via The National Interest...
Operational Air Force pilots with air superiority fighter experience were less than enthusiastic about the prospect of the F-35 replacing the Raptor or F-15. “I hope they get that we need to be well beyond the F-35 in the future and recycling a ramped up proposal isn't going to be good enough,” one senior officer said.&
Another added that it was physically impossible for the F-35 to match, much less replace, the F-22. “F-35s will never be able to sit at the table with F-22s in the realm of air-to-air and SEAD/DEAD [suppression of enemy air defenses/destruction of enemy air defenses],” the senior Air Force pilot said. “Doesn't have the performance, doesn't have the payload, doesn't have the stealth.”
Another highly experienced F-22 pilot was equally unenthused about the prospect of an advanced F-35 derivative—even if that new variant was equipped with an advanced adaptive cycle engine. “That would be a really bad idea unless they finally got enough thrust with two engines!!” the pilot said. “It is an underpowered airplane from what I hear from my bros flying the jet. But, we have leveraged our tactical aviation future on this aircraft, so I guess we have to like it...”And there you have it. Real USAF Air Force pilots are finally being heard about the F-35.
Doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement to me. Personally I'm thrilled. Propaganda and a massive marketing campaign are giving way to an honest appraisal of what we're betting the future of a great nation to.
Sidenote: I await with great anticipation the spin that Second Line of Defense Blog tries to put on this article!
Although the aviators are against it, Lockheed with its massive lobbying machine may pursuade the congress that a super F-35 is all the US could afford in times of defense budget cuts.
ReplyDeleteNever underestimate the power of Lockheed's lobbying machine.
Except Lockheed's lobbying machine is going to have to go up against Boeing's lobbying machine. And honestly, the last thing we need is for lockheed to have a monopoly on US fighters. I wouldn't be surprised if the DoD/Congress basically *require* a non-lockheed design.
DeleteAs far as the idea that the USAF and USN will get separate designs, I just don't see that happening. The airframe requirements between the USAF and USN are likely to be 99% the same with the primary difference being increased undercarriage and the tailhook. That should be pretty reasonable to find an fairly optimal design that can be modified either way.
99% the same with the primary "difference being increased undercarriage and the tailhook"
DeleteYou just contradicted yourself with that statement. Those are not trivial engineering tasks, and is a big reason F-35C shares only ~30% commonality with F-35A. Let the services buy the plqne best suited for their different operational environments and missions.
So lets see if they come up with 3D trust vectoring for the F-135 engine
ReplyDeleteFor now F-35 is a perfect replacement for a light tactical fighters, like a F-16, Gripen, Eurofighter Typhoon, F/A-18 Hornets A-D models. After F-35 would enter mass produiction, new dual engined air dominance fighter based on F-35 technology will be announced.
ReplyDeleteNon sense.. all the planes you named will fly circles around F35.
DeleteTyphoon is arguable the best a2a fighter still in production.
Several even got the much lauded 'sensor fusion', the only thing they do not have is stealth.
This means there is a big IF here. if stealth holds up F35 has something extra. if it does not.. its basically not much more then a more modem A7.
F-15C's are still in production. I'd take that over a Typhoon, although the two are close enough it comes down more to pilot skill.
DeleteF35 perfect replacement for light tactical fighters ? is this F16.net forum ? who can make this kind of statement here when people like eric palmer and don bacon constantly educated everyone on the massive hype and lies on F35's development ?
DeleteNo.. Just no... It is much more inferior in comparison to 'light planes' like the F16 in terms of cost (total, operating, lifetime, anyway you put it) and also actual availability. And this is based on rising projected costs. And it has very poor flight/stealth charachteristics, and at best ok range/payload.
DeleteAnd typhoon, nooo... Its costs way too much for what it is, which is comparable to Su27/F15 without support for air-to-ground weapons. And it also has a far to low availability rate and total cost of ownership.
It makes much more sense to take F16/15/18s or Su27/35s or Grippen NG over those 'fighter planes'...
It's not too late for the USAF to go with an F-15 Silent Eagle "interim solution" to the F-35 problem and uprade all the old Hornets and F-16s to Advanced Super Hornets with the carrier specific parts removed. Subcontract some avionics work to LM to keep them from griping too much, increase the stealthiness of the air fleet and see economies of scale across the services...
ReplyDeleteRight now it feels like "gamblers logic" in that if we keep throwing money on the roulette table we have to get lucky eventually. Problem is that most gamblers run out of money long before they run out of hope.
Gamblers logic is the perfect way to describe this.
DeleteIt is not too late to realise that the F35 was a bad plane from the conceptual phase (bad at bombing, bad at air-interception/supremacy, bad at air-patrol), and that replacing all US and Nato service planes with this was an even more idiotic idea. It is also not too late for development to start on a sensible suite of new planes.
DeleteSignificantly upgrading & refurbishing planes in the interim is a good way of gaining more capability/performance and life from the existing inventory while waiting for replacement designs to be completed. Replacing a portion of the existing inventory with more advanced, iteratively improved variants would not be a bad idea either... And would allow for improvements not possible via modifying existing airframes. I am thinking of a Super F15/F16.
Sukhoi TA-50 PAK-FA, is already being hailed as a “super weapon” that could outclass US jet fighters fF35, thereby making Russia supreme in the skies. 2016
ReplyDeletehttp://ic.pics.livejournal.com/karelmilitary/37260910/1612743/1612743_1000.jpg
The F-35 hasn't even started operational testing yet, it's still in development testing only. (In the Army we called it engineering test and service test, which makes it a little clearer.) They are now hiring for test people at Edwards AFB:
ReplyDeleteAircraft Effectiveness Analyst
--JSF Operational Test Team (JOTT)
--F-35 capabilities, weapons, and tactics
--operational effectiveness
--Perform as Kill Removal Officer to remove blue or red air players in a timely manner
--Evaluates pilot/test participant mission briefs/debriefs
--formulate an assessment of system effectiveness and mission capability
The test results will eventually show up in a report from the DOT&E.
"The Director, Operational Test and Evaluation(DOT&E) is the principal staff assistant and adviser to the Secretary of Defense (SecDef) on operational and live fire test and evaluation (OT&E) activities involving U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) weapons systems."
It's the law: --Title 10 U.S. Code, Section 139
“There is a Director of Operational Test and Evaluation in the Department of Defense, appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.”
“Operational test and evaluation means --
the field test, under realistic combat conditions, of any item of (or key component of) weapons, equipment, or munitions for use in combat by typical military users; and the evaluation of the results of such test.”
And that is where this pig will hopefully-finally die. During OT&E. Put it up against any of our legacy fighters in visual range, it'll be dust. BVR "might" be a different story. Hopefully then there will be real tangible evidence to all, that this is a dying limb that needs to be cut off. As far as the PAK FA goes, India already gave it a so-so review this summer. their Su-27's and 35's seem to perform better. You cannot sacrifice maneuverability for stealth in a fighter. Stealth is not the save all.
ReplyDeleteWe have given the AL-31 powered early prototype version of the PAK-FA a so-so review. And that so-so review was a result of many background behind the scenes politics rather than an actual technical so-so review. In anycase, the Sukhoi-27/30/35's are an amazing aircraft and platform which comforts the rest of us into thinking that the Sukhoi 50 will also turn out that way.
DeleteThere actually are many options.. I mentioned a 2 engined, more slender, F35 before myself. More power , less weight and some aerodynamic tweaks could probably make the F35 rather good. At a cost.. of even more money spend.
ReplyDeleteI am not the biggest fan of the Super-hornet, that also seems to be underpowered to me, less so then F35 though, on the other hand F16 and F15 could work with upgrades.
the USA will not buy Typhoons, but maybe a Boeing co-development of the basically already for 2/3s American Saab Gripen can save a load of money that can be spend on more F22's to supplement them.
I personally think a Gripen, with its 'expeditionary' nature of being able to fly from short strips with limited support makes it ideal for the Marine Crops if Vtol is a bridge to far after F35 B collapses .
DefenseNews, Sep 14, 2014
ReplyDelete...The most notable is the program known as “F-X”, “next-generation air dominance” or, much to the chagrin of the service, “sixth-generation fighter.” This would be the replacement for the F-22 and provide air dominance for the 2030s, 2040s and 2050s.
Air Force critics are quick to point out that the F-35 joint strike fighter, a fifth-generation jet, is still in the early stages of production — and still struggling with development and testing challenges. Why, then, should the Air Force be spending funds to develop a new fighter?
Col. Tom Coglitore, Air Superiority Core Function Team chief at Air Combat Command, said the timetable actually lines up with the development of other air dominance fighters, such as the F-15 and F-22.
“We’re at that point that we need to be thinking about replacement for capabilities we have today, because 15-20 years from now the F-22 will be 30 years old,” he said. And unlike their bomber cousins, which have notoriously long lifespans, “these platforms are sometimes pulling 8 or 9 Gs a couple times a day. We stress the heck out of them.”...
Forget pulling 8 or 9 Gs a couple times a day. F-35 flight g restrictions have been increased from 3.0 to 3.2. Maximum g forces for continuous turns are now projected to be 4.6 g for the F-35A.
DeleteOne F-35 problem is engine flex, which contributed to the June 23 plane loss at Eglin.
RAND
ReplyDeleteAir Force Major Defense Acquisition Program Cost Growth Is Driven by Three Space Programs and the F-35A
Three continuing space programs with extreme cost growth — Space-Based Infrared System, High Component; Advanced Extremely High Frequency; and Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) — drive the higher cost growth in the group of continuing MDAPs. However, in dollar terms, cost growth in the Air Force portion of the F-35 program (F-35A) is by far the largest of all programs.
You know, I might think the F-35 wpuld be a GREAT airplane if they called it what it is - an A-35. No one with a straight face can call a jet limited to 4.6g's a multirole fighter. They should stop the buys at 100 jets per service, call it an F-117 replacement, then start buying new-build Hornets, Eagles and Vipers until 6th gen arrives.
ReplyDeletei tend to agree with you regarding the naming , since JSF was meant to be a 'strike' platform instead of an 'air superiority' platform.. but how good is F35's LO quality ? compared to F117 ? if the secret of F117 already out and spread around america's enemies (assuming this is stealth material / radar absorbing material secret) , then how viable is the F35/F22/B2 and other stealth platform in the next war ?
DeleteIs Stealth still the weapon of choice for 'silver bullet' type scenario ? personally i think the whole 'stealth/LO' is not as effective as the impact of F117 in gulfwar. Seeing how easy the Iranian detected and hacked the stealthy drone RQ170..
In the meantime the USNavy says the F/A-18(EFG) will remain as the backbone of the fleet. And the F-35 will just add targeting designation capabilities. (A semi autonomous stealthier drone could do it better)
ReplyDeleteThe ones in trouble are the Marines and the USAF with their agin planes.
A low observable Advanced Super Hornet/Growler could take the Pakfa or Eurofigher any day
The USAF and marines are the ones in trouble, but mostly because they are so stuck on stealth or STOVL that they can't see other potential platforms and force structures.
DeleteIf USAF used alaskan based F15s to patrol it's northen borders , then why dont RCAF used the same platform as their primary interceptor aircraft ??? totally confused about the F35 selection by canadian goverment , over F15 or F18E/F/G
DeleteYou're not the only one confused. Many CDN's confused on the purpose of the F-35 in the RCAF.
DeleteAn F-15 or ASH F-18 would be much better for interception role.
By 2030, the red block(Russia and China) with their PAK-FAs and J-20s would hold an absolute kinematic and altitude advantage over the blue block consisting of the F-35A/B/C/E and the KFX/KFXX. Japan has no money to proceed with the F-3 project because of all the heavy spending on FACO and subsidized F-35 industrial participation.
ReplyDeleteJapanese must be feeling like shooting themselves in the head when they hear that the long-awaited USAF F-X jet that Japan hoped to merge its program with is in fact an enhanced F-35.
This is interesting post , If F-35 really ready for combat in 2019 , how will they perform against PAKFA / J20 / J31 in real world ? can the US military wage major war against peer nation(s) that can blind satellites and ISR assets ? how much US military depencency on satelites that might get blinded/destroyed ? are there alternatives to non GPS smart weapons nowadays other than ancient laser guided bombs ?
DeleteI would be suprised to see no major war in 2020-2050 period.. by the looks of it, seem like World War III would happen sooner or later .. Im just curious, can submarine launched SLBMs near US coast (east and west) surprised and destroyed america by fire in just one hour as stated in the book of revelation chap 17-18 ?
Slowman
DeleteOn a lighter note, shouldnt you include Japan as well in the "Red Block" ?
And on a deadly serious note- What you are implying here about Red Vs. Blue is what I have asked already a couple of times on Solomon's previous posts about F-35's and Israel and its neighbours who one day might or should i say- will definitaly get access to the next generation of Russian/Chinese aircraft with Israel operating 1980's tech. Why I specifically mentioned Israel is becasue it has due to its geography, its attitude to its neighbours and its neighbours attitudes to itself has become the 1 stop shop for Red vs.Blue weapons. SInce India and Pakistank have also mellowed down on the full scale war, the only place where high end capital weapons of Red/Blue can be used in anger looks to be the Middle East region.
By 2030 the red air force force will be destroyed on the ground and if they take off will be trapped by a web of autonomous sincronizes drones
ReplyDeletewhat is sincronizes drones ? can you elaborate ? links ?
Deletehttp://youtu.be/oDyfGM35ekc
Deletehttp://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1TOKpc0wwWw
Deletehttp://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YQIMGV5vtd4
Deletehttp://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E7X0_6o9J10
Deletehttp://m.youtube.com/watch?v=S-dkonAXOlQ
Deletehttp://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3CR5y8qZf0Y
Deletehttp://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hyGJBV1xnJI
Deletehttp://youtu.be/v0dHKWjXn-E
Deletehaha.....Superrhinocerront has posted more links here than the F35 can carry ordanance.
Deletehttp://breakingdefense.com/2014/08/art-of-the-possible-navy-defends-goals-for-uclass-drone-as-decision-looms/
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAir Defense/Air Supremacy missions are flown 80% of the time (real sortie hog), maneuvered 15% of the time and engaged 2-5% of the time. It's a waste mission that allows countries and services to compete with each other in a largely harmless dueling condition for 'best sky knight' without committing to something which could actually form a cogent risk to their rivals societies.
ReplyDeleteThat said, the obvious way to bring a fighter out of the duck suit that the F-35 represents is not to go the Tim Taylor route (the reason why that F-35 has 19,000lbs of fuel yet will only fly 2/3rds as far as the X-45 nor hold on station for 2hrs when it got there is the F135 with it's .9 TSFC) but to start chopping drag as front end weight. Rebalancing the flight control gains shoudl result in a jet whose 'lifting tail' can be relaxed to gain enormous pitch loadings as onset rates.
The cockpit goes and the radar goes on 3 out of 4 jets and suddenly you have a platform which is 5-7,000lbs lighter on the front end with much better fineness ratio tailoring of the shock coming off the nose and now you have both thrust gain equivalency and /drag loss/ drag minus thrust = acceleration and FLCS control gains move up to a point equivalent to 2/3rds fuel fight entry which is to say instantaneous 7-8G and a sustained 5.5-6. Which is realistic for a subsonic turn platform at heights typical for BVR entry to the WVR phase.
Obviously, we are talking about a UCAV condition where the piloted aircraft hangs back and drives his flight of 3 with something akin to football playbook templates which finger-on-glass he modifies on the fly.
You may also want to consider adding some drag and weight back in the form of a 100KW SSL which isn't 'cockpit sensitive' to dazzle from similar threat capabilities but which allows 7-10km shots in the high clear air of altitude and double this for a 250KW weapon which is likely by 2020.
You're still going to be paying a lot of bucks for the basic platform technology which is terribly dated but things like the DAS and MADL make it at least /possible/ for the jet to self-fly an intercept for which a pilot is only virtually represented. This translates to a lot smaller core aviator force and with fewer training hours, a great deal more stick time for those pilots who remain.
You are right about your UCAV being more statistically relevant when it comes to Air Patroling and policing the friendly skies and completing Sortie rates at a cheaper more sustainable rate.
DeleteBut failing that or till the time this UCAV technology doesnt result in a proper platform, the Sukhoi 27 derivatives looks like a perfect compromise. Range, wide choice of weapons can be integrated, existing wide footprint in existing air forces regarding spares and technicians, well polished maintenance techniques and procedures, not a hanger hog etc. And above all......built to a cost. Sort off.
Another example of too big to fail?
ReplyDeletehttp://m.aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/whats-store-a380