Read his post here.
Ok.
As always a good argument (on the Italian F-35 issues). But the Marine Corps still needs to prioritize Armor over the F-35 right now. I look forward to him telling me why I'm wrong..so far no one has been able to shake my belief that our procurement schedule is jacked up beyond all recognition.
There's only one way to get both new armor and STOVL, and that's how we're doing it now. There is no way to get both by buying STOVL later, and there is no budget to buy them both right now. Cancel the F-35B now and it's gone forever. Buying Super Hornets in their place would be a huge step backwards and probably unworkable to boot. SHs can't land on gators so you'd be kissing 11 flight decks capable of operating fighters goodbye, and CVNs already have their own missions. It's not like CVNs are sitting around collecting dust waiting for something to do right now. Not only that their numbers are falling which will only make the fixed wing capability on gators that much more important.
ReplyDeleteWhat happens if Marine armor replacement gets put off? Worse case? That's not nearly as bad as having your whole raison d'etre go tits up because the enemy controls the air and you get wiped out wholesale.
No one can convince you because you made up your mind already and can't be bothered to get any facts any more. More to the point, you command fuck all so we don't have to convince you of jack shit. You fell out of love with the F-35 because in your opinion we need armor more. Your strategy to acquire armor is you putting your fingers in your ear and humming real loud
ReplyDeleteYou have yet to show how f-35 delay even frees up the kind of funding you need for armor. You might as well be calling for a cut in the NASA budget to free up funds for the FDA
ok
DeleteI'm not sure about some his arguments comparing the Typhoon and the F-35. Sure the F-35 brings some nifty features to the game compared to the Typhoon but.... You're waiting 10 years for your aircraft to arrive while what you have is getting older and older. With the Typhoon you have something that is flying, that you already have versions of, and inventory of parts for. And then there is the price. You know what the price of Typhoon is and what its going to be. With the F-35, you don't.
ReplyDeleteThat picture of a max loadout of AIM-120's wouldn't do wonders for the stealth of the F-35, wouldn't it?
Touting theoretical max A2A load-outs like that are a joke.
ReplyDeleteYou can do that for any platform, including Typhoon.
Why doesn't he address Italy's MoD claiming it's above the will of an elected Parliament?
His addressing of the kinematic performance issues is also conspicuously weak.
As if sustained turn rate is only relevant to WVR.
HOBS itself equalizes WVR, until anti-missile laser/missile defenses prevail.
STR is still more than relevant to BVR, and that's where Dave gets his ass kicked.
But he's just throwing himself soft pitches, instead of dealing with questions from a real F-35 critic. Bravo.
F-35 has already had it's schedule delayed to pay for other stuff.
Don't see why it can't be done some more.
The “max loadout” pic was to show that 4 AAMs are part of IOC, not to say that this config will be used often. Remember that he was rebuffing the claim that ONLY 2 internal AAMs were part of the A2A loadout.
DeleteBtw, the “will of the parliament” business is not applicable. By Italian law, and not the MoD’s discretion, the parliament only has “advisory” powers over this phase of the F-35 decision. The issue is that what went through the Parliament was a “motion” and not a “law”, therefore it has no power.