Russian/Indian perspective on the F-35

Hardly an unbiased opinion, but an interesting read.

...let them believe it...

interesting or not, never was intended to be used like they are describing

the menuverability of the su-30 family is insane in comparison to the f35

Stopped reading when it said "... A super hot engine which a half decent radar can identify"

The BVR capability of the F-22 is insane in comparison to the SU-30.

See what I did there?

From all that I've read, the me109 was a far more maneuverable fighter than the P51 (as were many of the other American fighters as well). Assuming what I've read is correct, P51 pilots were trained to avoid engaging in a dogfight with the German fighters, but instead, make a pass and then run away. (didn't our F4s successfully use similar tactics as well?)

While Americans are often willing to give their lives for their country, historically, they do whatever they can to avoid doing so. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thach_Weave

The only reason they called it the "F"-35 was to justify canceling the F22 line and making sure LockMart got the maximum amount of money possible. It really ought to be called the B-35, because that's what it is. "Look! It haz stealthz!" .... That becomes useless the second you strap anything to the hard points. "It haz sensorz!" ... That don't work and probably never will.

That thing needs to be canceled to free up the defense budget for shit that actually works. Open the F22 line again (I know it still has its own issues, but it still does everything the EffTurdyFyve does better and the some, short of STOVL/CATOBAR capability.), and figure something else out for the Navy and Marines. But develop two different aircraft for two different roles this time instead of mission creeping one design to the point where it really can't do anything well.

By not working, what do you mean?  The sensors need work, as expected they are still in the development phase, but they do work.  And it should be an A not a B, not even close to a bomber.

Thankfully you can easily (despite what mx control will tell you) configure aircraft with pylons when they're needed or take them off when they aren't, so after initial strikes in a conflict where stealth is needed and after air defenses are minimized you can throw them.

Last I heard the APG-81 kicks ass.  I'm sure the other problems with other systems will be resolved.

There is no financial reason they won't be.

Air show maneuverability /=/ how you fight in combat.

Not necessarily, seen an av8 air show?  At zero airspeed can pretty much point wherever, can't fight like that.  Also, while BFM is fun, do you really want to merge?  I know due to roe it might be required at times, but even then if the fights on with anything capable of turning chances are mutual destruction is likely.

Dittos...US pilots are much better trained and generally employ superior tactics, I know I was once one and am now flying as a contractor in the sandbox. You don't have to have the best airplane, we have proved time and again that aircraft like the P51 and F4 were "good enough". The article is also factually incorrect on the flyaway cost per airframe, being off by almost 50%. Also, in the war games, out F15's did not use their full capability against the Indian Air Force, so that makes the comparison one of apples to oranges.

The reason for only two bombs is with precision guidance, our guys almost never miss. Compare that to the A6 Intruder, with up to 28 - 500 pound bombs that took a flight of three to four to take out a single target, vs one F15/16/18/22/35 that make the kill with one shot.

In 2003 Shock and Awe was terrifying to our opponents not because we carpeted bombed Iraq, but because each bomb dropped killed it's intended target >96% of the time. Reducing the need for multiple sorties and the required size of the attacking forces footprint and supply train.  Ask any current artillery man how boring his job has become with precision guided shells. Most fire missions are one shot affairs, not three spotter rounds and 18 then fired for effect.

I'm still a strong proponent of the A10C and increased production of the F22, but the F35, like a strong man, will be hard to kill.

If mutual destruction is likely, then the F-35 is still a poor choice.  Considering that the US has fewer of them.

The point is to avoid the merge...