F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread

[HMS Astute]

without the F-22 the F-35 is irrelevant.

I thought you said that the radar, avionics and computer systems fitted on F-35 is superior to older aircraft F-22.

If the F-35 was irrelevant, what would happen to Tejas, Mirage, Su-35 and others that India has?

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

I don't think any naysayer of stealth (who knows what he is talking about) has dismissed stealth. What they have dismissed is the over reliance on just one aspect of stealth and that's shaping (and other passive techniques) that the US promotes. There are other ways to achieve stealth and the US has not made those other methods available to others, considering they are still developing it. Shaping worked in the past, but it is simply not enough anymore, as the Israelis have pointed out. The Israelis argued that the F-35 level stealth will be compromised in the next 5 years, hence why they want their own EW systems on their version.

Stealth is signature mitigation, detection of stealth is looking for that signature.
In the Vietnam war the Sam sites of North Vietnam learned the Signatures for USAF tactical bombers and only sent there fighters up to hunt them leaving F4 Phantoms for Sam sites. they listened to American Radio call signs and Jammer frequencies. When they saw the jammer and heard call signs named after Car makers like Olds, Ford, Dodge and the like. they knew it was ThunderChiefs and sent fighters to kill them. of course an American Commander figured this out to and laid his own ambush fighting Phantoms with the same Jammer and using the same callsigns he and a formation of Airforce fighter went up and lured the Fighters into there own ambush.
With F22 The Air Force has continued to change the Stealth coatings, almost every block update has included a new paint job. it's likely that this will continue with F35 as well as other changes in engines and countermeasures. The Israelis have a long tradition of modifying aircraft and equipment sold to them or captured by them to meet there needs. Which differ form others. The Israelis live today in a period where through battle they have forced there neighbor states to grudgingly accept them and not push there luck in a conventional war. this means that there primarily looking to a strike fighter although they will likely also keep some Air superiority types.

There are only two real reasons the naysayers have against the F-35. One is the cost and time overruns. Second is the fact that LM and Pentagon are promoting a strike aircraft as an air superiority aircraft just to make sales. While the first one can't be helped, the naysayers argue that the second is not justified. Basically, the US is not saying the whole truth to sell the F-35, and even the military believes that without the F-22 the F-35 is irrelevant.

F35 Against 3rd and 4th Gen fighters is one sided favoring F35 with good missiles and a good pilot. but against a 4.5 - 4.5+ it gets harder. alot harder. against a fifth generation you need a true knife fighter. That's What raptor is the push of the F35 comes from the logic that by the time it went from concept to demonstrator it was deemed that future wars in the post cold war period would be asymmetric. fighting forces who lacked a air force. That logic is still deeply routed in the USAF, USN and USMC. Slowly however it's started to become apparent that that is flawed logic. Hence the 6th Gen Programs. Rather then tailoring to Asymmetric or Conventional I feel the Us should push a flexible force that can adapt but that's not a easy task.

The F-117 issue was a one-off thing, and the Serbians couldn't do the same consistently to regular 4th gen aircraft anyway.

The Failure of that F117 was due to complacency. the F117 was forward based and used the same route to ingress and egress. The Serbs listened for UFO and reports of a Flying Triangle where they saw a lot of them they parked a Sam sight and waited. much like any ambush predator would park next to a watering hole. eventually the prey walked in to the trap.
Stealth is no just shaping or electronics or Thermal countermeasures, or Visual camouflage. It all that plus it's tactics. And if you don't include all of them your going to have issues.
The most foolish thing The US did ( relating to this topic) was place a Export restriction on F22, the second most foolish thing was close the line.

 

[A Bar Brother]

I thought you said that the radar, avionics and computer systems fitted on F-35 is superior to older aircraft F-22.

If the F-35 was irrelevant, what would happen to Tejas, Mirage, Su-35 and others that India has?

The F-22 has speed and agility on its side. Tejas and Mirage are old and not enough to conduct air superiority missions for first day of war missions.

Su-35's avionics is an unknown factor, but speed and agility are top notch and well known.

As far as India is concerned, IAF will depend on FGFA, an F-22 equivalent, for air superiority. So they have none of the issues that other western countries are facing today. So with the FGFA fleet conducting air superiority + SEAD/DEAD, the remaining fleet will continue to be relevant, even if the aircraft is 4th gen or older.

The avionics isn't the problem here. Gen Hostage says you need 8 F-35s to do the work of 2 F-22s.

 

[A Bar Brother]

With F22 The Air Force has continued to change the Stealth coatings, almost every block update has included a new paint job. it's likely that this will continue with F35 as well as other changes in engines and countermeasures. The Israelis have a long tradition of modifying aircraft and equipment sold to them or captured by them to meet there needs. Which differ form others. The Israelis live today in a period where through battle they have forced there neighbor states to grudgingly accept them and not push there luck in a conventional war. this means that there primarily looking to a strike fighter although they will likely also keep some Air superiority types.

I'm sure even the F-22 and F-35 will be equipped with active technologies as time passes.

F35 Against 3rd and 4th Gen fighters is one sided favoring F35 with good missiles and a good pilot.

You don't even need a good pilot. Even an average trained rookie is enough. Our pilots have mentioned that Mirage-2000s and Mig-29s equipped with old radars and avionics are turkey shoot for the MKI. The pilots were unaware that they were shot down by the MKIs. And the MKI is not yet a true blue 4.5th gen like how the west defines it. Except for the radar, the remaining stuff is what you will find in a F-15C or a F-16C. After the upgrade, it will be 4.5th gen. The F-35 is a step ahead of the MKI as far as the avionics are concerned. This is where the 4x figure comes into the picture as far as legacy aircraft are concerned.

That's What raptor is the push of the F35 comes from the logic that by the time it went from concept to demonstrator it was deemed that future wars in the post cold war period would be asymmetric. fighting forces who lacked a air force. That logic is still deeply routed in the USAF, USN and USMC. Slowly however it's started to become apparent that that is flawed logic. Hence the 6th Gen Programs.

The development of the F-22 or the F-35 has nothing to do with asymmetric warfare. They were designed for conventional warfare for the US air forces. Training, weapons, deployment and missions have become more tuned to asymmetric warfare. If the US is willing to export the F-22, then it becomes fair for the rest of NATO+allies too, the ones who can afford both the F-22 and the F-35.

The only known 6th gen program is possibly the F-22 replacement. The SH replacement may or may not be a brand new program, it is yet to be seen. And even if it did see the light of day, neither programs are meant to clash with the F-35. Instead, the navy program may only boost the F-35.

Anyway, the F-15 was introduced in 1976. The F-22 in 2005. So, a 6th gen replacement introduced in 2035 makes sense to me. That's a 30 year gap between the generations.

The most foolish thing The US did ( relating to this topic) was place a Export restriction on F22, the second most foolish thing was close the line.

True on both counts.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

I'm sure even the F-22 and F-35 will be equipped with active technologies as time passes.

there radars are already powerful jammers.

The development of the F-22 or the F-35 has nothing to do with asymmetric warfare. They were designed for conventional warfare for the US air forces. Training, weapons, deployment and missions have become more tuned to asymmetric warfare.

Development of F35 to a degree did but it's procurement was really pushed as the Air superiority role was considered less need because of the shift.
When X35 flew it's mission was defined as a strike fighter. It was aimed to be a strike fighter form the start with some air to air. it was always aimed to replace F16 and hornet and the Marines and Royal navy sweet talked there Harrier needs in. but it was only to take the Lighter roles well For the Navy and Airforce NATF and ATF (F22) would take the Air Superiority replacing F14 Tomcat and F15 Eagle. first the NATF was Cancelled In it's place F/A18 Super Hornet was bought, This was because the Wall fell and then the USSR dissolved. so the Navy stayed with a 4.5+. Then the numbers of Raptors started to slip as well as cuts to the radar and IRST. and by full production the missions in Iraq and A-stan were full swing. and since Raptor only started hitting targets this year. Congress and the Admins of both the Obama and Bush presidencies allowed the Raptor to take the cut because it was felt that it was not needed. it was felt that the only Air Forces the Us would really need to worry about were The Cubans, North Koreans and Iranians with Forces that were deemed better for Air Museum display then combat. and that 99% of the missions would be JDAMS and Hellfires. and Drones were better for that. So the Raptor program was gutted and the Lightning II program was piled on.
but has we have seen the projections these choices were based on were short sighted.

If the US is willing to export the F-22, then it becomes fair for the rest of NATO+allies too, the ones who can afford both the F-22 and the F-35.

Absolutely, although more to allies as the Typhoon ( also deeply behind Schedule and over budget was coming online taking the British, Germans and Italian Air forces as well a Rafale for the French. But Japan, Australia and Israel wanted Raptors.

The only known 6th gen program is possibly the F-22 replacement. The SH replacement may or may not be a brand new program, it is yet to be seen. And even if it did see the light of day, neither programs are meant to clash with the F-35. Instead, the navy program may only boost the F-35.

Not Quite. Both the Navy and Air Force have Requirements. Super F35 is a fall back. the navy saying "Well if the budget looks it. we might not need to but" but the Navy has to be looking around and and seeing where trends are and what are the threats. for the first time since the end of the second world war the 2040's will have a wide list of nations with carriers and carrier fighters. and not just the Vtol types popular to Nato or the Carrier/Cruiser of Russia. India and Brazil nations that were considered lesser powers are both getting into it more and more seriously. the PRC is jumping in and has ambitions for being a Naval power. Russia has been talking big about carriers and Although shown little in that way other then talk, Things can change by the 2030's and if the PRC starts building carriers they might just export them to. Japan seems to be working it's way to it as tensions in SEA ratchet. On those decks there are going to be eventually Fifth Gens. even if it's just Pak-fa-K on the Kuznetsov it's going to happen. when it does thee USN is going to need a Air superiority fighter that can handle that.

F35 However will remain likely going to F35D/E/F which will include improvements after all it's a strike fighter. and it's already got a impressive export list, that alone will keep it updated and cycled for life extension. The Best thing to do with the Sixth gen programs I see it for the possibilities of one seeing the light of day is to figure, One) is there enough overlap between the USN and USAF needs to combine them? Although F35 Shows the issues a Joint program can have. Jointing is the best option for the budget. It's easier to turn a naval fighter Air Force then a Air Force fighter Naval. but it's alot harder to build a fighter when you have to build a fighter that is performing 3 different requirements at once. besides the Marines wouldn't be needing a "High Fighter" as there aim was a Pure F35 fleet.
Two) if not airframe then systems. Avionics, Assemblies engines.
Three) Export Friendly. Remember the Typhoon? Yeah Her mission life for a few owners should be clocking down by 2030. same for a few others. maybe Indian Navy Boeing F/A XX? or Brazilian? Lockheed F-X in Royal Air Force Colors or the German Iron Cross? Export options keep the lines open, allow for additional buys and expand the life of the Airframe.

Anyway, the F-15 was introduced in 1976. The F-22 in 2005. So, a 6th gen replacement introduced in 2035 makes sense to me. That's a 30 year gap between the generations.
True on both counts.

Agreed.

 

[A Bar Brother]

there radars are already powerful jammers.

That's pointless and doesn't contribute to stealth. All it does is work against existing fire control radars.

For active cancellation you need to be able to work through the entire relevant spectrum. And using up radar for ECM would mean less capability when using actual radar functions. I mean, if you compare the larger aperture of the F-35 with 1400 modules versus Rafale's radar with 1100 modules, and if you end up using 300 modules of the APG-81 for EW and datalink, then your actual radar capability is the same as the RBE-2AA. At the same time, the Rafale is capable against the entire spectrum while the F-35 isn't.

Development of F35 to a degree did but it's procurement was really pushed as the Air superiority role was considered less need because of the shift.

You can use a Cessna for air superiority in asymmetric missions.

When X35 flew it's mission was defined as a strike fighter. It was aimed to be a strike fighter form the start with some air to air. it was always aimed to replace F16 and hornet and the Marines and Royal navy sweet talked there Harrier needs in. but it was only to take the Lighter roles well For the Navy and Airforce NATF and ATF (F22) would take the Air Superiority replacing F14 Tomcat and F15 Eagle. first the NATF was Cancelled In it's place F/A18 Super Hornet was bought, This was because the Wall fell and then the USSR dissolved. so the Navy stayed with a 4.5+. Then the numbers of Raptors started to slip as well as cuts to the radar and IRST. and by full production the missions in Iraq and A-stan were full swing. and since Raptor only started hitting targets this year. Congress and the Admins of both the Obama and Bush presidencies allowed the Raptor to take the cut because it was felt that it was not needed. it was felt that the only Air Forces the Us would really need to worry about were The Cubans, North Koreans and Iranians with Forces that were deemed better for Air Museum display then combat. and that 99% of the missions would be JDAMS and Hellfires. and Drones were better for that. So the Raptor program was gutted and the Lightning II program was piled on.

This is US specific, not Japan or Israel specific. Don't get me wrong. Everything that's planned for the F-35 is perfect for the US.

When it comes to air superiority the USAF has the F-22. But Japan, Korea, Israel and Australia miss this capability.

When it comes to strike, the USAF has the F-35. It has a large payload, plenty of gas, and plenty of tankers. So it carries enough payload to enough distance. Though I'm sure this is lesser than what the Australians or some of the other partners want.

When it comes to long range strike, the USAF has the LRS-B. Australia, maybe Japan, sorely want this capability, but will most likely not get it.

So as far as the USAF is concerned, everything is good for them. But the partners are expected to use the F-35 even in roles that the LRS-B and the F-22 are designed for. Basically, not one of the partner nations are capable of waging war at the same level as the USAF. And even when using the F-35, they require the USAF tanker fleet for support because they themselves cannot afford many supporting aircraft.

None of this was such a big issue during the F-16/F/A-18 era.

but has we have seen the projections these choices were based on were short sighted.

Probably more to do with selling the F-35 than an actual risk aversion strategy.

"Let's cancel the F-22 and put all our money in the F-35. Then let's force everybody else to buy the F-35 by preventing the export of the F-22 (while also protecting secrets, two birds with one stone strategy)." That was probably Gates' Vision 2020.

But Japan, Australia and Israel wanted Raptors.

Japan and Israel operate F-15s too. They have the need for an air superiority platform.

Not Quite. Both the Navy and Air Force have Requirements. Super F35 is a fall back. the navy saying "Well if the budget looks it. we might not need to but" but the Navy has to be looking around and and seeing where trends are and what are the threats. for the first time since the end of the second world war the 2040's will have a wide list of nations with carriers and carrier fighters. and not just the Vtol types popular to Nato or the Carrier/Cruiser of Russia. India and Brazil nations that were considered lesser powers are both getting into it more and more seriously. the PRC is jumping in and has ambitions for being a Naval power. Russia has been talking big about carriers and Although shown little in that way other then talk, Things can change by the 2030's and if the PRC starts building carriers they might just export them to. Japan seems to be working it's way to it as tensions in SEA ratchet. On those decks there are going to be eventually Fifth Gens. even if it's just Pak-fa-K on the Kuznetsov it's going to happen. when it does thee USN is going to need a Air superiority fighter that can handle that.

Yeah, it is yet to be seen if there is a true blue 6th gen program by the navy. The air force appear to be going for one.

 

[Air Force Brat]

I don't think any naysayer of stealth (who knows what he is talking about) has dismissed stealth. What they have dismissed is the over reliance on just one aspect of stealth and that's shaping (and other passive techniques) that the US promotes. There are other ways to achieve stealth and the US has not made those other methods available to others, considering they are still developing it. Shaping worked in the past, but it is simply not enough anymore, as the Israelis have pointed out. The Israelis argued that the F-35 level stealth will be compromised in the next 5 years, hence why they want their own EW systems on their version.

There are only two real reasons the naysayers have against the F-35. One is the cost and time overruns. Second is the fact that LM and Pentagon are promoting a strike aircraft as an air superiority aircraft just to make sales. While the first one can't be helped, the naysayers argue that the second is not justified. Basically, the US is not saying the whole truth to sell the F-35, and even the military believes that without the F-22 the F-35 is irrelevant.

The F-117 issue was a one-off thing, and the Serbians couldn't do the same consistently to regular 4th gen aircraft anyway.

Bar Brother, you are making some very "off the wall" statements, which are frankly dishonest and NOT supported by any authoritative data, and your accusations against the US and LockMart are "slanderous". This is not gonna make your point, but it will most certainly cast doubt on your own veracity....One thing that we should consider when we post such nonsense, is that here on the SDF, those posts live on in history, I think you might want to do some real research on your opinions, starting with "without the F-22 the F-35 is irrelevant". That is simply not true, the F-35 operated as intended is second only to the Raptor in regard to lethality, it does not need to be "babysat", it is a very effective A2A against "any" potential adversary, up to and including the F-22..

while you may no doubt find lots of anti-F-35 propaganda, and even a few US officers who do not like the F-35, the vast block of hard data and knowledgeable science and operator evaluation is that the F-35 is indeed a revolutionary aircraft, and a very effective air superiority fighter against adversaries present and future.

To accuse the US military and LockMart of lying to our partners in order to sell airplanes is simply dishonest?

 

[HMS Astute]

Basically, not one of the partner nations are capable of waging war.

A war with whom? would you care to elaborate?

 

[Zool]

That's pointless and doesn't contribute to stealth. All it does is work against existing fire control radars.

For active cancellation you need to be able to work through the entire relevant spectrum. And using up radar for ECM would mean less capability when using actual radar functions. I mean, if you compare the larger aperture of the F-35 with 1400 modules versus Rafale's radar with 1100 modules, and if you end up using 300 modules of the APG-81 for EW and datalink, then your actual radar capability is the same as the RBE-2AA. At the same time, the Rafale is capable against the entire spectrum while the F-35 isn't.

You are right that jamming capability needs to cover a wide spectrum for maximum potential, but it is not correct to say that the system is operated continually as a draw on radar efficiency.

The entire point of the aircraft (F-35) is to run passive under EMCON in the given battle space. When detection of a radar threat occurs, a decision is made based on available assets in the aoe as to which will jam/prosecute the target. If it's a lone flight of 4 or 6 F-35's in the area, one will go active to jam while another engages. Back to passive search and track after the threat is eliminated.

That level of engagement and battle space penetration is just not possible with a 4th Gen aircraft.

 

[A Bar Brother]

Bar Brother, you are making some very "off the wall" statements, which are frankly dishonest and NOT supported by any authoritative data, and your accusations against the US and LockMart are "slanderous". This is not gonna make your point, but it will most certainly cast doubt on your own veracity....One thing that we should consider when we post such nonsense, is that here on the SDF, those posts live on in history,

Like which aspect? That the F-35 does not have full spectrum ECM or that it is delayed?

Without ECM, there is no active stealth. When project is delayed, other problems crop up. If you have issues with what I have stated, then please state the relevant point instead of making accusations with no basis.

As for whatever else I have posted, what is wrong with those? The fact is the F-22 and the LRS-B are not meant for export. So the capabilities they bring in are denied to US allies. All the naysayers have no immediate interest in what the USAF is doing, they are interested in how the export market will handle the F-35's deficiencies. The fact is as far as the USAF is concerned, the jet's capabilities are perfect for it, whereas the other air forces are dealing with the deficiencies differently, like UK and Italy will rely on the Typhoons for air superiority.

Am I to understand that this forum is only meant for pro-US discussions?

I think you might want to do some real research on your opinions, starting with "without the F-22 the F-35 is irrelevant". That is simply not true, the F-35 operated as intended is second only to the Raptor in regard to lethality, it does not need to be "babysat", it is a very effective A2A against "any" potential adversary, up to and including the F-22..

Interestingly it is not my comment. This comment was made by Gen Hostage. It be nice if you read what I post too, because I posted his comments in the same thread.

Just to make things easier, here it is again.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"If I do not keep that F-22 fleet viable, the F-35 fleet frankly will be irrelevant. The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform. It needs the F-22,” says Hostage to Air Force Times.

I will repeat it again. This is NOT my comment. I have not argued for or against it. Only Hostage can clarify what he meant by "irrelevant." Unless you believe Hostage is lying.

while you may no doubt find lots of anti-F-35 propaganda, and even a few US officers who do not like the F-35, the vast block of hard data and knowledgeable science and operator evaluation is that the F-35 is indeed a revolutionary aircraft, and a very effective air superiority fighter against adversaries present and future.

The aspects of the F-35 that I personally criticize is not propaganda at all. My only critical point is the lack of active ECM technology, that's about it. The FACT is the F-35 doesn't have full spectrum ECM.

The Israelis wouldn't have asked for full spectrum ECM if they didn't think it was necessary. They are paying half a billion dollars for modifications.

To accuse the US military and LockMart of lying to our partners in order to sell airplanes is simply dishonest?

That's what every F-35 critic objects to. Pentagon and LM are not being entirely honest.

Basically, what Pentagon is stating is that the OPFOR is incapable of making an F-22 equivalent aircraft, hence the F-35 which is the next best thing will be better than anything the OPFOR can bring in. That's hilarious. Even the Australian Air Chief stated both in Parliament and publicly that the J-20 and T-50 will not be as stealthy as the F-35.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"Let me tell you, I don't think that they have the level of stealth that's available in U.S. fifth generation aircraft, and it's by a significant factor," Air Marshal Brown told lawmakers.

He has ZERO data on the PAKFA or the J-20, let alone dismiss both the projects in the Parliament. He is practically lying through his teeth to support the F-35 and here you say I am the one being dishonest. Basically he says, "I don't think." Since when do air forces go on assumptions to decide the course of the next 40 years of your air force? Pentagon's and LM's basic premise is that the F-35 can be passed off as an air superiority aircraft because OPFOR is incapable of making a stealth aircraft. But they have nothing to say in case they are wrong.

So when you are telling a customer that this will be the next best jet for the next umpteen years, then you are selling the jet on the basis of a lie.