 |
| The F-35 Lightning II executed its first live-fire launch of a guided air-to-air missile over a military test range off the California coast on Oct. 30, 2013. The AIM-120 advanced medium range air-to-air missile (AMRAAM) was fired from an F-35A conventional take-off and landing variant test aircraft. Test data and observers confirmed the F-35 identified and targeted an aerial drone target with its mission systems sensors, passed the target "track" information to the missile, and launched the AIM-120 from the aircraft to engage the drone. After launch, the missile successfully acquired the target and followed an intercept flight profile. Moments before the missile was about to destroy the target, a self-destruct signal was sent to the AIM-120 in order to preserve the aerial drone for use in future tests. |
NO ONE IN THE PROGRAM OFFICE OR MARINE CORPS HAS EVER TALKED ABOUT HOW THIS PLANE WILL PROVIDE ENHANCED CLOSE AIR SUPPORT TO THE GROUND FORCES.
Plenty of talk about "sensor fusion."
Plenty of talk about an intelligence node.
Nothing about close air support. At one time in Marine Corps history, we strong armed the Brits into turning the Harrier into a bomb truck when they wanted a fighter. Now we're getting a deep strike platform when we need a 21st century bomb truck.
Amazing and sad.
I need CAS. its that simple, so either buy A-10's, more AV-8B's, bring back the A-8, or give me something similar
ReplyDeleteyeah but since you're probably headed to ANGLICO next (and back on jump status), you'll have that huge new destroyer to fill the gap when this turkey is killed!
DeleteOperation: PENCIL WHIP
ReplyDeleteThis is probably my ignorance of CAS but a Marine F-35B bombed a tank the other day. I understand it can carry 8 GBU-12's since stealth is not needed for CAS. Plus it carriers the same cannon as our Harriers. It may not be an A-10 but, that sounds like something to me.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.f35.com/news/detail/f-35b-lightning-ii-completes-first-guided-weapon-delivery-against-ground-ta
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flickr_-_Official_U.S._Navy_Imagery_-_A_pilot_pilots_the_F-35B_Joint_Strike_Fighter_test_aircraft..jpg
you're exactly right. but is this capability that we don't already have? is it something that we need stealth for? could we have opted for a cheaper option in maintenance and operating costs? would a Harrier 3 have done the job for less money and been more effective in the given role? will we use the F-35 in a firepower demonstrations? will you allow a pilot to risk his 100 plus plus million dollar airplane to save a squad of grunts?
Deletei say we could have done better with improved models of what we have or by using super hornets without busting the bank.
additionally, i truly believe that the only reason why the ACV is going to be delayed isn't because of tech but because we don't have the money for it because the F-35 is killing the budget.
well, the budget is getting cut by sequestration unfortunately.
DeleteSingle service only programs, no matter how good or how much they are needed, are going to get cut first because they are much harder to justify. The F-35 has the protection of having all 3 services standing up for it. However, the USMC DID managed to save the V-22, somehow.
You are going have to be brave soon Sol and put a date on this cancellation. :)
ReplyDeleteI am just hoping the RN gets a few more frigates, helicopters, and SSNs when it gets cancelled. Though I think what will happen will be the RAF or the Treasury will get the money.
hehehe, nope.
DeleteThe RN will only get 13 Type 26s, under the best circumstanded.
I can EASILY envision that number being cut to 10 or even 8 ships, with the rest of the cash plowed into social welfare spending.
Remember, the Type 45 was supposed to be 12 ships, and was supposed to mount Harpoons......
Also, the Astute class is having massive teething issues.
Harpoon is being fitted to some of the T45s, though I tend to think that we are waiting for better AShMs to be developed by you Septics. Astute class is fine, HMS Astute is also now through the normal first of class issues that crop up when you haven't built a nuclear sub for a long time.
DeleteCAS will be performed with SDBII and JAGM carried internally. The justification is that when we face off against enemy forces and they have a PANSIR S-1 guarding them the F-35B will be the only platform still capable of providing CAS. There was a article in the gazette several months ago expounding upon the virtues of the F-35B and those weapons and how it will revolutionize CAS. Cannot say i am sold.
ReplyDeleteexactly.
Deletemodern AAA systems will gobble up Harriers and A-10s.
Except as soon as the PANSIR S-1 starts radiating i will have all sorts of assets triangulate it's position and within 90 seconds i will have 18 rounds of DPICM headed towards that 8 digit grid. Or if cannon artillery is not in range, HIMARS, or even a TLAM or 2 if i have to. America has far more $800,000 TLAMS than the rest of the world has $10,000,000 PANSIR S-1.
DeleteAlso i am not entirely convinced a A-10 could not survive against a PANSIR S-1. Attacking it probably not, but flattening the tanks it was supposed to defend...
Interesting since it is unlikely the F-35B will be survivable against much. A fifth-generation Internet meme is still a meme.
Deletethe USMC needs a modern day A-4 SkyHawk. cheap, easily maintained, can carry a shit load of ordnance, is all weather and can fly close support and swing if necessary into the fighter mission.
DeleteSmall, single engine, canard wings, possibly some type of a delta wing.
Delete-Easy and cheap to maintain
-Able to take off in 3000 feet from a highway/runway in standard conditions with full load
-3 hour loiter time with 40 APKWS rockets
-Ability to mount sidewinder
-Built in gun 25-30mm with HE shells
-Subsonic
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteStealth? An old SA-3/SA-125 shot down an F-117A. At night.
ReplyDeleteRemember during the start of the Vietnam War? What was the kill ratio of the F-4 back then? It was so low because the mentality was to use the F-4 as a missile truck.
Same thing with this F-35. It'll be a missile truck against, possibly, more agile fighters. By the time those Russian or Chinese birds show up on radar, the pilot would probably not have enough time to open them doors and launch the missile.
F-35 mafia will be laughing while they are sipping champagne somewhere in LockMart's office.
Honestly I am not worried about the F-35 in air superiority. I know little of modern air combat but from what I know the F-22 and F-35 will still be able to eat anything for lunch.
ReplyDeleteIf the enemy is on the move in a T-90 the F-35 should be able to locate it with the radar, launch a SDBII at it from at least 8-10 nm out and the bomb will be able to find the T-90 with it's tri-mode seeker and destroy it. That is expensive but doable.
But what about the enemy dismounts that are staggered in a series of squad sized 100m radius strong points in a series of treelines with a RPG-29 per squad? Once upon a time we could paste the area with multiple dumb 500lb bombs. Now what?
and you hit on a point that i haven't posted on because i can't find the words. have we become too infatuated with precision? can anything except MLRS or HIMARS or a battery of artillery take on either dispersed infantry or a mechanized assault?
Deletei don't know. i don't even know if the F-35 would be able to handle that type of assault.
It's the air-to-air regimen that has so many scared about the F-35. Even if the so far unproven radar and sensor suite works as advertised, you still have a fighter that's slower, less agile, with less firepower than its competition.
DeleteEven if the stealth works as advertised, it still has a big, hot engine that will light up IRST systems like a Christmas Tree.
This things going to be a sitting duck against the PAK FA, J-20, or even the
Su-35.
Solomon, we have lots of area effect weapons. The CLAW payload and G-CLAW bomb provide wide area destruction. They are currently in use by the USAF (CBU-105 containing 10 CLAWs) and Harvest Hawk/AC-130J (G-CLAW).
DeleteCLAW is a wide area affect sub-munition weighing 64 lbs. Its lethality radius is 100 yds. Plus its fully compliant with both international cluster munition regulations and internal US cluster munition regulations.
The same containers can also be used to carry 40 Sensor Fused Weapons which can quite easily take out a mechanized tank assault.
Total weight of the CBU-105 is 1000 lbs allowing multiple CBU-105s to be carried per plane. Suffice to say, Air to Ground has multiple wide area effect options that will decimate ground forces over a wide area.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Deletedude. you will never post on my blog under this name. i highly recommend an alias....
DeleteI would love to see someone, like the Israeli AF, fly against the F-35. Simulated Operation Mole Cricket 19 with the IAF acting as defense and the F-35 flying escort (no BVR) and strike.
ReplyDeleteIf we are really shifting to PACOM then the F-35 is what the marines need. Modern air defense will eat alive the 80's aircraft. Modern enemy fighters will match or beat our 80's fighters in combat. Early WW2 we learned in blood why you don't want to just match your enemies in the air.
ReplyDeleteThe F-35 will have enough stealth to penetrate defenses and give our guys an advantage in air to air. Everyone screams dog fight but air battle is decided by first to see first to kill 90%, and with off bore sight weapons, helmet system, fixing the old best turn rate is a matter of tactics adjustment. After the suppression of the air defenses or in our current air dominance insurgency warfare the F-35 can lose the stealth and carry a heavier load than the AV-8B on external pylons. CAS for the F-35B will beat AV-8B, but be less than A-10,(A-10 is a one pony show not a real option).
WW2 you see the black sheep marine air operating off small island bases giving the Japanese hell. Marine air/Anphibs in a major PACOM war will be escorting convoys, supporting blockade, capturing small islands, and projecting power A2D2 from small islands. You just cannot do those things with AV-8B, or F-18..
If you cannot make a forced landing into Sudan without either waiting on the Air force to stack the surrounding nations or Big Decks you are a nothing but a Medium Army group that has Anphibs. I understand your point that its expensive and question "is it worth the cost". My opinion is Yes its expensive and Yes its worth the cost. I think we need both new AAV/ASV and F-35B but if the choice has to be made I would say update the current land equipment and pickup the F-35B. Even if a AAV goes 60mph deploys from over 100miles offshore, but we have no air to suppress the enemy anti/air and hold cap its a non-starter. In this budget environment their will not be enough big decks to tag along for taking small islands, and AV-8B will not be survivable to project power from the small ones we have or hold.
My 2cents.
I think our anger should be directed to the politicks that take the money for our military and either buys votes or spends it on projects so they can pull a kickback. We are printing off 85billion a month pushing it into the stock market, funny our politicks just happen to be exempt from insider trading laws (wonder how that is invested and who/how its decided, you could become a millionaire overnight if you knew say X was going to go to X). That 85billion a month stimulus is almost double the entire US defense budget. The feds spent 47billion in 2012 on green energy both in direct funds and/or tax write offs.
In this country if we cannot identify the real enemy cancer killing the body. trying to prioritize which fingers we really need is just a waste.