F35 - superfighter or lame duck?

[Daryl Hunt]

Judging by latest Chinese statements they aren't impressed

Would you admit to anything like that if you were the Chinese running a bluff? What good would the bluff be then.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Riigghhhttttt,,,suddenly the f35 doesn't need to be better or as good or just marginally worse than A-10.....move the goalposts much

 

[Manonthestreet]

Judging by latest Chinese statements they aren't impressed

Would you admit to anything like that if you were the Chinese running a bluff? What good would the bluff be then.

Question is who is running a bluff....

 

[Manonthestreet]

B version is only one that makes total sense.....I wouldn't go with any more than 12-16 pane sq per Ford.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Judging by latest Chinese statements they aren't impressed

Would you admit to anything like that if you were the Chinese running a bluff? What good would the bluff be then.

Question is who is running a bluff....

WE have already track both the so called Carrier Killer missiles and find that they can't come within 200 miles of a carrier on a good day. There are just too many variables that all have to be right to make them hit their intended target. Even the new "Vunder" Fighters have some serious problems that the Chinese are fielding. There are many good reasons the Chinese aren't making too many Military Equipment Sales lately. Too many crash or cease to operate on delivery or even before delivery or on the way to delivery. The World agrees. If you can't or won't buy American or Western, buy Russian. At least the Russian stuff will get there in one piece.

The Chinese are trying to learn what it's taken the US and Russia about a hundred years to learn about it's pilots. The Chinese Pilots are too dependent on the ground controllers. At least the Russians have broken away from that so much any more. The Chinese are trying to make that transition but there is a reason the United States is the best at it it's that we've been on the top the longest and worked to stay that way. The Chinese have been near the bottom for so long it's a long haul out of the cellar. So, to try and make up for it, they use Bravado of a series of bluffs. The Russians do as well but they don't have to as much.

As for the US, when our F-15s flew war games against other countries, our pilots were given real stringent directions and borders they had to fly inside of. The results was, the F-15 was well below it's capabilities at all times. Even then, the F-15 won most of the fights. But sometimes, some countries would sneak in a win. There is no reason that they aren't doing the same thing with the F-22 as well. Case in point, 2 F-15Cs jumped 2 Mig-29s and it became a close in dogfight. No guns since it's almost impossible to do a gun kill these days. One F-15 flew one of the Mig-29s into the ground. The other F-15 got into a real live dogfight with a fighter that, on paper, should have eaten it's lunch. Not so that day. The F-15 ended up getting a Aim-9 kill. Right after that, the Iraqi Pilots either flew to Iran or refused to take off. The F-15 CAN out manuever a Mig-29 afterall.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Think main concern carrier wise is a hypersonic from a sub.....judging by our inability not to crash into cargo ships lately not real confident about our sensor use.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Think main concern carrier wise is a hypersonic from a sub.....judging by our inability not to crash into cargo ships lately not real confident about our sensor use.

The chinese launching anything not pointed straight up is also questionable.

 

[DrainBamage]

It strikes this poster that the thinking is outmoded. Many, deadly, small and cheap will overwhelm few, big and expensive, I'm afraid.

F-35 is the few? They are buying thousands of them.

 

[DrainBamage]

Funny I've seen claims of combat but no descriptions of said combat....3f is an incomplete machine and everyone knows but hey play ignorant if ya want and think it makes you look smart, BTW as for ground support you dont even have enough ammo for 1 gun run.....

Ahhh so when USMC proves you wrong by flying a combat sortie in the ME it must be a conspiracy theory. The entire thing was fake, because Manonthestreet is willing to suspend reality to stick to his guns and avoid admitting how wrong he was. Hilarious.

Regarding gun run, you were wrong about when it would deployed (as you've been wrong about everything in this thread) and now piling bullshit on top of bullshit...

Pentagon: F-35 Gun Will Fire in 2017
The weapon, one of many slated for the aircraft, is based on a design with a proven track record on both the Harrier and the AC-130 gunship, he said. Linked to the aircraft’s fire control and targeting software, it will fire highly accurate rounds at air-to-ground or air-to-air targets, he said. Also, the exposure point — the time it takes for the pilot to point the plane and its gun at a target — may only last a fraction of a second, translating to nine or 10 bursts of fire, he said.

Sucks when you try to make something up and get exposed again doesn't it?

To further demonstrate how silly it is thing "fact" you're producing that it can only do one gun run, here's a video of an F-35A firing short 12-15 round bursts, which are clearly shorter than the 180 round barrel emptying video that's floating around from ground testing.



To even further demonstrate how silly your fixation on the ammo of this gun, here is the magazine of various other modern fighters:

F-35, 25mm GAU-22/A with 180 rounds.
Typhoon, 27mm BK 27 with 150 rounds.
Gripen, 27mm BK 27 with 120 rounds.
Rafale, 30mm GIAT 30 with 125 rounds.
Su-35, 30mm GSh-30-1 with 150 rounds

Now could it be that almost every aircraft manufacturer across the world has gone in the wrong direction in recent decades with fewer heavier more accurate rounds, and Manonthestreet is some lone beacon of wisdom that realizes some secret weakness that by happenstance every modern fighter being produced has? You don't have to answer that, it wasn't really a question.

 

[DrainBamage]

once you open bay doors you give away your position,

Hah hah we'll add this one to your greatest hits.

Just like all those B-2s and F-117s that got shot down in contested airspace when they opened their bay doors to deliver weapons right? Because it's not about a tracking radar, and locking on, and aircraft that move very quickly, and noisy RF environments, nope in Manonthestreet's simplified video game world the bay doors opening gives an exact position of a stealth aircraft and that is when they get shot down. F-22? Flawed, it's got bay doors. China and Russia spending millions to produce stealth aircraft with internal weapons? All fatally flawed, they don't think as deep as our forum expert Manonthestreet. They didn't think of the bay doors! Damn.

This goes right up there with your belief that all other combat aircraft fly around airshow clean and and top speed max altitude, getting the jump on an aircraft that has a usable mach 1.6 in combat config. That F-35 has no chance trying to outrun those Thunderbird pilots at the airshow!

You're so naive it's almost cute.

 

[DrainBamage]

F-35 releasing 5 Paveway IVs simultaneously, four to stationary and one to hit a moving target.

 

[there4eyeM]

With the incredible advances in tech, anyone who thinks a weapons system is being built that will be effective out to decades from now is not qualified to be building it. this vast expenditure by the U.S. is another display of having too much money to spend on the wrong things.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

With the incredible advances in tech, anyone who thinks a weapons system is being built that will be effective out to decades from now is not qualified to be building it. this vast expenditure by the U.S. is another display of having too much money to spend on the wrong things.

And if you don't expend it and fall way behind the other 2 then is that a good thing?

 

[DrainBamage]

History doesn't agree with you, B-52s built fifty years ago have proven quite effective. USS Carl Vinson is still a formidable aircraft carrier (which ironically will probably be first to have an F-35 squadron) it was built in 1982. M-1 is still considered one of the best main battle tanks in the world, it was delivered in 1980. F-15 is still in production and quite effective, it first flew in the early 70s.

 

[there4eyeM]

The history mentioned is so in the past that it doesn't apply to today. To repeat, all those systems mentioned are obsolete now and will either be scrapped or destroyed by twenty years from now.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The history mentioned is so in the past that it doesn't apply to today. To repeat, all those systems mentioned are obsolete now and will either be scrapped or destroyed by twenty years from now.

The problem is, when you build it right in the first place either by design or just by fool accident, you have to completely reinvent things before they become obsolete. Take the Buff for instance. The reason the B-1 and the B-2 are on the chopping block and the Buff isn't is that the Buff was built right in the first place. Both the B-1 and the B-2 operating costs are far above the Buffs. And if they go ahead and do the engine upgrade on the Buff like they should have done years ago then it just gets better. A Bomber only has to get the weapons within 1500 miles of the target these days for nuclear war. And the Bomber has to get the conventional within 30 miles. The Buff does a good job on both counts. And it does it cheaper than either the B-1 or the B-2. With the coming of the B-21, the B-1 and the B-2 become obsolete while the Buff just soldiers on.

Are you aware that the old M-60 Tank is really just an upgraded M-26 from WWII? And with the upgrades, it's still able to go up against any tank in the world including the M-1 Abrams and hold it's own. They are still offering upgrade kits to the M-60 because there are so many of them around. Speaking of the M-1 Abrams, that's another thing that just gets better because they built it right. They keep upgrading it over and over and it just gets better.

The F-15 and the F-16 aren't any different. But their days are numbered. Things for them have been reinvented. But it's going to take a very long time (more like 30 years) for them to become obsolete and probably only in the USA. And it's not going to from the F-22 since it's replacement is already gone on to the testing mode, at least it's components that we know of and they ain't saying anything else. The F-16 is still going to be around but the F-35A pretty much puts a damper on it for about the same price but not everyone will be offered to buy them from the US and other Countries. This means that the Russian and Chinese birds are just about 15 years from all becoming completely obsolete unless they can make their current stuff obsolete themselves. China is trying but they lack the precision to manufacture the tolerances required that the US has. In fact, there is NO other country outside the US that has that capability right now. Of course, that will change as time goes by. In the meantime, the F-15 and the F-16 is still relevant and so is the SU-27 and SU-35 sort of.

The M-2 Mah Deuce was built right the first time and only required an upgrade in how the barrel mounted. Otherwise, most of the parts interchange from the original WWII version, Vietnam Version and the modern version of today. It's not the gun that makes it work so well, it's the 50 cal Machine Gun Ammo that makes it work. The same can be said about the 20mm Vulcan. It was first made for the F-104 and is standard now and has been for the last 60 years. All of these, you would have to reinvent the wheel before they become obsolete. Maybe when a workable portable laser become available.

We are still using the old Bofar 40mm Cannon from WWII Destroyers on AC-130 Gunships. Why? Because it works. When you watch a gunship in operation and here that thumping sound, that's the 40mms being fired. Those puppies are good enough to take out anything short of a main battle tank. Right next to them will be a 105mm Howitzer (WWII) that can handle even a main battle tank outside the range of the Tanks weapons. Got some serious reinventing to go to get rid of that firepower. And all this is mounted on a bird that goes back to 1953. If you get a chance to go to the Wright Patterson Museum, look at the first C-130 on display there. The tail number is 53-00035. That was the second C-130 off the production line. The first one flew around the flag pole and was disassemble to inspect it. The one at the Museum is the second. But there are some stark differences in what is parked there and what the Air Force bought in 1954. For you history buffs, I'll start a new message on this.

 

[DrainBamage]

The history mentioned is so in the past that it doesn't apply to today.

Why not? What happened where an F-35 produced today cannot be upgraded and effective well into it's service life like every other military aircraft in modern history? You upgrade weapons, avionics, add features, etc.

To repeat, all those systems mentioned are obsolete now and will either be scrapped or destroyed by twenty years from now.

An F-15 isn't obsolete now, obsolete = still one of the best fighter aircraft on the planet which is why they are still produced and still purchased? Show me a list of the top tanks in the world that doesn't include the M-1, something you're claiming is obsolete.

 

[DrainBamage]

F-35 will be dead long before F-16

The F-35 death spiral you've been expertly predicting for years continues to blow up in your face. Hello Singapore, which has 60 F-16s that need replacing....


Singapore identifies F-35 fighter jet to replace F-16s, expects to buy ‘small number’ for full testing
The announcement ends years of speculation that Singapore would eventually decide on the fifth-generation F-35 as a replacement for the F-16s. Last June, Dr Ng said a decision on the replacement would be made in the coming months, although he would only say MINDEF was studying a range of options, including the F-35, Eurofighter Typhoon and Chinese-made stealth fighters. The decision is now clear as MINDEF has opted for the radar-evading F-35

 

[there4eyeM]

Swarms are being prepared. Big, valuable targets are strategically passé. Targets have to get smaller or be able to disappear. Attack is reaching a point of superiority over defense. Only superior swarms might work.
"Mr. President,...Mr. President, we must not allow a mine-shaft gap!
Air Force awards 'Gray Wolf' networked missile contract -- Defense Systems
USAF Wants Swarms of Cheap "Gray Wolf" Cruise Missiles That Can Overwhelm Enemy Defenses

 

[DrainBamage]

Swarms are being prepared. Big, valuable targets are strategically passé. Targets have to get smaller or be able to disappear. Attack is reaching a point of superiority over defense. Only superior swarms might work.
"Mr. President,...Mr. President, we must not allow a mine-shaft gap!
Air Force awards 'Gray Wolf' networked missile contract -- Defense Systems
USAF Wants Swarms of Cheap "Gray Wolf" Cruise Missiles That Can Overwhelm Enemy Defenses

Dude it's a "science and technology" project, not some harbinger of end of platforms that would launch them. I get you're all enamored with the cheap swarm thing, but I don't think you've given much thought to practical application just some vague notion of something that appeals to you. Did you see the part in your link where they talk about using B-52s, F-15Es, F-35s, etc. to launch them or did you just gloss over that part and imagine some inexpensive wonder-weapon that flies 5,000 miles on it's own with a warp drive powered by dlithium crystals?

A networked missile is nothing new, see LRASM.