F-35 more problems
12-15-2011, 02:14 AM
#11
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,275
Originally Posted by UAL T38 Phlyer
I still believe this program is on life-support, waiting for the plug to be pulled. Highly-touted as "the most expensive weapons program in history," and "The Last Manned Fighter," it has a huge policial lobby.
But for what purpose?
With Congress hamstrung over how to reduce spending and the deficit (let alone debt), how would replacing F-18s, Harriers, F-16s, and A-10s with F-35s help over the next 20-30 years fighting Toyota Terrorists? (ie, insurgents in a 4WD).
I honestly think it wouldn't.
I think one of the services, probably the Marines, will pull out, and the whole house of cards will collapse.
"Oh no, what to do?" For the wars we are likely to fight over the next three decades, A-10s, F-16s, F-18s, and both flavors of Eagle will work just fine. (New F-16s are one-third the cost of an F-35).
But for what purpose?
With Congress hamstrung over how to reduce spending and the deficit (let alone debt), how would replacing F-18s, Harriers, F-16s, and A-10s with F-35s help over the next 20-30 years fighting Toyota Terrorists? (ie, insurgents in a 4WD).
I honestly think it wouldn't.
I think one of the services, probably the Marines, will pull out, and the whole house of cards will collapse.
"Oh no, what to do?" For the wars we are likely to fight over the next three decades, A-10s, F-16s, F-18s, and both flavors of Eagle will work just fine. (New F-16s are one-third the cost of an F-35).
We have to send a message to the mil-industrial machine...they need to plan realistic projects and the execute them in a disciplined manner. Actually the submarine navy has gotten pretty good at that...they went through a parallel process like the F-22/35. Built a super-sub (F-22) optimized for cold war sub-to-sub but terminated that program early and transitioned the technology to a smaller cheaper boat with a wider capability set (F-35). The SSN-74 class subs are coming in early and under buget. Granted it's not a joint project.
CANX the F-35.
Re-start the F-22 line (better hurry, it shuts down today).
Buy more 15, 16, 18E/F as needed.
Start a clean slate strike-fighter program with fiscal controls built in. I think we still have time to beat the PRC and the russians to the draw.
The marines might lose out, not sure how long they can keep the AV8's going (although they did just buy ALL of the UK's fleet for spares).
12-15-2011, 06:10 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Originally Posted by UAL T38 Phlyer
Well, from my experience (back in the day), the stick is more about the weapon than the platform.
).
12-15-2011, 06:37 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,193
Originally Posted by XHooker
Very true. While fighter pilots will probably always measure their prowess by post merge engagement (one vs. one being the ultimate), the reality is pre merge is the most important phase of the engagement. I agree with what everyone says here re the money/capability equation, but I'd like to see us continue to press the edge of the technological envelope within fiscal sanity, which is admittedly a tough balancing act. Maybe the best answer is to bypass more manned fighters all together and begin taking the weakest link (us) out of the equation now. And no, there's nothing wrong with the F-4, especially if you hang the latest and greatest weapon system on it (aside from the fact you'd see it's J-79s smoking from about 30 miles out).
).
12-15-2011, 09:03 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: A-300 F/O
Posts: 281
Originally Posted by satpak77
as an aside, with all the drone crashes, does this serve to argue to keep the manned aircraft versus reduce them ?
The leadership ignores some basic tenants of electronic warfare in favor of RPAs because the political environment is so averse to risking lives.
Here is what I learned at EW school back in the day, and nothing I have seen can convince me it has changed.
1. Russian-Soviets had a saying that went something to the effect of those who control the electromagnetic spectrum will win the next war.
2. EW school had a saying that no one can guarantee control of the electromagnetic spectrum
3. The guy on the ground can always overpower whatever ECM/ECCM the guy in the air has because he is not limited by size of generator/transmitter and therefore can always throw more electrons to counter whatever it is you are trying to do or jam your signals thus adversely affecting or denying you the use of your communications and or data links for command and control and information sharing.
RPAs are great for the current conflicts, but the future conflicts that we debate about here will require at least a moderate number of fifth generation and beyond aircraft will not be a permissive electronic environment and RPAs will be all but useless. Unless we want to take the human totally out of the loop and give them AI or some kind of autonomy to go out and kill things and come home at the end of the mission.
12-15-2011, 09:13 AM
#16
Working weekends
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: Left Seat
Posts: 2,384
Originally Posted by Tweetdrvr
The leadership ignores some basic tenants of electronic warfare in favor of RPAs because the political environment is so averse to risking lives.
Here is what I learned at EW school back in the day, and nothing I have seen can convince me it has changed.
1. Russian-Soviets had a saying that went something to the effect of those who control the electromagnetic spectrum will win the next war.
2. EW school had a saying that no one can guarantee control of the electromagnetic spectrum
3. The guy on the ground can always overpower whatever ECM/ECCM the guy in the air has because he is not limited by size of generator/transmitter and therefore can always throw more electrons to counter whatever it is you are trying to do or jam your signals thus adversely affecting or denying you the use of your communications and or data links for command and control and information sharing.
RPAs are great for the current conflicts, but the future conflicts that we debate about here will require at least a moderate number of fifth generation and beyond aircraft will not be a permissive electronic environment and RPAs will be all but useless. Unless we want to take the human totally out of the loop and give them AI or some kind of autonomy to go out and kill things and come home at the end of the mission.
Here is what I learned at EW school back in the day, and nothing I have seen can convince me it has changed.
1. Russian-Soviets had a saying that went something to the effect of those who control the electromagnetic spectrum will win the next war.
2. EW school had a saying that no one can guarantee control of the electromagnetic spectrum
3. The guy on the ground can always overpower whatever ECM/ECCM the guy in the air has because he is not limited by size of generator/transmitter and therefore can always throw more electrons to counter whatever it is you are trying to do or jam your signals thus adversely affecting or denying you the use of your communications and or data links for command and control and information sharing.
RPAs are great for the current conflicts, but the future conflicts that we debate about here will require at least a moderate number of fifth generation and beyond aircraft will not be a permissive electronic environment and RPAs will be all but useless. Unless we want to take the human totally out of the loop and give them AI or some kind of autonomy to go out and kill things and come home at the end of the mission.
I got your drift 
12-15-2011, 10:22 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Originally Posted by satpak77
where did I see an article ? Air Forces Monthly ? about old geezers in F-4's up against young dudes in F-18's
the young dudes got their clocks cleaned
the young dudes got their clocks cleaned
12-15-2011, 10:29 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Originally Posted by Tweetdrvr
RPAs are great for the current conflicts, but the future conflicts that we debate about here will require at least a moderate number of fifth generation and beyond aircraft will not be a permissive electronic environment and RPAs will be all but useless. Unless we want to take the human totally out of the loop and give them AI or some kind of autonomy to go out and kill things and come home at the end of the mission.
12-15-2011, 11:30 AM
#20
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Posts: 44
where did I see an article ? Air Forces Monthly ? about old geezers in F-4's up against young dudes in F-18's
the young dudes got their clocks cleaned
the young dudes got their clocks cleaned
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
miker1369
Major
1
12-01-2006 02:42 PM
