What's with all the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter bashing?

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What's with all the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter bashing? (Page 1 of 4)

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:16:47 PM EDT

www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-35.htm

After all the recent F-35 bashing here, I went out and looked at the literature and the criticisms seem to be unfounded. For one, the "recent" discovery that the Radar Cross Section is "now" golf-ball size...this article states that this was known already, and it has been out a while. In terms of range (fully TWICE that as the F-16), performance and sensor capability the F-35 beats everything out there but the F-22!

For example:

The F-35’s mission systems are designed to return the pilot to the role of tactician and to increase combat effectiveness dramatically. Next-generation sensors will provide the pilot coherent and fused information from a variety of onboard and off-board systems. Sophisticated data links will connect the aircraft to both ground-combat elements and airborne platforms. In addition to fighter-to-fighter data links, the F-35 will be equipped with satellite-communications capability for both transmitting and receiving.

The aircraft’s onboard sensor suite is optimized to locate, identify, and destroy movable or moving ground targets under adverse weather conditions. This all-weather capability is achieved with the aircraft’s advanced electronically scanned array (AESA) radar built by Northrop Grumman. The AESA enables simultaneous air-to-ground and air-to-air operations. It can track moving ground targets and display them on a radar-generated terrain image, enabling precise target location relative to terrain features. These instruments, coupled with off-board sensors, will make the F-35 capable of all-weather close air support under the most demanding conditions.

An internally mounted electro-optical targeting system (EOTS) is installed in the nose of the F-35, enhancing both air-to-ground and air-to-air capabilities. The EOTS will provide long-range, high-resolution targeting-infrared imagery; laser-target designation; and battle-damage-assessment capability. This system will provide pinpoint weapons-delivery accuracy for close air support and deep-strike missions.

A distributed-aperture-infrared sensor system will provide full spherical infrared coverage around the aircraft. In addition to providing warnings of missile launches, information from the system can be displayed on the pilot’s helmet visor, permitting the pilot to see “through” the airplane’s structure in all directions, and eliminating the need for night-vision goggles. This system will dramatically increase the ability of the F-35 to conduct any type of mission at night.

The F-35 Propulsion Systems are the most powerful fighter/attack turbofans in the world.

An integrated airframe design, advanced materials and an axisymmetric nozzle maximize the F-35's stealth features. A quick look at the aircraft reveals an adherence to fundamental shaping principles of a stealthy design. The leading and trailing edges of the wing and tail have identical sweep angles (a design technique called planform alignment). The fuselage and canopy have sloping sides. The canopy seam and bay doors are sawtoothed. The vertical tails are canted. The engine face is deeply hidden by a serpentine inlet duct. The inlet itself has no boundary layer diverter channel, the space between the duct and the fuselage, to reflect radar energy. And, of course, weapons can be carried internally. Each internal bay contains two hardpoints onto which a wide variety of bombs and missiles can be attached.

According to November 2005 reports, the US Air Force states that the F-22 has the lowest RCS of any manned aircraft in the USAF inventory, with a frontal RCS of 0.0001~0.0002 m2, marble sized in frontal aspect. According to these reports, the F-35 is said to have an RCS equal to a metal golf ball, about 0.0015m2, which is about 5 to 10 times greater than the minimal frontal RCS of F/A-22. The F-35 has a lower RCS than the F-117 and is comparable to the B-2, which was half that of the older F-117. Other reports claim that the F-35 is said to have an smaller RCS headon than the F-22, but from all other angles the F-35 RCS is greater. By comparison, the RCS of the Mig-29 is about 5m2.

Much has been improved between the design of the F-22 and the F-35. The F-35 doors for landing gear and equipment, as well as control surface, all have straight lines. The F-35 does not require "saw tooth" openings to divert RF energy. One reason the openings on the F-35 are straight lines is reported to be embedded electrical wires near the edges whcih interfer with RF signals. The F-35 RAM is thicker, more durable, less expensive and, being manufactured to tighter tolerances compared to that of the F-22. The tighter tolerances means less radar signal can penetrate openings and reflect back to its source. The newer RAM is more effective against lower frequency radars, and maintenance should cost about a tenth that of the F-22 or B-2. Some forms of RAM have have electrical plates or layers within the layers of carbon composits.

Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems is developing the Multi-Mission Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) Radar for the F-35. This advanced multi-function radar has gone through extensive flight demonstrations during the Concept Demonstration Phase (CDP). The radar will enable the F-35 JSF pilot to effectively engage air and ground targets at long range, while also providing outstanding situational awareness for enhanced survivability.

In a joint effort with Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems will provide key electronic sensors for the F-35, which includes spearheading the work on the Electro-Optical Distributed Aperture System (DAS). This system will provide pilots with a unique protective sphere around the aircraft for enhanced situational awareness, missile warning, aircraft warning, day/night pilot vision, and fire control capability. Designated the AN/AAQ-37, and comprising six electro-optical sensors, the full EO DAS will enhance the F-35's survivability and operational effectiveness by warning the pilot of incoming aircraft and missile threats, providing day/night vision and supporting the navigation function of the F-35's forward-looking infrared sensor.

Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control and Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems are jointly providing key electronic sensors for the F-35 to include the Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS). The internally mounted EOTS will provide extended range detection and precision targeting against ground targets, plus long range detection of air-to-air threats.

The Electro-Optical Targeting System is an affordable, high-performance, lightweight, multi-functional system for precision air-to-air and air-to-surface targeting. The low-drag, stealthy EOTS is integrated into the Joint Strike Fighter's fuselage with a durable sapphire window and is linked to the aircraft's integrated central computer through a high-speed fiber-optic interface.

The EOTS uses a staring midwave 3rd generation FLIR that provides superior target detection and identification at greatly increased standoff ranges. EOTS also provides high-resolution imagery, automatic tracking, infrared-search-and-track, laser designation and rangefinding, and laser spot tracking. Sharing a Sniper legacy, it provides high reliability and efficient two-level maintenance.

Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control is teamed with Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems to produce the JSFTM Electro-Optical Sensor System (EOSS). The EOSS consists of the EOTS, led by Lockheed Martin with BAE SYSTEMS, and the Distributed Aperture System, which provides 360-degree situational awareness, led by Northrop Grumman. A cornerstone of future defense capability for the U.S. and its allies, the EOSS supports situational awareness, target recognition, and precision weapon delivery.

Unlike the cockpit design of current-generation fighter aircraft, the F-35’s does not include a head-up display. Rather, the information normally visible on such a display is instead projected on the pilot’s helmet visor. Vision Systems International, LLC (VSI) is developing the most advanced and capable Helmet Mounted Display System (HMDS) for the F-35. Utilizing extensive design experience gained on successful production Helmet Mounted Displays (HMD), the F-35 HMDS will replace the traditional Head-Up-Display (HUD) while offering true sensor fusion.

The F-35's diverterless inlet lightens the overall weight of the aircraft. Tactical aircraft pose a formidable challenge for inlet designers. A fighter inlet must provide an engine with high-quality airflow over a wide range of speeds, altitudes, and maneuvering conditions while accommodating the full range of engine airflow from idle to maximum military or afterburning power. Historically, inlet complexity is a function of top speed for fighter aircraft. Higher Mach numbers require more sophisticated devices for compressing supersonic airflow to slow it down to subsonic levels before it reaches the face of the engine. Inlet designs for fighter aircraft must also account for the boundary layer of low-energy air that forms on the surface of the fuselage at subsonic and supersonic speeds. The on the Joint Strike Fighter performs miracles that only aeronautical engineers can fully appreciate. At high aircraft speeds through supersonic, the fuselage bumps at each inlet work with forward-swept inlet cowls to redirect unwanted boundary layer airflow away from the inlets, essentially doing the job of heavier, more complex, and more costly approaches used by current fighters. The diverterless inlet eliminates all moving parts.

Because logistics support accounts for two-thirds of an aircraft's life cycle cost, the F-35 will achieve unprecedented levels of reliability and maintainability, combined with a highly responsive support and training system linked with the latest in information technology. The aircraft will be ready to fight anytime and anyplace. Autonomic Logistics (AL) is a seamless, embedded solution that integrates current performance, operational parameters, current configuration, scheduled upgrades and maintenance, component history, predictive diagnostics (prognostics) and health management, and service support for the F-35. Essentially, AL does invaluable and efficient behind-the-scenes monitoring, maintenance and prognostics to support the aircraft and ensure its continued good health.

The F-35 is designed to reduce operational and support costs significantly by increasing reliability and reducing required maintenance. Such high reliability will enable rapid deployment with minimum support equipment. The cost to operate and maintain the F-35 is expected to be 50 percent less than that for the aircraft it is designed to replace. For decades, the concept of repairing new aircraft came only after the aircraft was built. Then, it had to conform to an existing logistics structure. But the F-35’s logistics system has to be up and running before the first aircraft is flown.

The autonomic logistics system, as the F-35 system is called, will monitor the health of the aircraft systems in flight; downlink that information to the ground; and trigger personnel, equipment, and parts to be pre-positioned for quick turnaround of the aircraft. Ultimately, this automated approach will result in higher sortie-generation rates. Autonomic logistics is also something of a mind reader. Through a system called prognostics and health management, computers use accumulated data to keep track of when a part is predicted to fail. With this aid, maintainers can fix or replace a part before it fails and keep the aircraft ready to fly. Like the rest of the program, the autonomic logistics system is on a fast track. It has to be available to support the air vehicle during operational test and evaluation.

So, it even has the vaunted "EOTS" (Electro-Optical Targeting System ) that some people are raving about!

I say let's buy a lot of F-35's!

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:20:08 PM EDT

[#1]

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:20:42 PM EDT

[#2]

It's just like the Hornet bashing. People have their favorites or have gotten their panties in a twist because they liked another design better.

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:22:27 PM EDT

[#3]

The F-35 isn't bad.
In fact, it's very good - when compared to other offerings in its class.

However, we have the F-22 and it pales in comparison at speed and maneuverablilty.
I think many are tired of the high-low mix and want all F-22s.
Unfortunately, we don't have the cash (willpower, actually) to field a large force of F-22s.

Add to that the "joint" nature of the program and many don't want the compromises that are inherent with such programs. The Navy wants another hard-core F-14. The USMC wants an improved Harrier, but you can only polish a turd concept so much.

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:23:19 PM EDT

[#4]

I liked the idea at first, but I now think we'd be better served (and get much, much more for our tax dollars) if we canned the JSF project and dumped that money into buying more Raptors for the AF, upgrading the Super Hornet and the F-15, and buying lots of them.

This way we get more ultra-high end fighters and instead of dumping tons of cash into a brand-new design (JSF), we can get brand-new F/A-18s and F-15s with all the updates for much less money per unit than the F-35 would cost.

Exports of the newer, deadlier F-15 would probably skyrocket due to cheaper price tag as well.

Everybody wins all the way around.

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:29:25 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
I liked the idea at first, but I now think we'd be better served (and get much, much more for our tax dollars) if we canned the JSF project and dumped that money into buying more Raptors for the AF, upgrading the Super Hornet and the F-15, and buying lots of them.

This way we get more ultra-high end fighters and instead of dumping tons of cash into a brand-new design (JSF), we can get brand-new F/A-18s and F-15s with all the updates for much less money per unit than the F-35 would cost.

Exports of the newer, deadlier F-15 would probably skyrocket due to cheaper price tag as well.

Everybody wins all the way around.

Remember that the F-35 is heavily modeled after the F-16 program and, as an export fighter, is much more attractive to smaller countries. No way they're ponying up for the F-22 when an F-35 will secure them against their local enemies for the forseeable future. If we cancel the F-35, nobody is gonna be buying F-35s (remember the F-20?).

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:35:47 PM EDT

[#6]

Ah geez SJ, I gotta agree with you there.

One point, the Navy's version is more of a strike platform than an interceptor.

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:40:03 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Ah geez SJ, I gotta agree with you there.

One point, the Navy's version is more of a strike platform than an interceptor.

BAM!!

(I don't hate the F/A-18. But the F-16 is much, much more sexy.

)

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:40:27 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Remember that the F-35 is heavily modeled after the F-16 program and, as an export fighter, is much more attractive to smaller countries. No way they're ponying up for the F-22 when an F-35 will secure them against their local enemies for the forseeable future. If we cancel the F-35, nobody is gonna be buying F-35s (remember the F-20?).

I agree wholeheartedly. However, the only reason why the F-35 is the multi-role fighter foreign countries are interested in is...there are no other *new* options available from the US (aside from perhaps the Super Hornet).

Even right now, the Eagle is near the top of the food chain. If we were to throw money into upgrades and make it even better, the cost per unit would be chicken scratch compared to the JSF. Allies the world over would flock to the upgraded *new* Eagle (not existing airframes, new jets off the assembly line with all the new technology). Sales would atleast double whatever we could sell of the F-35.

ETA: If there was a choice, I'd bet the upgraded F-15 would be more popular.

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:40:58 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Ah geez SJ, I gotta agree with you there.

One point, the Navy's version is more of a strike platform than an interceptor.

BAM!!

(I don't hate the F/A-18. But the F-16 is much, much more sexy. )

I thought this was about the F-35?

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:43:16 PM EDT

[#10]

i personally think they're trying to do too much with too little in the F-35. It simply can not be the jack of all trades people want.

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:44:17 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Remember that the F-35 is heavily modeled after the F-16 program and, as an export fighter, is much more attractive to smaller countries. No way they're ponying up for the F-22 when an F-35 will secure them against their local enemies for the forseeable future. If we cancel the F-35, nobody is gonna be buying F-35s (remember the F-20?).

I agree wholeheartedly. However, the only reason why the F-35 is the multi-role fighter foreign countries are interested in is...there are no other *new* options available from the US (aside from perhaps the Super Hornet).

Even right now, the Eagle is near the top of the food chain. If we were to throw money into upgrades and make it even better, the cost per unit would be chicken scratch compared to the JSF. Allies the world over would flock to the upgraded *new* Eagle (not existing airframes, new jets off the assembly line with all the new technology). Sales would atleast double whatever we could sell of the F-35.

ETA: If there was a choice, I'd bet the upgraded F-15 would be more popular.

The F-15 doesn't meet all the needs that are out there. In fact, it can't fill certain needs. For instance do you think you can modify the F-15 to replace the Harrier? Land on a carrier? Have the RCS of a golf ball?

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:45:37 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
I liked the idea at first, but I now think we'd be better served (and get much, much more for our tax dollars) if we canned the JSF project and dumped that money into buying more Raptors for the AF, upgrading the Super Hornet and the F-15, and buying lots of them.

This way we get more ultra-high end fighters and instead of dumping tons of cash into a brand-new design (JSF), we can get brand-new F/A-18s and F-15s with all the updates for much less money per unit than the F-35 would cost.

Exports of the newer, deadlier F-15 would probably skyrocket due to cheaper price tag as well.

Everybody wins all the way around.

Yup…

The F-35 started off as a CHEAP fighter-bomber but now will cost not a great deal less than a bulk purchase F-22…($150 mil a go IIRC)

DoD and LM are still quoting $40-60 mil price tags for the F-35's, but all I can say is they must be smoking crack if they believe those estimates… the UK (Tier 1 co manufacturer) has worked out that $85 Mil a copy is a more realistic minimum figure for the F-35B.

It's also VERY late… it was supposed to be flooding off the production lines into service in 2007… now it may be up to 5-6 years late depending on the model.

Buying bucketloads of F-15K's for a bargain price (currently $105 mil per) and spending the gazillions budgeted on the F-35 on F-22's now makes more sense IMO

ANdy

ETA: Why not make the F/A-18E a tri-Service plane and make the Blue Suiters buy it?

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:48:46 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
The F-15 doesn't meet all the needs that are out there. In fact, it can't fill certain needs. For instance do you think you can modify the F-15 to replace the Harrier? Land on a carrier? Have the RCS of a golf ball?

All true, but when was the last time you heard of an F-22 flying off carrier decks? When countries are looking for air force fighters and cannot afford the Raptor, an upgraded F-15 with all new tech would sound juicy to them.

YMMV.

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:52:58 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Buying bucketloads of F-15K's for a bargain price (currently $105 mil per) and spending the gazillions budgeted on the F-35 on F-22's now makes more sense IMO

The latest F-15 costs $20 million more per unit than the UK's cost of $85 mil for a new F-35?

Was that a typo? I was expecting the F-35 to be much more expensive than a new F-15(K).

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:54:38 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
i personally think they're trying to do too much with too little in the F-35. It simply can not be the jack of all trades people want.

+1

This is my personal beef with the thing...

They are trying to sell it as the 'everything fighter' and have succeeded to the point where some politicos think it can do the F-22's job, or fill the hole left by the F-14....

The problem is that as a rule, fighter platforms NORMALLY make very poor strike aircraft, and strike aircraft do not make good fighters. When you try to design a plane to be both, you get something like the F/A-18 (which can do the job, but is slower than it's pure-fighter counterparts, and shorter ranged than a pure attack aircraft)..... Or you get the F-111, which was a decent attack platform, but didn't quite make it as an interceptor...

The Air Force got 'lucky' with the F-15, in that it turned out to be a decent attack platform, but the F-15 was NEVER designed for such a role - it was 'supered' into it with the E-variant.... Ditto for the USN & the Tomcat...

The F-35 is going to end up being another Hornet - it will do the jobs it's stuck in, but not as well as an aircraft purely designed for that role....

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:56:38 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Remember that the F-35 is heavily modeled after the F-16 program and, as an export fighter, is much more attractive to smaller countries. No way they're ponying up for the F-22 when an F-35 will secure them against their local enemies for the forseeable future. If we cancel the F-35, nobody is gonna be buying F-35s (remember the F-20?).

I agree wholeheartedly. However, the only reason why the F-35 is the multi-role fighter foreign countries are interested in is...there are no other *new* options available from the US (aside from perhaps the Super Hornet).

Even right now, the Eagle is near the top of the food chain. If we were to throw money into upgrades and make it even better, the cost per unit would be chicken scratch compared to the JSF. Allies the world over would flock to the upgraded *new* Eagle (not existing airframes, new jets off the assembly line with all the new technology). Sales would atleast double whatever we could sell of the F-35.

ETA: If there was a choice, I'd bet the upgraded F-15 would be more popular.

No it wouldn't. The lion's share of ANY aircraft program is R&D. The actual cost to go buy a later model F-15E is quite high. I don't recall the numbers off hand but it isn't too much cheaper than an F-22. Trouble is, when any number is quoted in the media it always includes R&D, which is stupid because its a sunk cost that we aren't getting back. Being that the F-35 is a simpler aircraft than the F-22, I suspect that the actual cost for some guy in Fort Worth to put it together would be about the same or perhaps even less than an F-15. Plus, and this is the biggie, with a "new" F-15 you'd have to incur all the R&D costs all over again. F-35 is a good aircraft for what it does.

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:58:11 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

ETA: Why not make the F/A-18E a tri-Service plane and make the Blue Suiters buy it?

The Air Force won't take a plane with little/no improvement on the F-15, and a gas habit that's pretty much legendary....

Posted: 3/31/2006 3:58:33 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The F-15 doesn't meet all the needs that are out there. In fact, it can't fill certain needs. For instance do you think you can modify the F-15 to replace the Harrier? Land on a carrier? Have the RCS of a golf ball?

All true, but when was the last time you heard of an F-22 flying off carrier decks? When countries are looking for air force fighters and cannot afford the Raptor, an upgraded F-15 with all new tech would sound juicy to them.

YMMV.

Not many countries can afford the F-15, to say nothing of an Uber F-15.

So, it comes down to how much they want to spend. Rafael and Gripen are cheap, but what opeartional capability would they get? Okay, so spend some more and get a Typhoon...but the F-35 is in the same price range, so they are getting a good plane, but still no F-35. They can never afford F-22's, so there you have it.

As far as the time line, even if they opted fot Rafael or Typhoon, deliveries would STILL be years away, based on current pending contracts. A Navalised Typhoon would be farther out yet.

Then there is the whole Industry Offset deal...how long would that take to set-up, even if the French agreed to it?

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:02:12 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Buying bucketloads of F-15K's for a bargain price (currently $105 mil per) and spending the gazillions budgeted on the F-35 on F-22's now makes more sense IMO

The latest F-15 costs $20 million more per unit than the UK's cost of $85 mil for a new F-35?

Was that a typo? I was expecting the F-35 to be much more expensive than a new F-15(K).

When you peel away the marketing gloss the F-35 is just a jumped up Harrier or a riced up F-16… the F-15K is a very deadly and capable beast…

But give it time, I'm sure the F-35's costs will carry on ballooning…

ANdy

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:10:05 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The F-15 doesn't meet all the needs that are out there. In fact, it can't fill certain needs. For instance do you think you can modify the F-15 to replace the Harrier? Land on a carrier? Have the RCS of a golf ball?

All true, but when was the last time you heard of an F-22 flying off carrier decks? When countries are looking for air force fighters and cannot afford the Raptor, an upgraded F-15 with all new tech would sound juicy to them.

YMMV.

Not many countries can afford the F-15, to say nothing of an Uber F-15.

So, it comes down to how much they want to spend. Rafael and Gripen are cheap, but what opeartional capability would they get? Okay, so spend some more and get a Typhoon...but the F-35 is in the same price range, so they are getting a good plane, but still no F-35. They can never afford F-22's, so there you have it.

As far as the time line, even if they opted fot Rafael or Typhoon, deliveries would STILL be years away, based on current pending contracts. A Navalised Typhoon would be farther out yet.

Then there is the whole Industry Offset deal...how long would that take to set-up, even if the French agreed to it?

I thought that one of the things the Rafael had going against it in export sales was its high price...

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:33:13 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
When you peel away the marketing gloss the F-35 is just a jumped up Harrier or a riced up F-16… the F-15K is a very deadly and capable beast…

....meanwhile, the world is clamoring for more Typhoons....oh, wait...

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:37:32 PM EDT

[#22]

An F-15K vs. an F-35B. What wins?

My money is on the Eagle.

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:38:55 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
An F-15K vs. an F-35B. What wins?

My money is on the Eagle.

Hope you've got a lot of money to lose.
Matt

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:42:05 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Quoted:
When you peel away the marketing gloss the F-35 is just a jumped up Harrier or a riced up F-16… the F-15K is a very deadly and capable beast…

....meanwhile, the world is clamoring for more Typhoons....oh, wait...

And were the fuck did I say that?

If you followed any of my posts you might know that I have always said the Typhoon was a mistake and 'we' the British should have bought the F-18 and F-15 when we had the offer back in the 90's…

And another thing… the RAF and Royal Navy are buying 150 F-35's……

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:42:05 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
An F-15K vs. an F-35B. What wins?

My money is on the Eagle.

So you want to take an export version of the Strike Eagle and go A2A with a next generation fighter with a smaller radar signature, a more advanced radar and AMRAAMs?

Are you nuts?

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:42:58 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Quoted:
An F-15K vs. an F-35B. What wins?

My money is on the Eagle.

So you want to take an export version of the Strike Eagle and go A2A with a next generation fighter with a smaller radar signature, a more advanced radar and AMRAAMs?

Are you nuts?

You guys are missing the obvious.

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:44:35 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
An F-15K vs. an F-35B. What wins?

My money is on the Eagle.

So you want to take an export version of the Strike Eagle and go A2A with a next generation fighter with a smaller radar signature, a more advanced radar and AMRAAMs?

Are you nuts?

You guys are missing the obvious.

What's that? That the F-15K is being produced? So? That logic is good for the next couple of years, then what?

Why would you ever want an export version of an aircraft?

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:45:04 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
An F-15K vs. an F-35B. What wins?

My money is on the Eagle.

So you want to take an export version of the Strike Eagle and go A2A with a next generation fighter with a smaller radar signature, a more advanced radar and AMRAAMs?

Are you nuts?

You guys are missing the obvious.

The obvious? You mean the part about missiles from the F-35 already half-way downrange before the F-15 even SEES the JSF?!? That obvious?
Matt

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:45:31 PM EDT

[#29]

Where's the F-35B?

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:47:06 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Quoted:
An F-15K vs. an F-35B. What wins?

My money is on the Eagle.

Hope you've got a lot of money to lose.
Matt

If the F-15 pilot uses his performnce advantage he should be able to stay ahead of the F-35…don't close and use your speed advantage to accept or decline combat unless on your terms.

I would imagine it would be the same problem our RN pilots had with the Sea Harrier, you could see ithe Bogey in plenty of time on the radar, but how do you make a faster jet come and play if he don't want to?

ANdy

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:47:27 PM EDT

[#31]

My bet is for an enhanced F-15.

On a related note, is it me or is the trend now adays to base new designs on future technology that must first be developed and perfected before the program can even move on? In other words, why are the current projects depending on technology that has yet to be fully developed? It would seem that is the reason for the hemmoraging costs and incessant production delays.

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:47:52 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Where's the F-35B?

Like I said, that's short-sighted. What happens in 10 years? 15 years? 20 years? In 20 years we will have prototypes of the F-35s replacement flying. The F-15 will be based on a design 60 years old! That's like flying Corsairs today!

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:48:52 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
An F-15K vs. an F-35B. What wins?

My money is on the Eagle.

Hope you've got a lot of money to lose.
Matt

If the F-15 pilot uses his performnce advantage he should be able to stay ahead of the F-35…don't close and use your speed advantage to accept or decline combat unless on your terms.

I would imagine it would be the same problem our RN pilots had with the Sea Harrier, you could see ithe Bogey in plenty of time on the radar, but how do you make a faster jet come and play if he don't want to?

ANdy

The problem is the Eagle pilot won't know the F-35 is there until it is too late to "accept or decline."

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:49:36 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Where's the F-35B?

Hopefully shitcanned so we will buy the F-35C, not the short range, low payload B

ANdy

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:51:08 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
When you peel away the marketing gloss the F-35 is just a jumped up Harrier or a riced up F-16… the F-15K is a very deadly and capable beast…

....meanwhile, the world is clamoring for more Typhoons....oh, wait...

And were the fuck did I say that?

If you followed any of my posts you might know that I have always said the Typhoon was a mistake and 'we' the British should have bought the F-18 and F-15 when we had the offer back in the 90's…

And another thing… the RAF and Royal Navy are buying 150 F-35's……

Cost/performance or just that they could have had the -18 and -15 ten years ago and thrown the money at F-22 or an indigenous project instead?

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:52:08 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Where's the F-35B?

Like I said, that's short-sighted. What happens in 10 years? 15 years? 20 years? In 20 years we will have prototypes of the F-35s replacement flying. The F-15 will be based on a design 60 years old! That's like flying Corsairs today!

I guess what I'm saying is with upgrades and enhancements the F-15(L?) would be a fairly devastating fighter when not compared to the F-22.

Don't know much about the Typhoon, but I think an "uber" F-15 would hold it's own against it. Could be wrong, but it's just a hunch.

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:52:43 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
An F-15K vs. an F-35B. What wins?

My money is on the Eagle.

Hope you've got a lot of money to lose.
Matt

If the F-15 pilot uses his performnce advantage he should be able to stay ahead of the F-35…don't close and use your speed advantage to accept or decline combat unless on your terms.

I would imagine it would be the same problem our RN pilots had with the Sea Harrier, you could see ithe Bogey in plenty of time on the radar, but how do you make a faster jet come and play if he don't want to?

ANdy

The problem is the Eagle pilot won't know the F-35 is there until it is too late to "accept or decline."

The shiney new Radar in the F-15's seems pretty trick… the F-35's not 'that' stealthy, especially from astern…and if it's carrying underwing loads it's a non-stealth ballgame.

ANdy

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:53:03 PM EDT

[#38]

Histironics aside, what is the reason behind the slip in F-35 production?

I have heard that it was "agressive" to begin with, but I have not been able to pin down exact explanations.

Where are the stumbling blocks...Design? Costs? Technology? Management? Testing?

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:55:08 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Where's the F-35B?

Like I said, that's short-sighted. What happens in 10 years? 15 years? 20 years? In 20 years we will have prototypes of the F-35s replacement flying. The F-15 will be based on a design 60 years old! That's like flying Corsairs today!

I guess what I'm saying is with upgrads and enhancements the F-15(L?) would be a fairly devastating fighter when not compared to the F-22.

Don't know much about the Typhoon, but I think an "uber" F-15 would hold it's own against it. Could be wrong, but it's just a hunch.

First of all, the F-15K is a Korean export version of the F-15E. Hardly an "uber" F-15. Now if you're talking about that contraption McD-D rolled out about 15 years ago with canards and thrust vectoring then you have a problem. The Eurofighter will detect it and engage it with Meteors at quite a distance. The only hope the Typhoon has against an F-35 is to detect it with IRST, hopefully the environment will cooperate. Otherwise, the Typhoon wil be in the new AMRAAM range if/when it detects the F-35.

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:56:14 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
Histironics aside....

Don't get me wrong, I think we need something for a cheaper alternative to the Raptor to give us bulk in numbers. If the F-35 fits the bill, so be it. I'm good with it. I just think there's more we can extract out of the Eagle.

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:58:37 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
First of all, the F-15K is a Korean export version of the F-15E. Hardly an "uber" F-15. Now if you're talking about that contraption McD-D rolled out about 15 years ago with canards and thrust vectoring then you have a problem. The Eurofighter will detect it and engage it with Meteors at quite a distance. The only hope the Typhoon has against an F-35 is to detect it with IRST, hopefully the environment will cooperate. Otherwise, the Typhoon wil be in the new AMRAAM range if/when it detects the F-35.

I misspoke. A "K" model was not what I should have specified. See above post. I simply think there's more we can extract from the '15.

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:58:47 PM EDT

[#42]

I'm sure someone already pointed tis out but it was the X35 but it is now the F22. That's why they are called X planes since they are only in development but when bought by the militart it becomes the F22

Posted: 3/31/2006 4:59:28 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
I'm sure someone already pointed tis out but it was the X35 but it is now the F22. That's why they are called X planes since they are only in development but when bought by the militart it becomes the F22

Experimental.

Posted: 3/31/2006 5:02:00 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
An F-15K vs. an F-35B. What wins?

My money is on the Eagle.

Hope you've got a lot of money to lose.
Matt

If the F-15 pilot uses his performnce advantage he should be able to stay ahead of the F-35…don't close and use your speed advantage to accept or decline combat unless on your terms.

I would imagine it would be the same problem our RN pilots had with the Sea Harrier, you could see ithe Bogey in plenty of time on the radar, but how do you make a faster jet come and play if he don't want to?

ANdy

The problem is the Eagle pilot won't know the F-35 is there until it is too late to "accept or decline."

The shiney new Radar in the F-15's seems pretty trick… the F-35's not 'that' stealthy, especially from astern…and if it's carrying underwing loads it's a non-stealth ballgame.

ANdy

Well, you have to close with the enemy to engage them. The good news is you can carry weapons internally.

Posted: 3/31/2006 5:02:22 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
When you peel away the marketing gloss the F-35 is just a jumped up Harrier or a riced up F-16… the F-15K is a very deadly and capable beast…

....meanwhile, the world is clamoring for more Typhoons....oh, wait...

And were the fuck did I say that?

If you followed any of my posts you might know that I have always said the Typhoon was a mistake and 'we' the British should have bought the F-18 and F-15 when we had the offer back in the 90's…

And another thing… the RAF and Royal Navy are buying 150 F-35's……

Cost/performance or just that they could have had the -18 and -15 ten years ago and thrown the money at F-22 or an indigenous project instead?

The 'preferred' option by the MoD was F-15's and F-18's. When the USAF pulled a wing of F-15's out of USAFE Germany, Bitburg IIRC, they offered to transfer them to the RAF for something like $1… RAF guys creamed their pants, politicians said no! … The Navy was quite happy to have the Hornet as was the RAF, it only lost out to the F-35 by a small margin in the final select anyway…

The Typhoon was the 'Euro Co-operation' choice that gave the politicians the 'feel good' saving jobs factor. The RAF was also cleared to buy the F-22 but it's a tad too expensive and a bit too much 'overkill' for us…

ANdy

Posted: 3/31/2006 5:05:17 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
I'm sure someone already pointed tis out but it was the X35 but it is now the F22. That's why they are called X planes since they are only in development but when bought by the militart it becomes the F22

2 different planes.

The YF-22 became the F-22. Then the F/A-22. Then the F-22A.

The X-35 became the F-35. (Boeing's version was the X-32)

Posted: 3/31/2006 5:09:23 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
Histironics aside, what is the reason behind the slip in F-35 production?

I have heard that it was "agressive" to begin with, but I have not been able to pin down exact explanations.

Where are the stumbling blocks...Design? Costs? Technology? Management? Testing?

Too abitious a project, they tried to get all the eggs in one basket with just one throw, the flight testing is proceeding in parallel with production.

The GAO did a report IIRC,

In a nutshell, take the F-16, it was developed as something doable, production started and better models were developed to bring in all the nice shiney features over a period of years.

LM is trying to telescope that development cycle into one hit. If you get it right first time it's a winner and saves money. If you get it wrong… you have to redesign the thing, and as you are also tryng to set up the final production line at the same time, you get program slippage

www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/3731699.html

Posted: 3/31/2006 5:09:31 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:

The shiney new Radar in the F-15's seems pretty trick… the F-35's not 'that' stealthy, especially from astern…and if it's carrying underwing loads it's a non-stealth ballgame.

ANdy

Nothing against the F-15 but it's radar will not be any more trick than the F-35's. F-35 will have so much more information coming in that as said before, F-15 will most likely be toast. F-35 also can carry its weapons internally, no matter how much the F-15 is upgraded it can't pull off that. Also Lock-Mart is developing external stealthy pods to carry weapons, so external stores may not be an issue. People keep saying well if a plane is designed for multi-role it will do neither well. The F-35's electronics are the key enabler (after it's stealth)... more so than raw performance, and it will make a huge difference. No matter how much performance a plane has now it's not going to outperform what a missile can do. YMMV.

Posted: 3/31/2006 5:11:34 PM EDT

[#49]

I like shiny new peices of technology. Especially if they blow things up and kill bad people. I'll never complain about defense spending. What drives me up the wall are these billions of dollars for AIDS in Africa and all of these other worthless social programs. Talk about throwing money down a well...

I'd be happy if Congress just shut-up and allocated the money to buy a proper number of airframes of each type. And told industry to come up with some kind of fast stealth fighter-bomber equivalent in role to the F-15E.

Posted: 3/31/2006 5:18:38 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Quoted:

The shiney new Radar in the F-15's seems pretty trick… the F-35's not 'that' stealthy, especially from astern…and if it's carrying underwing loads it's a non-stealth ballgame.

ANdy

Nothing against the F-15 but it's radar will not be any more trick than the F-35's. F-35 will have so much more information coming in that as said before, F-15 will most likely be toast. F-35 also can carry its weapons internally, no matter how much the F-15 is upgraded it can't pull off that. Also Lock-Mart is developing external stealthy pods to carry weapons, so external stores may not be an issue. People keep saying well if a plane is designed for multi-role it will do neither well. The F-35's electronics are the key enabler (after it's stealth)... more so than raw performance, and it will make a huge difference. No matter how much performance a plane has now it's not going to outperform what a missile can do. YMMV.

The F-15 is right here, right now, the F-35 is still maybe 8 or more years away… even the DoD has expressed concerns about block obsolecence of the USAF's fighter force while it waits for the F-35 to eventually turn up…

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What's with all the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter bashing? (Page 1 of 4)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us