Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+80
d_taddei2
TMA1
Arrow
ALAMO
Atmosphere
Finty
Kiko
Backman
lancelot
owais.usmani
lyle6
Hole
thegopnik
Cyberspec
The-thing-next-door
dino00
Isos
nero
MiamiMachineShop
Walther von Oldenburg
LMFS
PhSt
ATLASCUB
Anonymous Fighter
moskit
miketheterrible
FichtL_WichtL
GarryB
nomadski
Godric
George1
KiloGolf
Airman
KoTeMoRe
Grazneyar
JohninMK
PapaDragon
AlfaT8
jka
max steel
Book.
AirCargo
Zhukov-Patton
OminousSpudd
Manov
VladimirSahin
Kyo
Battalion0415
medo
kvs
higurashihougi
Mike E
sepheronx
BlackArrow
Werewolf
KomissarBojanchev
collegeboy16
Hannibal Barca
Airbornewolf
SOC
TR1
magnumcromagnon
flamming_python
zino
NationalRus
As Sa'iqa
Regular
BTRfan
gaurav
Viktor
nemrod
Corrosion
ahmedfire
Admin
IronsightSniper
Austin
nightcrawler
Russian Patriot
Vladislav
Turk1
84 posters

    F-35 Development and News Thread:

    AirCargo
    AirCargo


    Posts : 97
    Points : 95
    Join date : 2014-05-19
    Location : Seattle, WA. United States

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty F-35 Development and Problems Thread

    Post  AirCargo 21/05/15, 01:28 pm

    Six USMC F-35Bs Land Aboard The Wasp For Critical Operational Trials

    http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/six-usmc-f-35bs-land-aboard-the-wasp-for-critical-opera-1705657549
    George1
    George1


    Posts : 18268
    Points : 18765
    Join date : 2011-12-23
    Location : Greece

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  George1 27/05/15, 10:04 am

    US, UK Assess Fifth Generation Fighter Jet’s Amphibious Capabilities

    US and UK military personnel began testing the F-35B stealth fighter jet’s ability to conduct both land and sea operations from an aircraft carrier, US defense giant Lockheed Martin said in a press release on Tuesday.

    WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The “B” version of the F-35 jet combines essential “lethal fighter characteristics,” according to Lockheed Martin.

    “[S]ervice members from the United Kingdom are working alongside their US Navy and Marine Corps counterparts to assess the integration of the F-35B into amphibious military operations,” the release stated.

    The lethal fighter characteristics include supersonic speed, radar-evading stealth technology and short takeoff and vertical landing capabilities.

    Sixteen Royal Navy and Royal Air Force operational assessors, ship integration team members, aircraft technicians and maintenance crews, will conduct tests of the F-35B from a US aircraft carrier over the next two weeks, the release explained.

    The UK assessors will test F-35B night flight operations, weapons loading and interoperability of aircraft and ship systems, among other capabilities, the release added.

    UK pilots will begin operating the F-35B from home bases in England starting in 2018, according to the release, and are on track to fly from Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers in 2020.

    In February 2015, UK engineers and pilots stood up their first F-35 squadron at Edwards Air Force Base in California, where they fly and maintain two F-35B jets independently from their US colleagues, the release said.

    The F-35’s development has been beset by delays, cost overruns and technical problems. Critics of the program in the US Congress have argued that the jets are unnecessary and a waste of money.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20150526/1022585740.html#ixzz3bHi37rIb
    AirCargo
    AirCargo


    Posts : 97
    Points : 95
    Join date : 2014-05-19
    Location : Seattle, WA. United States

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty F-35 Development and Problems Thread

    Post  AirCargo 27/05/15, 03:00 pm

    USAF says F-35A IOC on schedule

    http://www.janes.com/article/51624/usaf-says-f-35a-ioc-on-schedule
    AirCargo
    AirCargo


    Posts : 97
    Points : 95
    Join date : 2014-05-19
    Location : Seattle, WA. United States

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty F-35 Development and Problems Thread

    Post  AirCargo 02/06/15, 03:35 pm

    Pentagon Ready to Ramp Up F-35 Production, Studies Options for Logistics Support

    http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=1855
    George1
    George1


    Posts : 18268
    Points : 18765
    Join date : 2011-12-23
    Location : Greece

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  George1 05/06/15, 08:47 pm

    The US Navy awarded Lockheed Martin a contract worth more than $920 million to manufacture 94 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets for production testing.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20150605/1022970204.html#ixzz3cAwbgsuY
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5913
    Points : 6102
    Join date : 2012-10-25

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  Werewolf 06/06/15, 03:45 am

    George1 wrote:The US Navy awarded Lockheed Martin a contract worth more than $920 million to manufacture 94 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets for production testing.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20150605/1022970204.html#ixzz3cAwbgsuY
    Wait what? Can't be correct by any measures... that would be 9.78 mio. USD per bird?
    collegeboy16
    collegeboy16


    Posts : 1135
    Points : 1134
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 27
    Location : Roanapur

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  collegeboy16 06/06/15, 06:14 am

    Werewolf wrote:
    George1 wrote:The US Navy awarded Lockheed Martin a contract worth more than $920 million to manufacture 94 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets for production testing.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20150605/1022970204.html#ixzz3cAwbgsuY
    Wait what? Can't be correct by any measures... that would be 9.78 mio. USD per bird?
    here's what i got
    http://www.businessinsider.com/r-lockheed-wins-920-million-deal-for-early-work-on-next-f-35-jet-order--2015-6
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Lockheed Martin Corp has won a contract valued at $920 million to start buying materials and parts for a tenth batch of 94 F-35 fighter jets, the Pentagon announced Thursday.

    The "advanced procurement" contract will allow the company to start ordering parts and material that take a long time to procure, such as titanium, according to a spokesman for the Pentagon's F-35 program office.

    Lockheed and the government are still negotiating the terms of the overall contract for jets in the 10th batch, a deal that will be valued at well over.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5913
    Points : 6102
    Join date : 2012-10-25

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  Werewolf 06/06/15, 07:48 am

    Makes more sense.

    Ty, Mr. WataMote.
    Mike E
    Mike E


    Posts : 2619
    Points : 2651
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  Mike E 06/06/15, 08:25 am

    Yeah...no way they'd be that cheap Wink

    I just cannot wait to see the maintenance bills on these birds...if you thought the development costs were high. Laughing
    Book.
    Book.


    Posts : 692
    Points : 745
    Join date : 2015-05-08
    Location : Oregon, USA

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  Book. 07/06/15, 10:13 am

    Russia supply the titanum. it prob 2x the cost Twisted Evil
    max steel
    max steel


    Posts : 2930
    Points : 2955
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  max steel 11/06/15, 07:32 am

    F-35A Engine Fire Investigation Finds $50 Million in Damages



    An Air Force investigation found that an F-35A aircraft engine fire which broke out during a training flight at a Florida base last June, leading to a temporary grounding of the aircraft, wound up causing more than $50 million in damages.

    "The Accident Investigation Board found the cause of the mishap was catastrophic engine failure," the report stated. "Pieces of the failed rotor arm cut through the engine's fan case, the engine bay, an internal fuel tank, and hydraulic and fuel lines before exiting through the aircraft's upper fuselage. Damage from the engine failure caused leaking fuel and hydraulic fluid to ignite and burn the rear two thirds of the aircraft."

    Investigators determined that the fire and engine failure were caused by excessive rubbing between materials in the engine's rotor, The friction caused the engine temperature to rise to 1,900 degrees Fahrenheit, much higher than the 1,000-degree temperature it was designed to handle. The high heat caused a micro-fracture in the rotor which, after several weeks of flying, led to engine failure.

    "High cycle fatigue caused the rotor to liberate from the airplane. The fire was not caused by the engine but by the pieces of the engine that flew out through the upper fuselage fuel tank






    : http://sputniknews.com/us/20150610/1023156155.html#ixzz3cgnj46XZ



    nemrod
    nemrod


    Posts : 839
    Points : 1333
    Join date : 2012-09-12
    Age : 59

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  nemrod 26/06/15, 10:20 pm

    Cost of F-35 program is 1.5 trillon $

    https://www.nationalpriorities.org/cost-of/f-35/

    nemrod
    nemrod


    Posts : 839
    Points : 1333
    Join date : 2012-09-12
    Age : 59

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Test Pilot Admits the F-35 Can’t Dogfight

    Post  nemrod 02/07/15, 08:59 am



    New stealth fighter is dead meat in an air battle Mwahahahahahaha lol!




    https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-pilot-admits-the-f-35-can-t-dogfight-cdb9d11a875





    by DAVID AXE

    A test pilot has some very, very bad news about the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The pricey new stealth jet can’t turn or climb fast enough to hit an enemy plane during a dogfight or to dodge the enemy’s own gunfire, the pilot reported following a day of mock air battles back in January.

    “The F-35 was at a distinct energy disadvantage,” the unnamed pilot wrote in a scathing five-page brief that War Is Boring has obtained. The brief is unclassified but is labeled “for official use only.”

    The test pilot’s report is the latest evidence of fundamental problems with the design of the F-35 — which, at a total program cost of more than a trillion dollars, is history’s most expensive weapon.

    The U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps — not to mention the air forces and navies of more than a dozen U.S. allies — are counting on the Lockheed Martin-made JSF to replace many if not most of their current fighter jets.

    And that means that, within a few decades, American and allied aviators will fly into battle in an inferior fighter — one that could get them killed … and cost the United States control of the air.

    The fateful test took place on Jan. 14, 2015, apparently within the Sea Test Range over the Pacific Ocean near Edwards Air Force Base in California. The single-seat F-35A with the designation “AF-02” — one of the older JSFs in the Air Force — took off alongside a two-seat F-16D Block 40, one of the types of planes the F-35 is supposed to replace.

    The two jets would be playing the roles of opposing fighters in a pretend air battle, which the Air Force organized specifically to test out the F-35’s prowess as a close-range dogfighter in an air-to-air tangle involving high “angles of attack,” or AoA, and “aggressive stick/pedal inputs.”

    In other words, the F-35 pilot would fly his jet hard, turning and maneuvering in order to “shoot down” the F-16, whose pilot would be doing his own best to evade and kill the F-35.

    “The evaluation focused on the overall effectiveness of the aircraft in performing various specified maneuvers in a dynamic environment,” the F-35 tester wrote. “This consisted of traditional Basic Fighter Maneuvers in offensive, defensive and neutral setups at altitudes ranging from 10,000 to 30,000 feet.”
    At top and above — F-35s and F-16s. Air Force photos

    The F-35 was flying “clean,” with no weapons in its bomb bay or under its wings and fuselage. The F-16, by contrast, was hauling two bulky underwing drop tanks, putting the older jet at an aerodynamic disadvantage.

    But the JSF’s advantage didn’t actually help in the end. The stealth fighter proved too sluggish to reliably defeat the F-16, even with the F-16 lugging extra fuel tanks. “Even with the limited F-16 target configuration, the F-35A remained at a distinct energy disadvantage for every engagement,” the pilot reported.

    The defeated flier’s five-page report is a damning litany of aerodynamic complaints targeting the cumbersome JSF.

    “Insufficient pitch rate.” “Energy deficit to the bandit would increase over time.” “The flying qualities in the blended region (20–26 degrees AoA) were not intuitive or favorable.”

    The F-35 jockey tried to target the F-16 with the stealth jet’s 25-millimeter cannon, but the smaller F-16 easily dodged. “Instead of catching the bandit off-guard by rapidly pull aft to achieve lead, the nose rate was slow, allowing him to easily time his jink prior to a gun solution,” the JSF pilot complained.

    And when the pilot of the F-16 turned the tables on the F-35, maneuvering to put the stealth plane in his own gunsight, the JSF jockey found he couldn’t maneuver out of the way, owing to a “lack of nose rate.”

    The F-35 pilot came right out and said it — if you’re flying a JSF, there’s no point in trying to get into a sustained, close turning battle with another fighter. “There were not compelling reasons to fight in this region.” God help you if the enemy surprises you and you have no choice but to turn.

    The JSF tester found just one way to win a short-range air-to-air engagement — by performing a very specific maneuver. “Once established at high AoA, a prolonged full rudder input generated a fast enough yaw rate to create excessive heading crossing angles with opportunities to point for missile shots.”

    But there’s a problem — this sliding maneuver bleeds energy fast. “The technique required a commitment to lose energy and was a temporary opportunity prior to needing to regain energy … and ultimately end up defensive again.” In other words, having tried the trick once, an F-35 pilot is out of options and needs to get away quick.
    Buy ‘The Air Force Way of War: U.S. Tactics and Training after Vietnam.’

    And to add insult to injury, the JSF flier discovered he couldn’t even comfortably move his head inside the radar-evading jet’s cramped cockpit. “The helmet was too large for the space inside the canopy to adequately see behind the aircraft.” That allowed the F-16 to sneak up on him.

    In the end, the F-35 — the only new fighter jet that America and most of its allies are developing — is demonstrably inferior in a dogfight with the F-16, which the U.S. Air Force first acquired in the late 1970s.

    The test pilot explained that he has also flown 1980s-vintage F-15E fighter-bombers and found the F-35 to be “substantially inferior” to the older plane when it comes to managing energy in a close battle.

    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5913
    Points : 6102
    Join date : 2012-10-25

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  Werewolf 02/07/15, 09:39 am

    David Axe... the paid journalist. His words have so much meaning like anything that comes from Jen Psakis.
    max steel
    max steel


    Posts : 2930
    Points : 2955
    Join date : 2015-02-13
    Location : South Pole

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  max steel 02/07/15, 09:55 am

    I take Medium:War is Boring with grain of salt . They had an article " Russian Dying Navy " . Pure BS .Though they praised PAK-FA AND J-20 or whatever it is . Maybe different contributors have different view .
    nemrod
    nemrod


    Posts : 839
    Points : 1333
    Join date : 2012-09-12
    Age : 59

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  nemrod 02/07/15, 12:06 pm


    F-35 Vs F-16

    We’ve heard of significant shortcomings before with the fighter jet that’s supposed to be America’s future, but this is just as bad as it gets. The F-35 performed so dismally in a dogfight, that the test pilot remarked that the it had pretty much no place fighting other aircraft within visual range.

    A test pilot report obtained by defense journalist David Axe of War is Boring detailed the performance of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter in a mock air battle against a two-seat F-16D. The F-35 pilot reported that his aircraft was in a “clean” configuration for the test, carrying nothing under its wings or in its internal weapons bays. The F-16, on the other hand, was flying with under-wing external fuel drop-tanks, which in theory would have put the aircraft at an aerodynamic disadvantage.

    Even with the limited F-16 target configuration, the F-35A remained at a distinct energy disadvantage for every engagement, the F-35 pilot reported. That means the F-35 constantly found itself flying slower and more sluggishly, unable to effectively maneuver to get the F-16 in its sights.

    What's your opinion on this.?
    Controversy here :


    http://fightersweep.com/2548/f-35-v-f-16-article-garbage/

    Why The “F-35 v F-16″ Article Is Garbage

    As one of our followers here on FighterSweep, you’re probably someone that likes to keep track of the latest news on America’s most advanced fighters–especially the stealthy, badass fifth-generation F-22 and F-35. More specifically, you’ve probably been keeping tabs on the development of the F-35–its setbacks, its achievements, and its march toward IOC. That also means you may have run across a very recent article that screams, “The F-35 can’t beat the plane it’s replacing in a dogfight!”
    As a taxpayer, reading that probably pisses you off. After all, the F-35 acquisitions program is one of the most twisted and over-budget jobs programs in the history of the U.S. military. It’s late. It’s expensive. It’s bloated. It can’t even fly within twenty-five miles of a thunderstorm because they had to remove lightning protection to save on weight–a requirement for the Marines so they could take off and land vertically in the F-35B.

    There are hundreds of valid complaints on this aircraft, but the latest clickbait headlines scattering social media aren’t among them; it’s as though suddenly everyone is Colonel John Boyd reincarnate and knows what the problem is.

    Now, before we get into the why, let me first preface all of this by saying I don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t work for Lockheed-Martin. I have nothing to do with the Air Force, Navy, or Marine Corps acquisitions process. As I mentioned in my Hornet versus Viper comparison, the Viper is my first love–so naturally I smiled a little when I read the headline.

    But at the end of the day, I–just like every other fighter pilot out there–have to be fair.

    First, let’s talk about what really happened. According to the article, an F-35A and a two-bag Block 40 F-16D took off on Jan 14, 2015 to engage in Basic Fighter Maneuver setups to test “the overall effectiveness of the aircraft in performing various specified maneuvers in a dynamic environment…this consisted of traditional Basic Fighter Maneuvers in offensive, defensive, and neutral setups at altitudes ranging from 10,000 to 30,000 feet.”

    English please?

    Just like a normal 1v1 proficiency sortie, the two fighters did canned setups to practice basic dogfighting. In the offensive setups, the F-35 would start off behind the F-16. At the specified range, the F-35 pilot would call “Fight’s On” and maneuver to the F-16’s control zone to employ weapons. In the defensive setups, the F-35 would start off in front while the Viper maneuvered to the F-35’s control zone. And finally, in the neutral (high-aspect) setup, the two aircraft would start completely neutral and fight until whatever DLOs (Designated Learning Objectives) they had were met, be they valid gunshots, valid missile shots, or whatever.

    So while this particular article may lead you to believe the two aircraft went out there mano y mano and duked it out, the reality is that we don’t know where each deficiency was found. My guess is the critiques on the pitch rates for gunning and abilities to jink happened in the canned offensive and defensive setups. But one has to remember this is a test platform and they were out to get test data, not find out who the king of the mountain is.

    The article talks about energy bleed rates, high-Alpha maneuvering, and the F-35 pilot’s “only winning move” to threaten with the nose at high angle of attack. What does that sound like?

    To me, it sounds like a Hornet fighting a Viper. Of course, a Hornet is not going to do well against an F-16 in a sustained rate fight. Its strength is to get slow and use its angle of attack advantage, much like the F-35 did here. It also bleeds energy rapidly and struggles to get it back once bled down. The fact the heavier, drag-encumbered F-35 had this problem is not surprising to me–despite its monstrous amount of available thrust, and it doesn’t mean much in the grand scheme of things.

    As for the helmet problem, I’m sure that’s an ergonomics issue that will be worked out in testing. It’s not “sneaking up” on anyone; the TTL driver likely went blind during the engagement. As they say, “Lose sight, lose the fight.”

    This aircraft is still in its infancy. Tactics, techniques, and procedures that key on strengths and minimize weaknesses are just starting to be developed. Taking one report and proclaiming that the F-35 is a piece of FOD in the air-to-air arena is irresponsible and sensationalist at best. There are far too many other factors to look at.

    For example, the test pilot was a former F-15E pilot. Two-bag Vipers do the same thing to Strike Eagles all day long. Maybe he was just used to it?

    I keed. I keed. But seriously, a guy with maybe 100 hours in the F-35 versus a guy with 1,500+ Viper hours? I’ve seen thousand-hour F-16 guys in two-bag D-models beat up on brand new wingmen in clean, single-seat jets. It happens. It’s the reality of the amount of experience in your given cockpit.

    I’m sure internet debates will rage on. It’s fun to trash the new kid, especially the new kid that’s overweight, wears too much bling, and talks about how awesome it is all the time. It’s way too early to declare the F-35 the “worst fighter aircraft design ever imagined.” Please. Let’s see how it does when guys who are proficient in developed tactics do against guys with similar amounts experience–the realm of the bros in the operational test or Weapons School environment.

    There’s plenty of room to criticize this program, but accuracy is important. The sky isn’t really falling, Chicken Little. And for the rest of you? Blow out your torches and hang up your pitchforks, for we have miles to go.
    Book.
    Book.


    Posts : 692
    Points : 745
    Join date : 2015-05-08
    Location : Oregon, USA

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  Book. 02/07/15, 12:39 pm

    Joint Program Office Response to “War is Boring” Blog
    July 01, 2015

    The media report on the F-35 and F-16 flight does not tell the entire story. The F-35 involved was AF-2, which is an F-35 designed for flight sciences testing, or flying qualities, of the aircraft. It is not equipped with a number of items that make today's production F-35s 5th Generation fighters.

    Aircraft AF-2 did not have the mission systems software to use the sensors that allow the F-35 to see its enemy long before it knows the F-35 is in the area. Second, AF-2 does not have the special stealth coating that operational F-35s have that make them virtually invisible to radar. And third, it is not equipped with the weapons or software that allow the F-35 pilot to turn, aim a weapon with the helmet, and fire at an enemy without having to point the airplane at its target.

    The tests cited in the article were done earlier this year to test the flying qualities of the F-35 using visual combat maneuvers to stress the system, and the F-16 involved was used as a visual reference to maneuver against. While the dogfighting scenario was successful in showing the ability of the F-35 to maneuver to the edge of its limits without exceeding them, and handle in a positive and predictable manner, the interpretation of the scenario results could be misleading. The F-35's technology is designed to engage, shoot, and kill its enemy from long distances, not necessarily in visual "dogfighting" situations. There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios and the F-35s won each of those encounters because of its sensors, weapons, and stealth technology.

    The release of this FOUO report is being investigated. The candid feedback provided by our test community is welcomed because it makes what we do better.

    The disclosure of this report should not discourage our warfighters and test community from providing the Program Office and Lockheed Martin with honest assessments of the F-35's capabilities.

    https://www.f35.com/news/detail/joint-program-office-response-to-war-is-boring-blog?sf10503378=1

    LM try save face

    the cat out ! lol1
    Godric
    Godric


    Posts : 800
    Points : 826
    Join date : 2015-05-01
    Location : Alba (Scotland)

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  Godric 03/07/15, 06:23 am

    how much has the program cost so far $1.5 trillion and it can't dogfight .... expensive coffin lol1
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38764
    Points : 39260
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  GarryB 03/07/15, 09:44 pm

    For a fraction of what this is costing they could have fitted new AESAs and new helmet mounted sights and new versions of Sidewinder and AMRAAM on new build F-16s and new build F-15s and just relied on their local superiority of numbers to dominate most countries.

    Lets be real... an F-35 is not going to be as scary as five times as many F-18s and F-16s and F-15s supported by AWACS and JSTARS and other platforms.

    Not only will they only have a fraction of numbers but each F-35 has a pathetic war load when in stealthy option flight setup.

    If the enemy has ECM equipment that protects it from BVR AMRAAM that means a knife fight... with an F-16 or F-15 or F-18 with helmet mounted sights and late model AAMs against most air forces with less training and a fraction of their budget they will come out on top... not really so sure with the F-35.

    And it is going to be very very expensive...
    Walther von Oldenburg
    Walther von Oldenburg


    Posts : 1600
    Points : 1713
    Join date : 2015-01-24
    Age : 33
    Location : Oldenburg

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  Walther von Oldenburg 03/07/15, 10:13 pm

    Insisting on VTOL capability was the biggest mistake IMO. Better option was to stick to F-16-like multirole fighter.
    JohninMK
    JohninMK


    Posts : 14503
    Points : 14638
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  JohninMK 04/07/15, 01:10 am

    GarryB wrote:For a fraction of what this is costing they could have fitted new AESAs and new helmet mounted sights and new versions of Sidewinder and AMRAAM on new build F-16s and new build F-15s and just relied on their local superiority of numbers to dominate most countries.

    Lets be real... an F-35 is not going to be as scary as  five times as many F-18s and F-16s and F-15s supported by AWACS and JSTARS and other platforms.

    Not only will they only have a fraction of numbers but each F-35 has a pathetic war load when in stealthy option flight setup.

    If the enemy has ECM equipment that protects it from BVR AMRAAM that means a knife fight... with an F-16 or F-15 or F-18 with helmet mounted sights and late model AAMs against most air forces with less training and a fraction of their budget they will come out on top... not really so sure with the F-35.

    And it is going to be very very expensive...
    What you say is very true in a logical world but the US military exists as the customer of the US MIC and as such it needs to place orders to keep the production lines/R&D/profits/political influence running. In the case of the USAF just keeping the F-15/16 production lines ticking over with loss replacements/upgrades was never an option. It did not generate enough profits.

    Bearing that fundamental requirement in mind, the choice of a F-35 multi role type aircraft was very clever as a long term strategy. Phase 1 is the replacement of the bulk of the existing fleet, from A-10 to F-15, whilst Phase 2 is the recognition that the F-35 is not a good enough 'one size fits all' leading to the development of new single role aircraft again.

    We need to bear in mind the opponents that the strategists in the Pentagon see themselves realistically facing. The USAF has not fought a symmetrically equal enemy since early in WW2 or even just faced one since the 80's. So for the best part of 30 years the USAF has had effective control of the sky anywhere it fought, this has inevitably led to the situation where, at least at its conception nearly 10 years ago, the F-35 was a valid and good decision. Only now does it look problematic with the resurgence in Russian and Chinese aircraft design and production and the explosion in costs.

    With the resources being poured into it I have no doubt that it will turn into a good aircraft, and being quirky it will be loved by those who master it. But it will be loved even more by the MIC.
    JohninMK
    JohninMK


    Posts : 14503
    Points : 14638
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  JohninMK 04/07/15, 02:06 am

    Book. wrote:
    Joint Program Office Response to “War is Boring” Blog
    July 01, 2015

    The media report on the F-35 and F-16 flight does not tell the entire story. The F-35 involved was AF-2, which is an F-35 designed for flight sciences testing, or flying qualities, of the aircraft. It is not equipped with a number of items that make today's production F-35s 5th Generation fighters.

    Aircraft AF-2 did not have the mission systems software to use the sensors that allow the F-35 to see its enemy long before it knows the F-35 is in the area. Second, AF-2 does not have the special stealth coating that operational F-35s have that make them virtually invisible to radar. And third, it is not equipped with the weapons or software that allow the F-35 pilot to turn, aim a weapon with the helmet, and fire at an enemy without having to point the airplane at its target.

    The tests cited in the article were done earlier this year to test the flying qualities of the F-35 using visual combat maneuvers to stress the system, and the F-16 involved was used as a visual reference to maneuver against. While the dogfighting scenario was successful in showing the ability of the F-35 to maneuver to the edge of its limits without exceeding them, and handle in a positive and predictable manner, the interpretation of the scenario results could be misleading. The F-35's technology is designed to engage, shoot, and kill its enemy from long distances, not necessarily in visual "dogfighting" situations. There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios and the F-35s won each of those encounters because of its sensors, weapons, and stealth technology.

    The release of this FOUO report is being investigated.  The candid feedback provided by our test community is welcomed because it makes what we do better.

    The disclosure of this report should not discourage our warfighters and test community from providing the Program Office and Lockheed Martin with honest assessments of the F-35's capabilities.

    https://www.f35.com/news/detail/joint-program-office-response-to-war-is-boring-blog?sf10503378=1

    LM try save face

    the cat out ! lol1
    Now comes the War is Boring counter counter attack, nothing like digging up past quotes!

    In January 2015, a single-seat F-35A Joint Strike Fighter fought a mock aerial battle with a considerably older, two-seat F-16D … and lost. That’s according to an unclassified test report that highlighted a number of serious and potentially deadly flaws in the basic design of the new, Lockheed Martin-made F-35.

    Lockheed’s public relations team fired back. The company insisted that the JSF will be just fine in combat — and it’s not really a close-in dogfighter, anyway. “The media report on the F-35 and F-16 flight does not tell the entire story,” Lockheed stated in a July 1 press release. “The F-35’s technology is designed to engage, shoot and kill its enemy from long distances, not necessarily in visual ‘dogfighting’ situations.”

    But what the Texas-based defense contractor — and the Pentagon — do not mention is that they have subtly shifted the goalposts for the F-35 as the stealthy fighter has failed to live up to expectations over the years. In contrast to current rhetoric, proponents once sold the JSF as a dogfighter.

    In 1996, the Pentagon hired both Lockheed and Boeing to build advanced fighter jet prototypes. Five years later, Lockheed’s X-35 won out to become the basis for the Joint Strike Fighter for the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps—what we today know as the F-35. “The goals for the F-35 are lofty,” John Kent, a senior communications specialist with the Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter Program, wrote in the Spring 2003 edition of the Air Force’s Air & Space Power Journal. The plane would be “a single-pilot, survivable, first-day-of-the-war combat fighter with a precision, all-weather strike capability that uses a wide variety of air-to-surface and air-to-air weapons—and that defends itself in a dogfight.”

    So while aerial dueling wasn’t the F-35’s main mission, the company still expected the Joint Strike Fighter to defeat opponents at close range. Kent also praised the JSF’s supposed “high maneuverability.”

    But then the next year, the Pentagon’s top weapons-testing organization pointedly avoided mentioning air-to-air fighting while discussing the F-35 — and instead fixated on the plane’s ground-attack skills. “[The] JSF will be capable of striking and destroying a broad range of targets, day or night, in adverse weather conditions,” the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation claimed in its first-ever annual report on the program. That didn’t mean that the Air Force—or the Navy or Marine Corps—had totally given up on ever sending the F-35 into close air battles. But the flying branch began downplaying the jet’s need to dogfight, perhaps acknowledging what testers were finding to be true — that the JSF couldn’t maneuver very well.

    “The challenge, chivalry and thrill of ‘guns-only’ dogfighting is clearly of a bygone era,” Air Force Lt. Col. Pete Zuppas, then in charge of the 35th Operations Group in Japan, wrote in an official 2007 op-ed. But Zuppas was quick to qualify his own statement. After all, there would probably come a time when the F-35 equipped most of the Air Force’s fighter squadrons. If the F-35 couldn’t dogfight, then the Air Force couldn’t dogfight. “Who knows when we’ll need to do some of that fighter pilot stuff,” Zuppas added. “So at least for now … we’ll keep balancing our training to include a good dogfight now and then.”

    So even as the Joint Strike Fighter’s official role across the services increasingly focused on attacking ground targets, the Air Force still alluded to — and tested — close-range air battles. “Test maneuvers are being executed up to 50 [degrees] AoA,” an official JSF program press release stated in December 2012, referring to the exact same sort of high “angles of attack” that were involved in the January 2015 mock air battle. Pilots need to be able to “aggressively maneuver the F-35A,” the statement explained.

    To recap — as of 2003, the F-35 was supposed to be, in part, a dogfighter. By 2012 the Air Force was working hard to adjust that expectation. Two years later, the flying branch talked as though the JSF was never meant to get involved in close aerial fighting.

    “An F-35 pilot who engages in a dogfight has probably made a mistake,” Air Force Gen. Mike Hostage, then chief of Air Combat Command, told Breaking Defense in June 2014. Air Combat Command owns most of the service’s fighter jets. In the same interview, the general seemed to both dismiss the possibility of short-range battles and suggest they were an inevitable consequence of early victories. And if caught off guard, an F-35 pilot would still be able to maneuver as well as an F-16, Hostage added, seemingly undermining his own earlier point.

    The Air Force took the same contradictory position in response to the newest test revelations. “The F-35 is designed to be comparable to current tactical fighters in terms of maneuverability, but the design is optimized for stealth,” Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Harrigian, director of the Pentagon’s F-35 Integration Office, said in his July statement. “This will allow it to operate in threat environments where the F-16 could not survive.” Harrigian insisted that it was too soon to draw any conclusions about the jet’s overall agility, but the January 2015 outings call both his and Hostage’s claims into question.

    Despite the recent pushback against the “dogfighter” label, Lockheed still declared the January tests to be a successful example of the JSF’s air-to-air prowess. “The dogfighting scenario was successful in showing the ability of the F-35 to maneuver to the edge of its limits without exceeding them, and handle in a positive and predictable manner,” the company stated.

    Never mind that, according to the test pilot’s report, the F-35’s “lateral/direction control was often unpredictable” and the “rudder inputs often feel sluggish/gradual or delayed.” Of course, the test pilot did offer some ideas on how to “ensure predictability.” But this isn’t the same as showing the aircraft to consistently perform as originally expected.

    Lockheed noted that the test jet in the January experiment didn’t have the software to run certain sensors or aim weapons. The AF-02 jet that flew in the mock engagement is an early test vehicle that lacks many of the F-35’s key systems. But burdened with extra weight of weapons and other gear, the jet would likely have struggled even more to get a clean shot on its simulated dogfighting rival. Nor would sensors and radar-evading stealth have necessarily done anything for the pilot in a close-quarters battle, where energy, eyesight and reflexes are the key factors. “Even with the limited F-16 target configuration, the F-35A remained at a distinct energy disadvantage for every engagement,” the test pilot noted in his report.
    Buy ‘Air War in the Gulf 1991.’

    This problem speaks to a fundamental design flaw, not some minor hiccup in development. More to the point — just because the government and Lockheed now intend for the F-35 to stick to a specific mode of air-to-air fighting — or, better yet, avoid aerial fighting altogether — doesn’t necessarily mean that actual combat will take a form advantageous to the sluggish JSF.

    If the plane’s shape means an experienced pilot cannot win a one-on-one engagement at short range, the Pentagon should assume its enemies will do everything they can to exploit this weakness. Pilots cannot — and should not — put their faith in their opponents playing to the F-35’s strengths.

    Lockheed and the Pentagon both seem to be forgetting the basic military maxim that the enemy gets a vote. And they keep moving the performance goalposts to make the cumbersome F-35 look like a success, apparently assuming that there will never be a real aerial shooting war — and lots of destroyed JSFs and dead pilots—to reveal their obfuscation.



    https://medium.com/war-is-boring/when-is-the-f-35-not-a-dogfighter-when-it-s-convenient-2fb1f233f42
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38764
    Points : 39260
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  GarryB 04/07/15, 09:00 pm

    The real problem is that they wanted... or needed a 5th gen F-16 fully multirole fighter bomber that was light and cheap but fully up to date in all areas.

    By trying to make it all planes to all customers... especially the shape of the aircraft allowing for VSTOL operations, they ended up with a light strike aircraft... one could argue that modern all aspect IIR guided AAMs have killed dogfighting, but makers of DIRCMS probably think there is still a role for a cannon... and to use a cannon you need to move the plane around the sky... ie dogfight.

    It seems however the F-35 puts the dog in dogfighter.

    It is more a 5th gen Buccaneer than a 5th gen F-16... which is not the end of the world... the Bucc is a very under rated aircraft... and I like it a lot, but it makes it simply unsuitable as a replacement for many of the aircraft it is supposed to replace.

    For Europe, having F-35s as well as Rafales or Typhoons then who cares if the F-35 is not a dogfighter... it can be the strike/bombtruck that the F-16 is in the USAF when F-15Cs are present.

    It is not the worst aircraft... but is far from being the best...
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5913
    Points : 6102
    Join date : 2012-10-25

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  Werewolf 04/07/15, 09:10 pm

    If they want a strike bomber they still have enough Tornados and can equip Rafaels and Eurofighters with the necessary equipment to do the jobs far better than this money and widowmaker ever could. It is not worth the money.
    higurashihougi
    higurashihougi


    Posts : 3011
    Points : 3098
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  higurashihougi 15/07/15, 05:01 pm

    Our Sputnik said something about the F-35 saga

    http://sputniknews.com/military/20150511/1021988428.html

    F-35 Lightning II: the World's Most Expensive Mistake

    The US-led program to build the F-35 Lightning II, the world's most advanced multi-role fighter, has been beset with delays and cost over-runs that could yet make it the world's biggest white elephant.


    http://sputniknews.com/military/20150713/1024535149.html

    After Shocking Failures, F-35 Could be Long Gone by New Defense Chief

    The world’s most advanced and expensive multi-role fighter program could come short of the US Department of Defense (DOD) and Pentagon hopes, as years of weak development saw cost overruns and perpetual delays.



    Sponsored content


    F-35 Development and News Thread: - Page 8 Empty Re: F-35 Development and News Thread:

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is 29/03/24, 12:09 am