if you are flying an “A” model. The A model will be capable of carrying 4x AMRAAM internally from Block 3 onwards. This is at the expense of ATG munitions carried internally of course, but since when does EVERY aircraft in a package carry the EXACT same loadout?

Were will the funding for this “upgrade” come from?

Anyone who wishes the capability. It’s not unheard of for a Country to integrate a particularly capability onto an aircraft that not EVERYONE else uses. Apparently RAAF Hornets carry the ASRAAM missile. How many other Hornet users, make use of the ASRAAM?

“”The four added internal AMRAAMs would be carried in place of internal bombs. It’s not clear, however, whether the short-take-off, vertical landing F-35B variant, which has smaller weapon bays, would be able to carry the added weapons.””An executive for a competing fighter program, speaking at the conference, said that the six-missile capability would be a major improvement for the JSF. Until now, competitors have criticised the JSF because it carries only two AAMs – supporting only a single engagement – in stealth mode.

Once you start hanging weapons externally… you may as well buy more Gripens, Rafale, Hornets…

No, the F-35 is a FAR more low observable aircraft than any of those you mentioned. External weapons carriage will decrease this advantage, but it certainly won’t eliminate it entirely.

Nor will external weapons carriage effect the OTHER factors that make the F-35 such a superior fighter over earlier generations, avionics, sensors, comms, fuel fraction etc.

The LM website DOES not mention any upgrades to the weapons bay…
Nor does the official F-35 website..

“”The problem is that your are INCORRECTLY assuming that the F-35’s exhaust is hotter. Besides, modern IR seekers don’t even rely of exhaust heat, but more of airframe heat.””

So a seeker wont be fooled into tracking an exhaust plume?
And the F-35s skin is “cooler” then other other airframes flying out there?
I dont follow your reasoning…

Modern heaters use “dual plane” seekers. They seek IR as well as UV reflections off aircraft.

Once again, here is what an ASRAAM missile seeker “sees”

There are parts of the airframe that seem as hot as the exhaust area…