via Breaking Defense...
“The F-35 was fundamentally designed to go do that sort of thing [take out advanced IADS]. The problem is, with the lack of F-22s, I’m going to have to use F-35s in the air superiority role in the early phases as well, which is another reason why I need all 1,763. I’m going to have some F-35s doing air superiority, some doing those early phases of persistent attack, opening the holes, and again, the F-35 is not compelling unless it’s there in numbers,” the general says. “Because it can’t turn and run away, it’s got to have support from other F-35s. So I’m going to need eight F-35s to go after a target that I might only need two Raptors to go after. But the F-35s can be equally or more effective against that site than the Raptor can because of the synergistic effects of the platform.”Wow.
Did you catch that?
This is the first time that the USAF has admitted that the Rand Reports assessment of the F-35..... "Can't Turn, Can't Climb and Can't Run" is actually spot on.
The little war fiction at the beginning of the article was cute, but consider this.
The Rand assessment was based on the F-35 facing SU-27 family of airplanes. How do you think it would fare against the like of the PAK-FA or the J-20? Have you noticed that we have not received any updated assessments against these threats?
I'm guessing here, but the tea leaves indicate that the F-35 is facing some pressure behind the scenes when it comes to numbers to be procured. Hostage saying "another reason why I need all 1,763" is in my mind telling. The cuts are coming, the death spiral is here...and just like Amos finally getting out of my beloved Marine Corps I couldn't be happier.
“The F-35 complements the EA-6B and EA-18G — not replaces. That may change in some long range plans but in the near future they complement each other,” the source said in an email. “Right now we need them both.” And so the discussion goes. But Gen. Hostage was crystal clear in his assessment.
ReplyDeleteSomeone really.....i mean really needs to define in clear cut terms what LONG RANGE PLANS and NEAR FUTURE means. Sooo much F-35 news and capability/readiness news has been tossed about by multiple sources with complete abandon to time frames.....this is it. Someone familiar with this program has to define in clear terms the time frame. Accountants will take no time in DEFINING monetary aspects, fighter pilots will take no time DEFINING capability/readyness, enemies will take no time DEFINING counter points etc etc. But who will DEFINE Timeframes ?
So what advanced aircraft are F-35s likely to face? Russia has found it impossible, so far, to field numbers of fifth-generation fighters. ”The Russians can build one-off systems, can build small numbers of really capable stuff, but they have not yet achieved the industrial capacity to produce in huge volumes,” Hostage tells me.
DeleteWith whats being said above.....are we returning to the same old Tiger Vs Sherman debate again ?.....you build high capability low volume stuff and i shall flood you with my numbers ? Thats his plan ?....Flood the Russian Air Force the same way that Cheap Chinese goods are flooding our economy ?
General Hostage is refering 2 very important pieces of equipment here.
Delete1. The Helmet and helmet mounted situational awareness equipment
2. The overall squadron situational awareness program that tells you what your wingman and entire squadron are doing.
Both pieces of equipment have yet to be verified for effectiveness in the real world, both are yet to be seen in real life by majority of pilots, both are yet to undergo the scrutiny that only experienced hands can provide.
Btw, I am not overly critical of the F-35. Just stating ground reality. Next time Solomon does a Su-50 piece, I'll do my best to be critical of that plane as well.
DeleteEight F-35 can be as effective as two Raptors against a single target.... Since when 8=2?
ReplyDeleteWhat is he smoking?
I prefer one growler and two Super Hornets, they are more cost-effective.
http://news.usni.org/2014/04/07/navy-preparing-aggressive-growler-operations
Or just two advanced Super Hornets, they can really turn and fight.
ReplyDeletewww.youtube.com/watch?v=UF7RQ50gwFY&feature=youtube_gdata_player
www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-mtvZoq4N0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYGM-aB1Luc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
ReplyDeleteAs long as we're buying things that are less than ideal for the mission, if the general wants swarms of things we'd be better off building new F-5's, surely you could build almost a dozen for the cost of each F-35. Then have an F-22 or ,hell, while I'm daydreaming, a B-1R or a modified B-2 as the swarm leader to lead the attack with a butt load of AAMRAM and provide Command and control and maybe EW support. Or better yet just buy new F-16, F-15s and F-22s instead. Some one give me a commission, it only took me 4 minutes to come up with two better ideas than that general.
ReplyDeleteElsewhere in the interview, Gen Hostage claims the F-35 stealthiness [in terms of RCS?] exceeds that of the F-22: "The F-35′s cross section is much smaller than the F-22′s, but that does not mean, Hostage concedes, that the F-35 is necessarily superior to the F-22 when we go to war."
ReplyDeleteEither Colin Clark got it wrong, or this is a major shift about the aircraft's level of stealth. It has always been assumed that the F-22 stealthiness was superior.
The F-35, after thirteen years and many delays, is still early in development. DOD expects to complete developmental flight testing in 2017. Less than three-quarters of its requirements have been tested and proven. The production decision is scheduled for 2019, and it looks like that date will slip yet again. General Hostage will be long gone by then. So sit back and relax, there isn't really an airplane yet, just a bunch of faulty prototypes.
ReplyDeleteSo any F-35 performance claims at this time are pure speculation.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/05/us-lockheed-martin-canada-f-idUSKBN0EG2P820140605
ReplyDeleteExclusive: Canadian review will recommend buying Lockheed F-35 fighter jet - sources
An 18-month review of Canada's fighter jet needs has concluded that the government should skip a new competition and proceed with the C$9 billion ($8.22 billion) purchase, three sources said.
considering the current Canadian govt is all in on the F-35 and stacked the review in favor of that airplane its hardly news. want to impress me? show me a report where Canada actually puts money where its mouth is and commits to buying 100 plus.
Deletethe govt will fall but it will be fun to watch.
Solomon's correct. Defense Canada has huge financial problems -- so show us the money.
DeleteDec 2013: Army parks big and little trucks in order to keep tanks on the road. The Conservative government is freezing departments’ operational budgets for another two years…
The "news" reminds me of this:
September 17, 2013: Dutch to buy the F-35 jet fighter -- The Netherlands plans to buy 37 F-35 joint strike fighter planes from Lockheed Martin, the European country announced on Tuesday.
No further action. Netherlands has reduced their wish-list from 85 to 37, that's the only news.
And this on Australia:
May 1: After years of deliberations, Australia has made a full commitment to the controversial Lockheed-Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) with Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s announcement that his government has approved an A$12.4 billion ($11.5 billion) deal for 58 F-35A Conventional Takeoff and Landing (CTOL) variant of the JSF.
And now we hear about the "full commitment" for 58:
In addition to the two F-35A in production, to be delivered next month, the next procurement of twelve (12) F-35A will be in LRIP-10 contracted in 2016 and delivered in 2018 also eight (8) F-35A in LRIP-11. That's twenty more a/c in LRIP, years from now.
I should have said: years from now, maybe.
DeleteI find this to be really embarrassing. The F-22, as superb as it is, was still defeated a few times in mock dogfighting exercises against the Eurofighter and the Rafale. The details of the fights haven't been fully released, but if the F-22 could be beat, then the F-35 could be beaten much easier. What we also know is that the Rafale's IRST was good enough to find and track the F-22 during the exercises.
ReplyDeleteHere is the dogfight footage of a Rafale getting a gun kill on an F-22: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioTTnjxNc7o
Here are some pictures of the Rafale's IRST tracking the F-22 during the excersises: http://optronique.net/defense/systeme/osf-rafale-dassault-f22-raptor-lockheedmartin
Again, we don't know the full details surrounding these mock dogfights so one side could have had to operate under more strict rules than the other. However, it's pretty clear that although the F-22 is probably still the best fighter in the world, it's not the best by the margin that most people think it is.
The F-22 was also defeated by the F-16, the Super Hornet and Growler, and the Eurofighter by the F-16, and the F-16 and Super Hornet by the Rafale, and the Rafale crashed doing dogfigh with an F-18, and the F-16 defeated by the Super Hornet 20 to 1, etc. etc.
ReplyDeleteAny airplane can be defeated, but some of them have absurd prices.
Still dreaming re your Death Spiral Sol'…don't worry it might get here one day…except the death spiral will actually be for those who think the F-35 will go away. Fools!
ReplyDeleteIt's going to get real bad for the F-35 Critics soon. As the orders are starting to come in. Just remember the most negative comments came from Australia, Canada, and Italy. Yet, Australia has now ordered 72 (firm) and Canada is said to be on the verge of ordering "65". This should open the door for more nations to start moving forward and placing F-35 Orders. Personally, I expect to see a several in the next 12-24 months. Possibly, even follow on orders from South Korea, Japan, or Israel.
Deletehttp://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/canada/story/1.2669476
DeleteNo helmet. No working gun. No internal carry of rail-mounted A2A missiles (AIM-9, AIM-132), no working....well, a lot of things. Other than that the F-35 is just fine.
ReplyDeleteHelmet works or have you been living in a cave. Gun is also not an issue. Missiles will be added in due course as part of test & development program. Accept it Eric, the F-35 is moving from success to success despite you and you're buddies inane rantings to the contrary.
ReplyDeleteEric- Your loosing the battle day by day and I would make a course correction soon. Otherwise how are you going to explain you were so wrong???
DeleteSolomon, Remember I said i'd do some more research on the less than savory features of the PAK-FA, well...while browsing around I did see this artical. Its not critical of the program but still a good read of all the new patents that have been filed by the russians over its technology. Progress is good.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.janes.com/article/32190/pak-fa-stealth-features-patent-published
Russian Engines are not reliable.
ReplyDeleteAnother incident with the Crapfa today.
http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=166845
http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/dementievskiy/13523675/1097463/1097463_original.jpg
ReplyDeleteFot this pilot 4 engines replaced by 2 is the same logic as 2 engines replacwd bu 1.
ReplyDeleteFunny new argument
http://video.intelligencer.ca/search/all/source/kenora-daily-miner-and-news/f-35-jet-decision/3616567586001