F35 - superfighter or lame duck?

[DrainBamage]

Put the stuff in front that was excised out, namely the degradation in stealth due to rain (because the radars can track the hole in the rain). That is specifically what i was referring to, and that was in regards to the B2.

You can't lie your way out of this, the internet remembers. Here is the ENTIRE chain of quoted posts, started from HBH's that quoted nothing and was entirely original in content (red emphasis mine):

HenryBHough:
The F-35 started out as a good idea but then each of the services started making unique demands for specialization. Result was a "Swiss Army Knife" sort of airplane that might be able to do lots of things but NONE of them well. The major impact came from the Marine Corps demand that it be made capable of vertical takeoff which added incredibly to weight and complexity, compromised the already limited stealth capability it once had. Fuel consumption is outrageously high leading to short missions or frequent refueling requirements. The Farnborough disgrace was occasioned by an unexplained engine fire that had grounded the few existing F-35s indefinitely

Mushroom:
But that is only 1 out of 3 models. And it has minimal impact on the other 2. And it was not the Marines demanding it, it was more the other way around. The Marines were more then willing to develop an updated version of the Harrier, but they were forced to buy into the F-35 program. However, to satisfy the needs of the Marines and replace both the F/A-18 and AV8B, they had to incorporate VSTOL capabilities. They can always simply authorize the Corps to go ahead with a new updated Harrier, and kill the F-35B program as far as many are concerned.

WestWall:
That is completely untrue. As I said before there are compromises that have been made to the basic airframe that penalize the performance of ALL models. It won't be a good interceptor because it's stealthiness has been compromised. It won't be a good naval air fighter because it's range is compromised and to think it can replace the A-10 or even the AV-8B is a crock.


Ooops! With entire context it is quite obvious you are addressing the F-35 (not B-2) and criticizing it as not being a good interceptor because of compromised stealth. It takes a serious suspension of reality to claim you were talking about anything but the F-35 as an interceptor. You're trying to whitewash your previous foolishness, but you have to own it man. If you talk out of your ass that is on you forever.

Here is a screenshot of your post, if you want to pretend some was excised you'd have to be accusing of photoshop too:

 

[westwall]

Put the stuff in front that was excised out, namely the degradation in stealth due to rain (because the radars can track the hole in the rain). That is specifically what i was referring to, and that was in regards to the B2.

You can't lie your way out of this, the internet remembers. Here is the ENTIRE chain of quoted posts, started from HBH's that quoted nothing and was entirely original in content (red emphasis mine):

HenryBHough:
The F-35 started out as a good idea but then each of the services started making unique demands for specialization. Result was a "Swiss Army Knife" sort of airplane that might be able to do lots of things but NONE of them well. The major impact came from the Marine Corps demand that it be made capable of vertical takeoff which added incredibly to weight and complexity, compromised the already limited stealth capability it once had. Fuel consumption is outrageously high leading to short missions or frequent refueling requirements. The Farnborough disgrace was occasioned by an unexplained engine fire that had grounded the few existing F-35s indefinitely

Mushroom:
But that is only 1 out of 3 models. And it has minimal impact on the other 2. And it was not the Marines demanding it, it was more the other way around. The Marines were more then willing to develop an updated version of the Harrier, but they were forced to buy into the F-35 program. However, to satisfy the needs of the Marines and replace both the F/A-18 and AV8B, they had to incorporate VSTOL capabilities. They can always simply authorize the Corps to go ahead with a new updated Harrier, and kill the F-35B program as far as many are concerned.

WestWall:
That is completely untrue. As I said before there are compromises that have been made to the basic airframe that penalize the performance of ALL models. It won't be a good interceptor because it's stealthiness has been compromised. It won't be a good naval air fighter because it's range is compromised and to think it can replace the A-10 or even the AV-8B is a crock.


Ooops! With entire context it is quite obvious you are addressing the F-35 (not B-2) and criticizing it as not being a good interceptor because of compromised stealth. It takes a serious suspension of reality to claim you were talking about anything but the F-35 as an interceptor. You're trying to whitewash your previous foolishness, but you have to own it man. If you talk out of your ass that is on you forever.

Here is a screenshot of your post, if you want to pretend some was excised you'd have to be accusing of photoshop too:

Wrong silly boy, we were also talking about the B2 which I see you still have excised out of the string. The context of the WHOLE conversation matters. Leave it to a dishonest person, like you, to ignore context.


So, let me make it plain for you. Based on the fact that the JSF is a series of compromises designed to enable the airframe to do as many jobs as possible, it CAN'T be superlative in ANY of them. Yes, it will be a very good interceptor. But it won't be as good as it could be if it were a dedicated airframe. Thus the comment "it won't be a good interceptor" was specifically referring to the degradation in stealthiness that had been exposed when flying in rain. THAT SPECIFIC case.

In other words little silly person, you are picking and choosing from a whole host of comments and completely ignoring the reasoning behind them. In other words you are a propagandist who isn't nearly as smart as he thinks he is.

 

[DrainBamage]

That was a pathetic attempt at spin.

HenryBHough clearly made a point on the three versions of the F-35 that had nothing to do with B-2s and rain or whatever else you're dreaming up, and you pounced on it to claim (ignorantly) that it wouldn't be a good interceptor. Now you're stuck, because there is too much evidence to the contrary and you hate being exposed as doing complete 180 on your viewpoint.

Your 180 was pretty funny, but watching a grown man attempting to play it off as being specifically about rain with a straight face is even funnier. Keep it coming, I've got popcorn.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Was never meant to be a super fighter .....and wont be one
Forget the F-35: Why America's Military Misses the F-14 Tomcat
The report notes that both the Super Hornet and the F-35C are severely challenged by new enemy fifth-generation fighter aircraft such as the Russian-built Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA and Chengdu J-20. Indeed, certain current adversary aircraft like the Russian Su-30SM, Su-35S and the Chinese J-11D and J-15 pose a serious threat to the Super Hornet fleet. It’s a view that shared by many industry officials, U.S. Navy, U.S. Air Force and even U.S. Marine Corps aviators. “Both F/A-18E/Fs and F-35Cs will face significant deficiencies against supercruising, long-range, high-altitude, stealthy, large missile capacity adversary aircraft, such as the T-50, J-20, and follow-on aircraft,” the authors note. “These aircraft will be capable of effectively engaging current and projected U.S. carrier aircraft and penetrating defenses to engage high value units, such as AEW aircraft, ASW aircraft, and tankers. Already, the F/A-18E/F faces a severe speed disadvantage against Chinese J-11 aircraft, which can fire longer range missiles at a higher kinematic advantage outside of the range of U.S. AIM-120 missiles.”

Nor does the F-35C—which suffers from severely reduced acceleration compared to even the less than stellar performance of other JSF variants—help matters. “Similarly, the F-35C is optimized as an attack fighter, resulting in a medium-altitude flight profile, and its current ability to only carry two AIM- 120 missiles internally [until Block 3] limits its capability under complex electromagnetic conditions,” the authors wrote.

 

[DrainBamage]

Meh, that same author has written plenty of pieces over the years on the "F-35 can't fight" and "F-35 can't even beat the plane it's replacing" theme, which have been thoroughly debunked by dominant F-35 performances and dozens of pilot accounts to the contrary. That criticism of only carrying two AIM-120 is a perfect example of silliness. On one hand they are talking about threats from planes that are still in development stages as threats, while on the other worrying about current weapon load of F-35C even though it will have software allowing expanded weapons envelope by the time it is operational on CVN air wings. Are we really concerned a F-35C running Block 3i is going to enter combat?

Latest on Block 3F is that they completed testing of expanded flight envelope (mach 1.6, 9gs) in November 2016, and were continuing regression testing of weapons separation in December. Goal for release is still Fall 2017, so expanded weapons (AIM-9X, SDB, JSOW, etc.), additional sensors integration, datalink imagery, navigation, and flight envelope should be available before Navy declares IOC sometime in 2018.

I know they are working on qualifying a rack that allows carrying 6 AMRAAMs internally instead of four but doubt release with Block 3F since that is hardware and all 3i planes are supposed to be upgradable to 3F with just software release.

 

[I amso IR]

No doubt that this article from Business Insider proves the F35 is a "loser". But then I suppose a kill ratio of 15 to 1 is a starting point.


The F-35 just absolutely slaughtered the competition in its latest test

• Alex Lockie
  

• 2h
• 3,523

• FACEBOOK
• LINKEDIN
• TWITTER
• EMAIL
• Aviation Week reports that the Joint Strike fighter killed 15 aggressors for each F-35 downed. The F-35 achieved this remarkable ratio in a drastically increased threat environment that included radar jamming, increased air threats, and surface-to-air missile batteries.
  
  “In the past, the non-kinetic effects were not fully integrated into the kinetic fight,” Col. Robert Cole, the Air Forces Cyber Forward director, said in a statement.
  
  But now F-35s take on cyber threats and electronic warfare in addition to enemy surveillance and conventional, or kinetic, threats.
  
  “This integration in an exercise environment allows our planners and warfighters to understand how to best integrate these, learn their capabilities and limitations, and become ready to use [these combined resources for maximum] effect against our adversaries,” Cole said.
  
  
  
  Staff Sgt. Darlene Seltmann/US Air Force
  
  But the F-35s didn't just shoot down the enemy, they used their sensor-fusion and datalink abilities to talk to other planes and help them sniff out threats they would never have seen on their own.
  
  “Before where we would have one advanced threat and we would put everything we had—F-16s, F-15s, F-18s, missiles, we would shoot everything we had at that one threat just to take it out—now we are seeing three or four of those threats at a time,” Lt. Col. George Watkins, 34th Fighter Squadron commander, told Aviation Week.
  
  “Just between [the F-35] and the [F-22] Raptor we are able to geo-locate them, precision-target them, and then we are able to bring the fourth-generation assets in behind us after those threats are neutralized. It’s a whole different world out there for us now.”
  
  The ability for fifth-generation US aircraft to detect threats and send that information to legacy planes meets an urgent need for the US military.
  
  
  
  Even after the F-35 runs out of missiles, it can still pass valuable targeting data to legacy planes laden with bombs and missiles. Jim Hazeltine/US Air Force
  
  As adversarial nations like China and Russia constantly improve their counter-stealth abilities and air defenses, numbers increasingly matter.
  
  The F-35 has repeatedly hit cost and schedule overruns during its production and is now years behind schedule. But the latest performance at Red Flag proves that even a handful of F-35s can improve an entire squadron's performance.
  
  The current Red Flag exercise will conclude on February 10.
  

 

[DrainBamage]

we are able to geo-locate them, precision-target them

The ability to quickly geolocate threats using data fused from various sensors, along with precision targeting through weather using SAR is a huge advantage for F-35 over legacy aircraft.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Buying more F-35As over the next few years — while the program is still undergoing its development phase — could lead to higher than predicted retrofit costs in the early 2020s, when the Block 4 follow-on modernization program starts, said Maj. Gen. Jerry Harris, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for strategic plans, programs and requirements. Air Force official cautions against increasing F-35 buy rate Alrdy got a bunch sitting around that need upgrading......ridiculous state of affairs when upgrades happen faster than useful airframes

 

[DrainBamage]

That makes sense, they have to way current war fighting requirements versus hardware retrofit costs for block 4 with the new faster computer.

I don't find it a ridiculous state of affairs though, has been the same with every fighter plane where retrofits happen into production.

 

[Manonthestreet]

That makes sense, they have to way current war fighting requirements versus hardware retrofit costs for block 4 with the new faster computer.

I don't find it a ridiculous state of affairs though, has been the same with every fighter plane where retrofits happen into production.

Not four before it hits combat.....Trump is talking up Super hornet three buy again......which I think will happen since Naval version is doggiest of em all and current state of naval air arm

 

[DrainBamage]

Not four before it hits combat.....Trump is talking up Super hornet three buy again......which I think will happen since Naval version is doggiest of em all and current state of naval air arm

Actually, yes there have been plenty of aircraft that underwent several upgrades before seeing combat. I'm not even sure the significance of the "hits combat" thing, actually hitting combat is just an artificial goalpost with no significance here.

A-10 first flew in the early 70s, was full production by 1976, and didn't see combat until 15 years later in 1991. During that time they went through four upgrades to resolve airframe fatigue and wing cracking issues, upgraded to work with Pave Penny, upgraded to have inertial navigation, upgraded to have LASTE and ground collision warning, upgraded to have GPS navigation, upgraded to have mult-function display, and again more upgrades to wing structure. Is the A-10 included when you say no aircraft has had some upgrades before hitting combat?

F-22 first flew in the 90s, and hit combat as a JDAM chucker in Syria in 2014. During that time it was upgraded to use said JDAM, radar was upgraded to SAR, upgrades to facilitate electronic attack and drop SDB, upgrades to structure, infamous upgrade to oxygen system, and upgrade to lower maintenance stealth coating they have on F-35. Plenty of upgrades either planned or fully implemented before hitting combat.

Not sure what will happen with Trump and F-18/F-35, he's too unpredictable and nothing that comes out of his mouth can really be counted on to be truth versus rhetoric.

 

[Manonthestreet]

The head of the F-35 Joint Program Office (JPO) says the outer wings of 32 carrier-based C-models need to be replaced to carry the Raytheon AIM-9X Sidewinder, the aircraft’s primary dogfighting ... F-35C Needs New Outer Wings To Carry AIM-9X

 

[DrainBamage]

Same article points out they already have a fix designed that is currently undergoing flight testing. F-35C numbers are fairly limited right now so impact shouldn't be too great and fleet wide AIM-9X rollout is only moved back one month to Nov of this year. Navy is looking at IOC of their first squadron in 2018, which shouldn't be impacted by this either.

F-35C Needs New Outer Wings To Carry AIM-9X
Engineers have already produced an enhanced outer wing design, which is now undergoing flight testing. The issue has impacted the timeline for fielding AIM-9X, which is being rolled out for the Navy in Block 3F. “Once the new design is verified to provide the required strength, the fix will be implemented in production and retrofitted to existing aircraft by swapping existing outer wings with the redesigned ones,” Bogdan writes.

They are also testing a fix for the catapult issue, which involves changes to the launching system tension (as opposed to modifications to the plane) so we should be hearing about whether that is resolved shortly.

 

[Manonthestreet]

2019.....And oh btw there goes your "stealth " the minute you put one on......

 

[DrainBamage]

2019.....And oh btw there goes your "stealth " the minute you put one on......

Stealth isn't on/off, it is varying levels of low observability against radars depending on many factors. An F-35 with two AIM-9X doesn't magically become as stealthy as 4th gen aircraft, because most of the radar cross section is the aircraft itself. Given equal radars an F-35 with two external Sidewinders will still see a 4th gen aircraft way before it gets spotted.

 

[Manonthestreet]

2019.....And oh btw there goes your "stealth " the minute you put one on......

Stealth isn't on/off, it is varying levels of low observability against radars depending on many factors. An F-35 with two AIM-9X doesn't magically become as stealthy as 4th gen aircraft, because most of the radar cross section is the aircraft itself. Given equal radars an F-35 with two external Sidewinders will still see a 4th gen aircraft way before it gets spotted.

When you hang it on the wing its not stealthy anymore..........BTW its such a great platform they are just itching to use it against ISIS.....in a couple of yrs.......talk about lame...cant even go into a permissive enviro yet

 

[DrainBamage]

When you hang it on the wing its not stealthy anymore..........BTW its such a great platform they are just itching to use it against ISIS.....in a couple of yrs.......talk about lame...cant even go into a permissive enviro yet

Again, stealthy isn't black and white. There is no on/off like you are implying, there is just degrees of RCS. An F-35, which by all accounts (and counter to your repeated incorrect claims in this forum) has a very small RCS, and while putting two relatively small missiles externally does increase it, is it still a lot smaller than it's opponent? Of course. Look at it this way:

F-35 (tiny RCS) + two sidewinders = what RCS?
SU=35 (not LO plane at all) + 6 much larger external missiles = what RCS?
F-16 (not LO plane) + two fuel tanks + pod + 2 sidewinders + 2 AMRAA = what RCS?

Of course the F-35 would have the smallest RCS of above aircraft, so given similar radars (of which F-35 has the most powerful anyway) the F-35 is STILL at a tremendous advantage in detection range.

I don't know what you're going on about with permissive environment, to be honest at times you sound almost desperate to criticize this plane even at the expense of common sense. They have been using F-22s in some areas because of long range SAM threat (non-permissive) to drop JDAMs and SDBs, and USAF F-35s are first coming online in Asia and Europe. When they have a squadron in the ME, they will probably use F-35s instead.

This whole "not seeing combat" thing is really a feeble angle to pursue given A-10, F-22, B-1, etc.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Typhoon has a .05....F-18 is a 1........thats vsm cross section.....what F-35 increases to with missiles cant find .....Even if it remains under F-18....the advantage of of buying it is miniscule......1 equals size of a man........
US stealth fighter jet can’t evade Russian radars | Veterans Today
Pentagon Worries That Russia Can Now Outshoot U.S. Stealth Jets

 

[Manonthestreet]

When you hang it on the wing its not stealthy anymore..........BTW its such a great platform they are just itching to use it against ISIS.....in a couple of yrs.......talk about lame...cant even go into a permissive enviro yet

Again, stealthy isn't black and white. There is no on/off like you are implying, there is just degrees of RCS. An F-35, which by all accounts (and counter to your repeated incorrect claims in this forum) has a very small RCS, and while putting two relatively small missiles externally does increase it, is it still a lot smaller than it's opponent? Of course. Look at it this way:

F-35 (tiny RCS) + two sidewinders = what RCS?
SU=35 (not LO plane at all) + 6 much larger external missiles = what RCS?
F-16 (not LO plane) + two fuel tanks + pod + 2 sidewinders + 2 AMRAA = what RCS?

Of course the F-35 would have the smallest RCS of above aircraft, so given similar radars (of which F-35 has the most powerful anyway) the F-35 is STILL at a tremendous advantage in detection range.

I don't know what you're going on about with permissive environment, to be honest at times you sound almost desperate to criticize this plane even at the expense of common sense. They have been using F-22s in some areas because of long range SAM threat (non-permissive) to drop JDAMs and SDBs, and USAF F-35s are first coming online in Asia and Europe. When they have a squadron in the ME, they will probably use F-35s instead.

This whole "not seeing combat" thing is really a feeble angle to pursue given A-10, F-22, B-1, etc.

Gee didnt they declare it combat rdy yet they cant even send on a gravy run against isis

 

[Manonthestreet]

Thats well outside our missile range with top two....If enemy is higher your missile range shortens ......