Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
#4361505 - 06/02/17 12:08 AM Germany Thinking of Buying F-35?  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
GERMAN AIR FORCE COULD BUY THE F-35 STEALTH FIGHTER JET TO REPLACE THE EUROFIGHTER


Quote
According to Reuters the Luftwaffe (German Air Force) sent a letter to the U.S. military where the service asks a classified briefing on the capabilities of the Lockheed-Martin F-35 stealth fighter.

The Luftwaffe in fact has begun to look for a replacement fighter for its current fleet of fourth-generation warplanes (Tornadoes in use since 1981 and Eurofighters) that will be procured from 2025 to 2035. The F-35 is considered a fifth-generation fighter that thanks to its stealth capabilities is able to evade enemy radars.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#4361513 - 06/02/17 02:42 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Mr_Blastman Online content
Hotshot
Mr_Blastman  Online Content
Hotshot

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 9,570
Atlanta, GA
'Eff 'em. They don't like us, we shouldn't like them. They don't deserve our plane.

#4361515 - 06/02/17 02:51 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Mr_Blastman]  
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,712
Dart Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Dart  Offline
Measured in Llamathrusts
Lifer

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,712
Alabaster, AL USA
Originally Posted by Mr_Blastman
'Eff 'em. They don't like us, we shouldn't like them. They don't deserve our plane.


That's a bridge too far for me. While it's pretty well known that I am skeptical of individual European governments (including Germany's) and absolutely despise the European Union, they are a NATO member.

We can't on one hand tell them to pick up the defense slack we've been carrying for them and on the other deny them the tools to do so.

Besides, I seriously doubt they can come up with the political will to lay down the Euro's to buy them, let alone spend the money to keep them flying.

Last edited by Dart; 06/02/17 02:52 AM.

The opinions of this poster are largely based on facts and portray a possible version of the actual events.

More dumb stuff at http://www.darts-page.com

From Laser:
"The forum is the place where combat (real time) flight simulator fans come to play turn based strategy combat."
#4361518 - 06/02/17 03:36 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,384
PanzerMeyer Offline
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Offline
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,384
Miami, FL USA
I'm all in favor of selling F-35's to Germany. Why not? The US sold them the F-104 and the F-4 in the past. smile


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4361519 - 06/02/17 03:53 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
Yes it would be quite disingenuous to ask Germany to increase defense spending and then refuse to sell them the F-35.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4361527 - 06/02/17 06:05 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
csThor Offline
Senior Member
csThor  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
Germany
So far it's but a request for a classified briefing. Given the political developments of the last few weeks and the general habit of the german political body to consider military procurement as industry subsidy for german defense contractors I vividly doubt that the F-35 really has a chance.


Intel i7 960 @ 3.2 GHz - ASUS Rampage III Gene Republic of Gamers - 6GB RAM OCZ CL7 XTC Platinum PC3-12800 - ZOTAC GeForce GTX 480 - 64GB Crucial RealSSD C300 SATA II - 1TB Western Digital WD1002FAEX SATA II - Creative Soundblaster Xi-Fi Titanium - Windows 7 Professional 64bit
#4361529 - 06/02/17 06:15 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
Flogger23m Offline
Senior Member
Flogger23m  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
US
May as well sell them. Why not make more money? Although replacing the Eurofighter seems a bit odd. It is a fairly new plane with a lot of life left in it. I can see replacing Tornadoes and possibly the oldest Eurofighters 15-20 years down the road. But even the oldest German Eurofighter is a mere 14 years old if I am not mistaken.

#4361532 - 06/02/17 06:46 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,763
Catfish Offline
Member
Catfish  Offline
Member

Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,763
Where the ocean meets the sky
The Eurofighter is a wonder of tactical manoeuverability, while the F35 has a more strategical role, and is much better suited for real modern (network electronics) warfare. As far as i read the F 35 would cut off the enemy before he even reaches the vicinity, don't know how well that would work though in real life. Question is always quality, or mass.
I (Germany here) would be all for buying the F 35, but.. got to love those politicians.

Last edited by Catfish; 06/02/17 06:51 AM.
#4361547 - 06/02/17 10:59 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 6,968
Jayhawk Offline
Silastic Armorfiend
Jayhawk  Offline
Silastic Armorfiend
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 6,968
Docking Bay 94
I seriously doubt that the Luftwaffe will replace the Eurofighter anytime soon (= within the next 30 years). As Flogger wrote: more likely the Defense Ministry is looking into the possibility for a potential (at some point inevitable) replacement for the aging Tornadoes. But certainly not before 2025. And who knows; this could also be a political maneuver to put some pressure on Airbus Defense. So far the Luftwaffe merely asked for classified info on the F-35's capabilities/ sensor suite. Any kind of potential purchase is waaaaaaaay off.

Or it is a rather blunt attempt at in-your-face espionage. Cloak and dagger is sooooo 19th century. biggrin


Why men throw their lives away attacking an armed Witcher... I'll never know. Something wrong with my face?
#4361549 - 06/02/17 11:02 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: csThor]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,384
PanzerMeyer Offline
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Offline
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,384
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by csThor
and the general habit of the german political body to consider military procurement as industry subsidy for german defense contractors .



That's definitely not unique to Germany. Most Left wing politicians in the US also think that way.


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4361550 - 06/02/17 11:03 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Jayhawk]  
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,534
Alicatt Offline
Hotshot
Alicatt  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,534
Ice Cold in Alex or Eating in ...
Originally Posted by Jayhawk

Or it is a rather blunt attempt at in-your-face espionage. Cloak and dagger is sooooo 19th century. biggrin

lol after that last summit, that was my first thought smile


Chlanna nan con thigibh a so's gheibh sibh feoil
Sons of the hound come here and get flesh
Clan Cameron
#4361551 - 06/02/17 11:05 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,384
PanzerMeyer Offline
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Offline
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,384
Miami, FL USA
The spirit of Bismarck is alive and well in Germany! wink


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4361553 - 06/02/17 11:12 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,614
theOden Offline
Member
theOden  Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,614
Dear Germany,
Buy JAS-39E.
Sincerely.
/handsomeOden

#4361554 - 06/02/17 11:14 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: PanzerMeyer]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
csThor Offline
Senior Member
csThor  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
Germany
Originally Posted by PanzerMeyer
Originally Posted by csThor
and the general habit of the german political body to consider military procurement as industry subsidy for german defense contractors .



That's definitely not unique to Germany. Most Left wing politicians in the US also think that way.


Ah, but do US politicians enforce certain procurement decisions even if it merely adds one more troublesome issue to the plate of the armed forces? The entire history of the NH-90 and the A400M, the Tiger and especially the recent "attempt" to procure 5 more K130 corvettes provide ample evidence that military capabilities matter nothing compared to pampering certain defense contractors (because they create jobs and taxes in certain electoral districts). Simply put if being forced to choose between procuring the F-35 in the mid-2020s or having Airbus design yet another "gold edge solution" which costs more and brings only trouble the political body will always opt for the latter choice.

PS: I am pretty relieved that the CH-53G successor will be bought as MOTS - either CH-53K (a bit expensive) or the CH-47 (the logical choice).


Intel i7 960 @ 3.2 GHz - ASUS Rampage III Gene Republic of Gamers - 6GB RAM OCZ CL7 XTC Platinum PC3-12800 - ZOTAC GeForce GTX 480 - 64GB Crucial RealSSD C300 SATA II - 1TB Western Digital WD1002FAEX SATA II - Creative Soundblaster Xi-Fi Titanium - Windows 7 Professional 64bit
#4361568 - 06/02/17 11:58 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: csThor]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
Originally Posted by csThor
Originally Posted by PanzerMeyer
Originally Posted by csThor
and the general habit of the german political body to consider military procurement as industry subsidy for german defense contractors .



That's definitely not unique to Germany. Most Left wing politicians in the US also think that way.


Ah, but do US politicians enforce certain procurement decisions even if it merely adds one more troublesome issue to the plate of the armed forces?


Three words: Littoral Combat Ship.

Also know as the LCS, or as critics like I call it "Little Crappy Ship".


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4361586 - 06/02/17 01:36 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 17,301
Nixer Offline
Scaliwag and Survivor
Nixer  Offline
Scaliwag and Survivor
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 17,301
Living with the Trees
Literally Can't Sail.

Some admirals should be reduced to seaman for that boondoggle,


Censored

Look for me on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook or Tic Toc...or anywhere you may frequent, besides SimHq, on the Global Scam Net. Aka, the internet.
I am not there, never have been or ever will be, but the fruitless search may be more gratifying then the "content" you might otherwise be exposed to.

"There's a sucker born every minute."
Phineas Taylor Barnum

#4361594 - 06/02/17 02:14 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
csThor Offline
Senior Member
csThor  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
Germany
I see your LCS and raise one F125, also known as Wannabe-Colonial Gunboat-Cruiser with weight issues. rolleyes


Intel i7 960 @ 3.2 GHz - ASUS Rampage III Gene Republic of Gamers - 6GB RAM OCZ CL7 XTC Platinum PC3-12800 - ZOTAC GeForce GTX 480 - 64GB Crucial RealSSD C300 SATA II - 1TB Western Digital WD1002FAEX SATA II - Creative Soundblaster Xi-Fi Titanium - Windows 7 Professional 64bit
#4361605 - 06/02/17 02:45 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: csThor]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
Originally Posted by csThor
I see your LCS and raise one F125, also known as Wannabe-Colonial Gunboat-Cruiser with weight issues. rolleyes


Well at least if/when the F125 has it's problems ironed out it will be a well armed warship. If LCS were to function exactly as intended it would still be under armed, over priced and too short legged (ie range).


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4361629 - 06/02/17 04:12 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
csThor Offline
Senior Member
csThor  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,669
Germany
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by csThor
I see your LCS and raise one F125, also known as Wannabe-Colonial Gunboat-Cruiser with weight issues. rolleyes


Well at least if/when the F125 has it's problems ironed out it will be a well armed warship. If LCS were to function exactly as intended it would still be under armed, over priced and too short legged (ie range).


Actually ... well, not really. No VLS (meaning minimal Air Defense capabilities), it's not yet clear if it'll get some kind of Anti-Ship-Missile system after the Harpoons get past their "Scrap by" date, factually zero Anti-Submarine capabilities ... For a 7,000 ton warship it's simply an oversized, overprized and overweight cruiser-sized Wannabe-Gunboat for colonial adventures (which our constituency likes sooo much /s).


Intel i7 960 @ 3.2 GHz - ASUS Rampage III Gene Republic of Gamers - 6GB RAM OCZ CL7 XTC Platinum PC3-12800 - ZOTAC GeForce GTX 480 - 64GB Crucial RealSSD C300 SATA II - 1TB Western Digital WD1002FAEX SATA II - Creative Soundblaster Xi-Fi Titanium - Windows 7 Professional 64bit
#4361655 - 06/02/17 07:00 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 17,301
Nixer Offline
Scaliwag and Survivor
Nixer  Offline
Scaliwag and Survivor
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 17,301
Living with the Trees
Meanwhile the Russians are planning on building a crap ton of missile frigates.


Frigates are Us says Russia


Censored

Look for me on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook or Tic Toc...or anywhere you may frequent, besides SimHq, on the Global Scam Net. Aka, the internet.
I am not there, never have been or ever will be, but the fruitless search may be more gratifying then the "content" you might otherwise be exposed to.

"There's a sucker born every minute."
Phineas Taylor Barnum

#4361662 - 06/02/17 08:08 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: PanzerMeyer]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 723
jens198 Offline
Member
jens198  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 723
Nuremberg, Germany
Originally Posted by PanzerMeyer
I'm all in favor of selling F-35's to Germany. Why not? The US sold them the F-104 and the F-4 in the past. smile


and we were veeerryy happy with those F-4s (not so much with the F-104s).


"It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue."
#4361699 - 06/02/17 11:18 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
I'm not surprised at all if Germany "jumps in" the F-35.

If the German Air Force wants to be relevant (as well as any other western air forces) it only has a single option -> The F-35.
Sorry for those that are fan of European-made fighter aircraft but that's the real and harsh truth!

And also don't get with the Typhoon. The Typhoon and other 4.5th gen fighter aircraft such as the Super Hornet, Rafale, Gripen NG and older 4th gen fighter aircraft are already completely obsolete compared to the F-35 and are already obsolete against modern and advanced air defence systems such as the S-400 as they will be obsolete against 5th gen fighter aircraft currently in development such as the Russian T-50 and/or the Chinese J-20 and J-31.
Designing and building a European 5th gen fighter aircraft is also NOT a solution/option since even if for example Germany and France decided to develop together such aircraft starting from TODAY it would take them something like 20 years or more (until the aircraft actually enters in service) and by that time other nations such and namely the US (together with close allies) would probably be developing a 6th gen fighter aircraft (whatever that might be) which probably wouldn't take long to field (by the time the European 5th gen fighter aircraft would field). Or resuming by the time a European 5th gen fighter aircraft enters in service it would be already outdated.

As the "cherry on top of the cake", Britain and Italy which are also Eurofighter Typhoon partners (together with Germany) are also F-35/JSF partner nations are will buy the F-35 which will be their future fighter aircraft, so the Typhoon wouldn't certainly be a reason for Germany not "jumping" in the F-35.

#4361704 - 06/02/17 11:36 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 6,968
Jayhawk Offline
Silastic Armorfiend
Jayhawk  Offline
Silastic Armorfiend
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 6,968
Docking Bay 94
“The hen is the wisest of all the animal creation, because she never cackles until the egg is laid.”

- Abraham Lincoln


Why men throw their lives away attacking an armed Witcher... I'll never know. Something wrong with my face?
#4361708 - 06/03/17 12:56 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
considering that the oldest EF2000 is less than 15 years old , that they can last 30-35 years and that they have not yet received the last of them, the earliest Germany would seriously start to consider the F-35 as a Eurofighter Typhoon replacement would be 10 years from now and then if they decide to buy it , schedule first deliveries 20 years from now.

Their 60-90 Tornado fleet on the other hand is the one that is old and in need of replacing - and since it is going soon to be phased out in the UK and Italy its replacement is a much more urgent need.

It would make much more sense for Germany then to consider strengthening their European bond by choosing a French alternative in the form of a two seat AESA Rafale ( since both Italy and the UK went the F-35 way ) and doing so would be a win-win for both France and Germany and avoid a F-35 covfefe .

#4361712 - 06/03/17 02:00 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Tom_Weiss]  
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,881
Meatsheild Offline
Arma3 guy!
Meatsheild  Offline
Arma3 guy!
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,881
Peoples Republic of Yorkshire
the f35 is doomed to be a failure for everyone except lockheed martin (who must be making an effing fortune from it!) Its impossible to make a good aircraft that can do everything (fighter, bomber, interceptor), it just turns into a plane full of compromises. Also, it makes each one flipping expensive, sure it may be super advanced system wise, but at the end of the day .. it'll either be bombing rebels or the Chinese/Russians who will shoot em down in droves because they'll have 20-30 easy to use and replace planes to every 1 high maintenance, hard to replace plane and (harder to replace) pilot.

<highly cynical mode activated>

Its just a pipe dream by the top brass who are most likely getting back handers from lockheed martin to keep the thing alive

</highly cynical mode activated>

much better to have more specialised aircraft that excel at what they were made to do.


SimHQ Arma3 sessions, weekly semi-serious co-op action for all ages and skills! check the forum sticky for more info!

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3732626/SimHQ_Arma3_Sessions,_who,_wha#Post3732626

All spelling errors are included free of charge and courtesy of a broken spell checker!
#4361717 - 06/03/17 03:07 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Meatsheild]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
Originally Posted by Meatsheild
Its impossible to make a good aircraft that can do everything (fighter, bomber, interceptor), it just turns into a plane full of compromises.


Ahem... F-4 Phantom, F-15 Eagle/Strike Eagle, F-14 Tomcat/Bombcat...


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4361722 - 06/03/17 05:13 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Crane Hunter Offline
Veteran
Crane Hunter  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Master Meme-er
Originally Posted by ricnunes
I'm not surprised at all if Germany "jumps in" the F-35.

If the German Air Force wants to be relevant (as well as any other western air forces) it only has a single option -> The F-35.
Sorry for those that are fan of European-made fighter aircraft but that's the real and harsh truth!

And also don't get with the Typhoon. The Typhoon and other 4.5th gen fighter aircraft such as the Super Hornet, Rafale, Gripen NG and older 4th gen fighter aircraft are already completely obsolete compared to the F-35 and are already obsolete against modern and advanced air defence systems such as the S-400 as they will be obsolete against 5th gen fighter aircraft currently in development such as the Russian T-50 and/or the Chinese J-20 and J-31.
Designing and building a European 5th gen fighter aircraft is also NOT a solution/option since even if for example Germany and France decided to develop together such aircraft starting from TODAY it would take them something like 20 years or more (until the aircraft actually enters in service) and by that time other nations such and namely the US (together with close allies) would probably be developing a 6th gen fighter aircraft (whatever that might be) which probably wouldn't take long to field (by the time the European 5th gen fighter aircraft would field). Or resuming by the time a European 5th gen fighter aircraft enters in service it would be already outdated.

As the "cherry on top of the cake", Britain and Italy which are also Eurofighter Typhoon partners (together with Germany) are also F-35/JSF partner nations are will buy the F-35 which will be their future fighter aircraft, so the Typhoon wouldn't certainly be a reason for Germany not "jumping" in the F-35.


New radar advances, particularly radio-photonic technology, sound like they are going to severely limit the value of stealth measures (at least those that are applicable to a fighter aircraft) by next decade, which should give the older designs a new least on life.

#4361725 - 06/03/17 06:42 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Tom_Weiss]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
Flogger23m Offline
Senior Member
Flogger23m  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
US
Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss
considering that the oldest EF2000 is less than 15 years old , that they can last 30-35 years and that they have not yet received the last of them, the earliest Germany would seriously start to consider the F-35 as a Eurofighter Typhoon replacement would be 10 years from now and then if they decide to buy it , schedule first deliveries 20 years from now.

Their 60-90 Tornado fleet on the other hand is the one that is old and in need of replacing - and since it is going soon to be phased out in the UK and Italy its replacement is a much more urgent need.

It would make much more sense for Germany then to consider strengthening their European bond by choosing a French alternative in the form of a two seat AESA Rafale ( since both Italy and the UK went the F-35 way ) and doing so would be a win-win for both France and Germany and avoid a F-35 covfefe .


The Rafale is a decent plane, but it lacks a lot of the capabilities of the F-35. Dated anti tank missiles, no modern HARM, no option for a low RCS, ect. On the other hand, it doesn't do anything the Eurofighter doesn't. Choosing both serves nothing but politics and a logistical nightmare. It would be similar to the USAF buying F-18s to go along with the F-16s we were buying the the 1980s. They both fill a similar role and it makes no sense to operate both.

#4361734 - 06/03/17 11:53 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 723
jens198 Offline
Member
jens198  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 723
Nuremberg, Germany
Quote
Originally Posted by Meatsheild
Its impossible to make a good aircraft that can do everything (fighter, bomber, interceptor), it just turns into a plane full of compromises.


Tornado? F-16!?

Last edited by jens198; 06/03/17 11:54 AM.

"It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue."
#4361735 - 06/03/17 12:03 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Flogger23m]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
Originally Posted by Flogger23m

The Rafale is a decent plane, but it lacks a lot of the capabilities of the F-35. Dated anti tank missiles, no modern HARM, no option for a low RCS, ect. On the other hand, it doesn't do anything the Eurofighter doesn't. Choosing both serves nothing but politics and a logistical nightmare. It would be similar to the USAF buying F-18s to go along with the F-16s we were buying the the 1980s. They both fill a similar role and it makes no sense to operate both.


the Rafale has integrated the new Meteor AAM and will receive a new active AESA, will be in production for the next 20 years - probably will win the Indian Navy 55+ order competition and receive additional Indian Air Force orders on top of the 36 it already has won not to mention a 100+ AdA order still to be fulfilled, it is as state of the art as it can be.

the Gripen E is about to enter production for the SwAF and FAB and is likely to win the Swiss competition for 30-70 new fighters, will be around for another 20 years as well.

the Typhoon has enough orders to remain in production at least 5 more years

European Aerospace industry is not about to commit suicide just because LM has a marketing campaign for stealth.

I like the F-35 but with the Israelis just about to order new F-15I you can see that this artificial 4th generation thing is nothing more than a gimmick - the Su-35 is a fourth generation fighter and I don't think anyone believes that it is not a match for a stealth F-35A.

Last edited by Tom_Weiss; 06/03/17 12:15 PM.
#4361737 - 06/03/17 12:12 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Meatsheild]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Meatsheild
the f35 is doomed to be a failure for everyone except lockheed martin (who must be making an effing fortune from it!) Its impossible to make a good aircraft that can do everything (fighter, bomber, interceptor), it just turns into a plane full of compromises. Also, it makes each one flipping expensive, sure it may be super advanced system wise, but at the end of the day .. it'll either be bombing rebels or the Chinese/Russians who will shoot em down in droves because they'll have 20-30 easy to use and replace planes to every 1 high maintenance, hard to replace plane and (harder to replace) pilot.

<highly cynical mode activated>

Its just a pipe dream by the top brass who are most likely getting back handers from lockheed martin to keep the thing alive

</highly cynical mode activated>

much better to have more specialised aircraft that excel at what they were made to do.



With all due respect, you've been living under a rock or something like that haven't you?

#4361738 - 06/03/17 12:23 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Crane Hunter]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Crane Hunter

New radar advances, particularly radio-photonic technology, sound like they are going to severely limit the value of stealth measures (at least those that are applicable to a fighter aircraft) by next decade, which should give the older designs a new least on life.


The problem with all those "radar and other technology advances" is that even if you can actually detect a Stealth aircraft like the F-35 at longer distances those same technologies WILL ALWAYS detect non-Stealth aircraft at even longer distances!
For example imagine a current radar that can detect a Super Hornet, Rafale or a Typhoon at 200km but it can only detect a F-35 at lets say 30Km. Suddenly you came with that "advanced radar or technology" that you're talking about, then the following happens:
- Probably you'll be able to detect the F-35 at lets say 100-120Km (a considerable boost, ok) but then you'll be able to detect a Super Hornet, Rafale or a Typhoon, etc... at 400km or more with this same tecnology!
So what does this mean? It means that the F-35 will always have the advantage over other existing aircraft no matter what new technology you come up with, and these are facts!

Like it or not, Stealth technology is here to stay just like, retractable gears, jet engines, airborne radars, guided missiles/weapons, ECM, etc... before it. You either jump at the new technology or you'll get behind, simple as that!
And that goes for Canada as well...

#4361739 - 06/03/17 12:24 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Tom_Weiss]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss

- the Su-35 is a fourth generation fighter and I don't think anyone believes that it is not a match for a stealth F-35A.



It can't shoot what it can't detect. Can't detect first at least.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4361740 - 06/03/17 12:27 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss

- the Su-35 is a fourth generation fighter and I don't think anyone believes that it is not a match for a stealth F-35A.


The Su-35 is not even remotely and even in your wildest dreams a match or even a remotely a close match to the F-35A!

Resuming the Su-35 doesn't have a single chance against the F-35A unless save for an odd stroke of luck!

#4361742 - 06/03/17 12:57 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
When an F-117A was shot down by a Serbian SA-3 and another F-117A landed so damaged after being hit by another Serbian SAM that it was a write off everybody was surprised, how come an obsolete good for nothing SAM could have shot down a stealth fighter ?

the USAF soon retired it ...

very much like the F-4B was at the onset of the Vietnam War, with its mighty AIM-7 and AIM-9 missiles and ready to dominate the skies , the F-35 is a long way from being what it is touted to be.

That is why the Israelis are hedging their bets and about to order new F-15I to replace their F-15A.

from what I read - the greatest asset that the F-35 has is its networking capability and that allows it to leverage its stealth against a target.

#4361745 - 06/03/17 02:02 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Tom_Weiss]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss
When an F-117A was shot down by a Serbian SA-3 and another F-117A landed so damaged after being hit by another Serbian SAM that it was a write off everybody was surprised, how come an obsolete good for nothing SAM could have shot down a stealth fighter ?


That F-117 was lost because of lax planning, using the same route night after night. Stealth isn't magic, no one ever claimed it was, it requires proper tactics and those were not applied in the case of this F-117 loss.


Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss
very much like the F-4B was at the onset of the Vietnam War, with its mighty AIM-7 and AIM-9 missiles and ready to dominate the skies , the F-35 is a long way from being what it is touted to be.


That's an opinion, not backed up by any facts that you're presented.


Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss
That is why the Israelis are hedging their bets and about to order new F-15I to replace their F-15A.


The Israelis are also buying F-35's. What you're saying is the same as me claiming the F-15 was a failure because the USAF bought more F-16's than F-15's. The reason the Israelis are buying more F-15's is because their current F-15's are getting old and the F-15 is still a useful aircraft.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4361750 - 06/03/17 02:18 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
the Serbs showed that once you knew where to look - it became very easy to shot down a then state of the art stealth fighter with an obsolete SAM missile

the F-35A is a great aircraft - so are many others, this 5th generation thing is a marketing gimmick, I am sure that an F-16V or F-16E is more than capable for every day needs.

the Israelis are replacing their F-16A with the F-35, the F-35A was developed as an F-16 replacement.

the F-22 is an F-15 replacement, since there is no F-22 available, the Israelis are (probably) buying new F-15I because they need a two seat, twin engine multi role aircraft to replace their F-15A/B.

#4361754 - 06/03/17 02:29 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Tom_Weiss]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Offline
Veteran
Arthonon  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss
the Serbs showed that once you knew where to look - it became very easy to shot down a then state of the art stealth fighter with an obsolete SAM missile

the F-35A is a great aircraft - so are many others, this 5th generation thing is a marketing gimmick, I am sure that an F-16V or F-16E is more than capable for every day needs.

the Israelis are replacing their F-16A with the F-35, the F-35A was developed as an F-16 replacement.

the F-22 is an F-15 replacement, since there is no F-22 available, the Israelis are (probably) buying new F-15I because they need a two seat, twin engine multi role aircraft to replace their F-15A/B.

Wow, if only the experts in the US, Denmark, Norway, Britain, Italy, Turkey, Australia, and yes, even Israel, had spoken to you first they could have realized how much more you know about it than them (even though they have access to top secret information about it) and they could have saved a lot of money!


Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4361755 - 06/03/17 02:30 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Tom_Weiss]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss
the Serbs showed that once you knew where to look - it became very easy to shot down a then state of the art stealth fighter with an obsolete SAM missile




The only reason they knew where to look was because USAF planners had the aircraft flying the same routes all the time. Seriously, that's not hard to understand.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4361756 - 06/03/17 02:43 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
exactly - once the Serbs realized that the USAF was doing something they should never have done , they set their SAM to look where the F-117A were supposed to be, showing that stealth means reducing not eliminating the capability of SAM to engage - what made this incident so awful was that they used a SA-3 to shoot it down.

#4361762 - 06/03/17 03:40 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Offline
Veteran
Arthonon  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
Most accounts of the shoot-down show that they didn't shoot it down by locking on a missile and firing it and hitting it, they knew roughly where and when to look, used some radars to narrow the area, and volleyed multiple missiles, assisted by manual/visual guidance, and one of them exploded near enough to cause damage requiring the pilot to eject. It was the perfect set of circumstances to use that technique (knowing where it would be, only one aircraft to aim at and dedicate a lot of resources toward it, etc.), and they weren't able to shoot anymore down after that, so they certainly didn't have some sure-fire technique for tracking and shooting down stealth aircraft.


Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4361768 - 06/03/17 04:00 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
they shot down 1 and damaged another F-117 , a write off after landing - and from what I read, it was not a volley of SA-3 and blind luck.

the Serbs managed to shot down a Sea Harrier and a Mirage 2000 as well thanks to being well trained and knowing their stuff, not every adversary is incompetent.

#4361770 - 06/03/17 04:07 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Franze Offline
Member
Franze  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Originally Posted by Meatsheild
Its impossible to make a good aircraft that can do everything (fighter, bomber, interceptor), it just turns into a plane full of compromises.


Ahem... F-4 Phantom, F-15 Eagle/Strike Eagle, F-14 Tomcat/Bombcat...


F-15E is not widely considered a good fighter/interceptor and the F-14 was #%&*$# as an attack aircraft compared to the A-6.

I'll give you the F-4, but it also didn't sling a whole lot of advanced munitions either.

These F-35 threads never end well.

#4361779 - 06/03/17 04:59 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Franze]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
Originally Posted by Franze
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
[quote=Meatsheild]Its impossible to make a good aircraft that can do everything (fighter, bomber, interceptor), it just turns into a plane full of compromises.


Ahem... F-4 Phantom, F-15 Eagle/Strike Eagle, F-14 Tomcat/Bombcat...


Originally Posted by Franze
F-15E is not widely considered a good fighter/interceptor and the F-14 was #%&*$# as an attack aircraft compared to the A-6.



I never said the F-15E was a good fighter, but the F-15C (same basic aircraft) has been the best fighter in existence for most of it's lifetime.

And comparing a dedicated bomber (A-6) to a fighter bomber (F-14B) is meaningless, the A-6 also is a crappy fighter but that proves nothing.

I should also throw in the F-16 and F/A-18, both of which are excellent multi role aircraft.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4361791 - 06/03/17 06:19 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Tom_Weiss]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
Flogger23m Offline
Senior Member
Flogger23m  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
US
Originally Posted by Tom_Weiss
Originally Posted by Flogger23m

The Rafale is a decent plane, but it lacks a lot of the capabilities of the F-35. Dated anti tank missiles, no modern HARM, no option for a low RCS, ect. On the other hand, it doesn't do anything the Eurofighter doesn't. Choosing both serves nothing but politics and a logistical nightmare. It would be similar to the USAF buying F-18s to go along with the F-16s we were buying the the 1980s. They both fill a similar role and it makes no sense to operate both.


the Rafale has integrated the new Meteor AAM and will receive a new active AESA, will be in production for the next 20 years - probably will win the Indian Navy 55+ order competition and receive additional Indian Air Force orders on top of the 36 it already has won not to mention a 100+ AdA order still to be fulfilled, it is as state of the art as it can be.

the Gripen E is about to enter production for the SwAF and FAB and is likely to win the Swiss competition for 30-70 new fighters, will be around for another 20 years as well.

the Typhoon has enough orders to remain in production at least 5 more years

European Aerospace industry is not about to commit suicide just because LM has a marketing campaign for stealth.

I like the F-35 but with the Israelis just about to order new F-15I you can see that this artificial 4th generation thing is nothing more than a gimmick - the Su-35 is a fourth generation fighter and I don't think anyone believes that it is not a match for a stealth F-35A.


The Meteor is great, but the AIM-120D already has excellent range and this will not fix the shortcomings in the Rafale's arsenal. Even the Super Hornet is getting the Brimstone integrated. At best, the Rafale will be getting a radar that is hopefully on par with that of the Super Hornet, roughly two decades later. The F-35 has everything out of the box. Again, you're looking at the advantages of politics and not capability. There is zero reason from a capability perspective to buy a Rafale or Gripen when you already have Eurofighters. Considering the logistical problems that seem to plague the German military, adding another plane that fills the same role with the same capabilities is pointless. The F-35 brings a lot of tech to the table that the other offerings don't have, and will likely cost less to.

As for the Su-35, it is a Russian design and is inferior to western designs. Just about everything that came out of the USSR was inferior. There are few exceptions - SAMs, especially mobile SAMs, mobile shell based artillery, the R-73 and a few others. Everything else was grossly inferior. Night vision, thermals, radars, missiles, armored vehicles, small arms. The latest versions of the Su-35 are utilizing French avionics to help minimize the gap. The biggest lacking of the Flanker series are the weapons, followed by the avionics. Even Russian special forces are using AR-15s, HK 417s and Glocks. All western weapons.

Unless money is a concern, the F-15SA or similar Strike Eagle variant is a much better option than a Flanker.

#4361804 - 06/03/17 07:35 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
RSColonel_131st Offline
Lifer
RSColonel_131st  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
Vienna, 2nd rock left.
Interesting to see how people fall fir the LM marketing gimmick.

#4361806 - 06/03/17 07:53 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Crane Hunter Offline
Veteran
Crane Hunter  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Master Meme-er
Originally Posted by ricnunes
Originally Posted by Crane Hunter

New radar advances, particularly radio-photonic technology, sound like they are going to severely limit the value of stealth measures (at least those that are applicable to a fighter aircraft) by next decade, which should give the older designs a new least on life.


The problem with all those "radar and other technology advances" is that even if you can actually detect a Stealth aircraft like the F-35 at longer distances those same technologies WILL ALWAYS detect non-Stealth aircraft at even longer distances!
For example imagine a current radar that can detect a Super Hornet, Rafale or a Typhoon at 200km but it can only detect a F-35 at lets say 30Km. Suddenly you came with that "advanced radar or technology" that you're talking about, then the following happens:
- Probably you'll be able to detect the F-35 at lets say 100-120Km (a considerable boost, ok) but then you'll be able to detect a Super Hornet, Rafale or a Typhoon, etc... at 400km or more with this same tecnology!
So what does this mean? It means that the F-35 will always have the advantage over other existing aircraft no matter what new technology you come up with, and these are facts!

Like it or not, Stealth technology is here to stay just like, retractable gears, jet engines, airborne radars, guided missiles/weapons, ECM, etc... before it. You either jump at the new technology or you'll get behind, simple as that!
And that goes for Canada as well...


At some point detection ranges become long enough that stealth becomes of marginal value, except as an ECM assisting measure.

That has to be weighed of course against all the negatives that a stealth optimized design brings to the table, high costs, avionics packaging and cooling constraints, small internal weapons load, aerodynamic ccompromises etc.

#4361810 - 06/03/17 08:36 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: RSColonel_131st]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Offline
Veteran
Arthonon  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
Originally Posted by RSColonel_131st
Interesting to see how people fall fir the LM marketing gimmick.

So, are you saying the militaries of all of the countries buying the F-35 have fallen for a marketing gimmick, yet you are somehow figuring it out on your own?


Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4361820 - 06/03/17 09:29 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Flogger23m]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Crane Hunter Offline
Veteran
Crane Hunter  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Master Meme-er
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
As for the Su-35, it is a Russian design and is inferior to western designs. Just about everything that came out of the USSR was inferior. There are few exceptions - SAMs, especially mobile SAMs, mobile shell based artillery, the R-73 and a few others. Everything else was grossly inferior. Night vision, thermals, radars, missiles, armored vehicles, small arms. The latest versions of the Su-35 are utilizing French avionics to help minimize the gap. The biggest lacking of the Flanker series are the weapons, followed by the avionics. Even Russian special forces are using AR-15s, HK 417s and Glocks. All western weapons.

Unless money is a concern, the F-15SA or similar Strike Eagle variant is a much better option than a Flanker.


The only Soviet systems that were significantly technically inferior as a rule were those that relied on their comparatively primitive miniaturized electronics and/or very precise standard of manufacture, or else where the comparable Western system represents a much greater "gold plated" level of investment.

A good example being the F-4 Phantom, yeah it was more technically capable than contemporary Soviet planes, but it also cost 4 to 5 times as much. Having your tactical fighter force soaking up so much more of a given budget means that you have to accept shortcomings in other areas.

#4361823 - 06/03/17 09:53 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Crane Hunter]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
Flogger23m Offline
Senior Member
Flogger23m  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
US
Originally Posted by Crane Hunter
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
As for the Su-35, it is a Russian design and is inferior to western designs. Just about everything that came out of the USSR was inferior. There are few exceptions - SAMs, especially mobile SAMs, mobile shell based artillery, the R-73 and a few others. Everything else was grossly inferior. Night vision, thermals, radars, missiles, armored vehicles, small arms. The latest versions of the Su-35 are utilizing French avionics to help minimize the gap. The biggest lacking of the Flanker series are the weapons, followed by the avionics. Even Russian special forces are using AR-15s, HK 417s and Glocks. All western weapons.

Unless money is a concern, the F-15SA or similar Strike Eagle variant is a much better option than a Flanker.


The only Soviet systems that were significantly technically inferior as a rule were those that relied on their comparatively primitive miniaturized electronics and/or very precise standard of manufacture, or else where the comparable Western system represents a much greater "gold plated" level of investment.

A good example being the F-4 Phantom, yeah it was more technically capable than contemporary Soviet planes, but it also cost 4 to 5 times as much. Having your tactical fighter force soaking up so much more of a given budget means that you have to accept shortcomings in other areas.








It is true that Soviet equipment cost less, but most things were not 4-5 times cheaper. A lot of Soviet equipment was fairly expensive. Take the T-64 expensive, unreliable, short engine life ect. They had to design another tank, the T-72, as a cost effective solution. Factor that in for overall cost to. Then they had a repeat with the T-80, which resulted in more upgraded T-72s (T-90s). Then factor in the short life of most Soviet weapon designs. Flanker / MIGs have a shorter engine life than their western counterparts. The list goes on and on.

They did occasionally put out some good tech, but they were always behind the west. Both before and after the USSR.

#4361826 - 06/03/17 10:03 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: RSColonel_131st]  
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Franze Offline
Member
Franze  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Originally Posted by RSColonel_131st
Interesting to see how people fall fir the LM marketing gimmick.


Yeah, Sikorsky and Boeing should've done this kind of thing back when the RAH-66 was being developed. Could've had themselves a gold plated contract for 3 decades with 'too big to fail' written all over it.

Fortunately, Army Aviation tends to be a little bit more careful with their money and their equipment than the USAF.

#4361827 - 06/03/17 10:04 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
Has there ever been a Soviet/Russian fighter aircraft that enjoyed a superior kill to loss ratio against its American counterpart?


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4361830 - 06/03/17 10:16 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Crane Hunter Offline
Veteran
Crane Hunter  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Master Meme-er
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
Has there ever been a Soviet/Russian fighter aircraft that enjoyed a superior kill to loss ratio against its American counterpart?


None probably, but then again we've never seen the full might of the Soviet/Russian military pitted up against the kind of weak opposition that Western fighters have built up their records with.

#4361846 - 06/03/17 11:35 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
Flogger23m Offline
Senior Member
Flogger23m  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
US
Originally Posted by Franze
Originally Posted by RSColonel_131st
Interesting to see how people fall fir the LM marketing gimmick.


Yeah, Sikorsky and Boeing should've done this kind of thing back when the RAH-66 was being developed. Could've had themselves a gold plated contract for 3 decades with 'too big to fail' written all over it.

Fortunately, Army Aviation tends to be a little bit more careful with their money and their equipment than the USAF.


The blame goes largely to the USMC, which essentially required an almost entirely new plane. Add in the MV-22 (USAF also got some), M27 and whatnot, and the USMC is clearly getting a lot of unique things that are expensive. The Navy had little interest in the F-35 if I recall, they largely got into it because the naval F-14 replacement was cancelled. Which is why they pulled a fast one on Congress to get the Super Hornet and decided to buy a few F-35s to hold them over.

#4361848 - 06/03/17 11:55 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Flogger23m]  
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Franze Offline
Member
Franze  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Originally Posted by Flogger23m

The blame goes largely to the USMC, which essentially required an almost entirely new plane. Add in the MV-22 (USAF also got some), M27 and whatnot, and the USMC is clearly getting a lot of unique things that are expensive. The Navy had little interest in the F-35 if I recall, they largely got into it because the naval F-14 replacement was cancelled. Which is why they pulled a fast one on Congress to get the Super Hornet and decided to buy a few F-35s to hold them over.


The USMC's desire to have a Harrier replacement has some merit, but the issue I see is that they (or the commanders) will be reluctant to use the F-35 in a front line capacity as with the AV-8. The Peace Dividend of the '90s largely resulted in the F-35 becoming what it is today; had it remained as a F-16 replacement I sincerely doubt it would be as expensive nor as complex as it's all shaking out to be. By the same token, it might've gotten canned years ago for being a USAF exclusive toy, just like so many other defense projects over the past 2 decades.

The west has a very real problem in accepting practical "good enough" solutions as opposed to the "perfect" solutions; this is why we're in this boat today with so many defense industry pundits running around screaming about the Su-35, J-11, and whatever, without realizing that those aircraft are incremental upgrades to ye olde Su-27. I'd put an F-15E/K/S/Q and an F-16E/F up against an Su-35 any day -- especially if I've got the better pilots.

#4361922 - 06/04/17 01:35 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Crane Hunter]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Crane Hunter

At some point detection ranges become long enough that stealth becomes of marginal value, except as an ECM assisting measure.

That has to be weighed of course against all the negatives that a stealth optimized design brings to the table, high costs, avionics packaging and cooling constraints, small internal weapons load, aerodynamic ccompromises etc.


Nope!
You are completely missing the point that it's not only the detection ranges that have their range increased. You are missing the fact that all sorts of weapons also have had their ranges increased and vastly extended.
For example with since the 1980's one of the western longer range guided air-to-ground weapons was the AGM-65 Maverick with a maximum range of around 12 Nautical Miles (or 22Km) which today is being replaced by weapons such as the Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) which have a maximum range in excess of 60 nautical miles (or 110km).
Another example is for example the 40N6 Surface-to-Air missile (SAM) developed by the Russians for their S-400 Air Defence System, this missile (40N6) has a range of 400km (Yes, four hundred kilometers)!
Modern Air-to-air missiles have longer ranges then their predecessors, and so on...

Therefore Non-Stealth aircraft are far more vulnerable to these newest weapons (SAMs and Air-to-Air missile) while at the same time still being ineffective at releasing the newest and longer range air-to-ground weapons (without being engaged by the enemy).
So yes, Stealth will be more relevant than ever!

And there's another evidence that completely dismisses your "anti-stealth" theories which is the FACT that other countries such as Russia and China are developing their own 5th gen STEALTH fighter aircraft (T-50, J-20 and J-31).
If Stealth was so "useless" and without any future why would these other countries also try to develop such aircraft??

Again, like it or not Stealth is the future together with net-centric warfare. Actually Stealth is an extremely important component of net-centric warfare since it allows sensors to get closer to the enemy and thus providing more reliable information.

Resuming, NOT jumping into the F-35 = 2nd tier Air Force.
If Canada wants to become a 2nd tier Air Force it's their (wrong) choice. Apparently Germany doesn't want to remain a 2nd tier Air Force hence why it seems interested in the F-35.

#4361925 - 06/04/17 01:54 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Also regarding Stealth I find odd to see some here referring to the shot down of the F-117 over Serbia as some sort of evidence on how "Stealth don't work". Really, I though that people here were mostly military aircraft "aficionados" which searched/researched more about the subject of military aviation.

Heck, there's even a Simulator which has its own room here at SimHQ, that sim being "SAM Simulator" which historically depicts this event (the F-117 shot down over Serbia). About this event and what is well known about it, is that the Serbs were lucky, very lucky indeed since:
- The F-117 basically overflew the SAM site! The F-117 was shot down (hit by an SA-3 missile) at a distance of roughly 17-19km from the SAM site and flow as close to the site as 13km away!
- Of course if a Stealth aircraft flies very close to a radar source (like it happened to that F-117) than the Stealth aircraft will be detected. Stealth doesn't means invisibility - It means that it can only be detected at much shorter ranges compared to non-stealth aircraft.
- The F-117 didn't have Electronic Warfare equipment! The F-117 didn't have ECM, it didn't have decoy (Chaffs and Flares) launchers. So even if the missile launch was detected there wasn't much the pilot could do.
- Some sources seem to point out that the F-117 wasn't even equipped with RWRs (although I'm not sure about this).

So go on, play SAM Simulator (its free) - This scenario is among the "easiest" by the way. Or together or alternatively research more about the subject. The commander of that Serbian SA-3 battery (Col. Zoltan Dani) provides very interesting and useful insight about the subject.

Finally between 1991 Desert Storm and 1999 Allied Force how many Non-Stealth aircraft were shot down and how many Stealth aircraft were shot down?? Just to ask... rolleyes

Last edited by ricnunes; 06/04/17 02:00 PM.
#4361927 - 06/04/17 02:33 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Flogger23m

The blame goes largely to the USMC, which essentially required an almost entirely new plane. Add in the MV-22 (USAF also got some), M27 and whatnot, and the USMC is clearly getting a lot of unique things that are expensive. The Navy had little interest in the F-35 if I recall, they largely got into it because the naval F-14 replacement was cancelled. Which is why they pulled a fast one on Congress to get the Super Hornet and decided to buy a few F-35s to hold them over.


Interesting that you mention the Osprey. This was another aircraft that everyone said it was going to be a failure but currently it's one of the most successful vertical lift aircraft in world and certainly the most successful of all vertical lift aircraft in the USMC current inventory.

The Navy is reluctant to jump into the F-35 because historically it's the most conservative service and the service with the most backward mentality when it comes to combat aircraft of all 3 services (USAF, USMC and USN). Again this backward mentality from the US Navy has some historical roots like for example:
- In the 1930's, the US Army Air Corp (USAF predecessor) first nonoplane fighter aircraft (P-28 Peashooter) flew for the first time in 1932 while the US Navy first nonoplane fighter aircraft (Brewster Buffalo) flew for the first time in 1937. In a period where military aviation evolved so fast 5 year a part is a LOT.
- The F4U Corsair. I believe that many here know the story. This one just makes the US Navy look so pathetic with its backwards mentality. Well who "won" with this mentality was the USMC and the Royal Navy. Heck after the Royal Navy proved that the F4U Corsair could be operated safely from Carriers and it was superior to the best US Navy aircraft the F6F Hellcat which by the way entered in service later than the Corsair, was when the US Navy itself adopted the F-4U Corsair and curiously after WWII the US Navy kept their Corsairs and retired the Hellcats. With the F-35, I believe that something along this lines will happen with the US Navy - mark my words!
- The US Navy adopted jet propelled aircraft later than the USAAF.
- The US Navy adopted swept-wing aircraft quite later than the USAF. For example in Korea the USAF employed the superior swept-wing F-86 Sabre as well as the North Koreans/Chinese/Soviets employed the superior swept-wing Mig-15 all of this while the US Navy with its backwards mentality only employed inferior straight-wing aircraft like the F9F Panther and F2H Banshee.
- USAF (and also the USMC) have Stealth aircraft in service, the US Navy has not!

The only era where the US Navy seemed have "dropped" its backwards mentality for a moment regarding combat aircraft was from the late 1950's until the early 1970's where it acquired excellent aircraft which gave the US Navy parity with the USAF - I'm talking about the F-8 Crusader, the F-4 Phantom (yes, the great F-4 Phantom) and the F-14 Tomcat.
I won't mention the F/A-18 Hornet because this was a forced decision on the Navy to acquire one of the USAF's LWF contesters (the YF-16 or YF-17) and thus the F/A-18 is a modified YF-17 and thus having a point of origin from the USAF.

Well, my point is that while reluctant regarding the F-35 (namely the F-35C) the US Navy will acquire the F-35C it will eventually replace the Super Hornet (and of course the legacy Hornet) specially when everyone else (namely the USAF and USMC) proves how superior the F-35 really is (which already have started to be proved with the latest Red Flag exercise).

Also point of notice is that the Super Hornet fleet is wearing off much faster than anticipated, namely because it's the Super Hornet fleet whose responsible for air-tanking (refueling) missions. So the new Super Hornet orders seem to be required in order to fill in this unexpected condition of the Super Hornet fleet and of course to keep in-country a second fighter aircraft manufacturing line and manufacturer open (resuming POLITICS!).

#4361951 - 06/04/17 07:16 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
Flogger23m Offline
Senior Member
Flogger23m  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
US
The Super Hornet is indeed being kept alive to keep Boeing in the market. This is why it is being pushed hard for export. It seems like it finally received two orders; although the Canadians made a mistake in selecting them at the last minute. But The USN has no interest in replacing Super Hornets with F-35s. They want their F-14 replacement, and likely their A-6 replacement. The F-35 fits the same role as the Super Hornet, and they're content with the Super Hornet in the bomb truck role. I'm not sure what ranges the USN intends to operate from, but I can imagine with limited landing options over water, they will almost always be carrying drop tanks. Making the low RCS capabilities fairly useless for the operational limitations of the F-35. Clearly, the want a larger sized, longer ranged aircraft like the F-22. The Super Hornet program was designed because they knew it would be well over a decade before a unique program would get approval. Even though the Super Hornet essentially is an entirely new plane, they got it quickly as it was a proposed "upgrade".

#4361955 - 06/04/17 07:39 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Flogger23m]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
RSColonel_131st Offline
Lifer
RSColonel_131st  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
Vienna, 2nd rock left.
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
... they will almost always be carrying drop tanks. Making the low RCS capabilities fairly useless for the operational limitations of the F-35.


Which is my main beef with the way Ricunes and some others here are painting the Stubblenose as the next coming of a weaponized Messias, and saying that the European Infidels are too stupid to grasp this relevation.

Unless you are fighting a very high tech enemy - and I don't even count China on that level because most of their copies, err.. own developments are not really so brilliant - you only need Stealth the first two to three days before the air defense network is taken care of and the enemy aircraft have no where to take off from. Then you end up using a very expensive plane with a very high maintenance requirement etc. as a dumb bomb truck for the rest of the campaign.

So unless you expect Euros to go to war versus US or us all together versus Russia (which is good at ground-based air defense, their fighters are still nothing exceptional) there is zero sense in fielding a force full of low-payload, low-RCS aircraft. And that's not even counting the fact that the Eurofighter Typhoon and other European 4+ Gen will also have methods to deal with ground defenses and capable enemy fighters.

That's why I said the LM Marketing Koolaid is cheap in this thread. For everything up to and including messing with Russia and China the "not so stealthy - just lower RCS" European aircraft would be doing a pretty decent job. If Germany should aquire a few F35 then as complimentary option to their own designs. And it's not like EADS/Airbus hasn't started working on Stealth projects themselves.

#4361960 - 06/04/17 08:06 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: RSColonel_131st]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Offline
Veteran
Arthonon  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
Originally Posted by RSColonel_131st
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
... they will almost always be carrying drop tanks. Making the low RCS capabilities fairly useless for the operational limitations of the F-35.


Which is my main beef with the way Ricunes and some others here are painting the Stubblenose as the next coming of a weaponized Messias, and saying that the European Infidels are too stupid to grasp this relevation.

Unless you are fighting a very high tech enemy - and I don't even count China on that level because most of their copies, err.. own developments are not really so brilliant - you only need Stealth the first two to three days before the air defense network is taken care of and the enemy aircraft have no where to take off from. Then you end up using a very expensive plane with a very high maintenance requirement etc. as a dumb bomb truck for the rest of the campaign.

So unless you expect Euros to go to war versus US or us all together versus Russia (which is good at ground-based air defense, their fighters are still nothing exceptional) there is zero sense in fielding a force full of low-payload, low-RCS aircraft. And that's not even counting the fact that the Eurofighter Typhoon and other European 4+ Gen will also have methods to deal with ground defenses and capable enemy fighters.

That's why I said the LM Marketing Koolaid is cheap in this thread. For everything up to and including messing with Russia and China the "not so stealthy - just lower RCS" European aircraft would be doing a pretty decent job. If Germany should aquire a few F35 then as complimentary option to their own designs. And it's not like EADS/Airbus hasn't started working on Stealth projects themselves.

Uh, wow, really? I mean, there's so much here to address that it's hard to know where to start. I mean, European countries are getting the F-35, so you can't even lump all of Europe together in the thinking of the F-35, and no one is saying that the existing aircraft don't have capabilities.

Also, sure, the F-35 has stealth, but that's not all it brings to the fight, and many say it's not the most important thing it brings, so even if it weren't stealthy, it would still have significant abilities that other aircraft don't have, and couldn't easily have added. As one example, during Red Flag exercises, an F-35 guided an air-to-ground munition while simultaneously taking out an air target. No other aircraft has been able to do that before, and while that might not be a common need, it demonstrates some of what it can do beyond simple stealth, and I'm certain there's a lot more.

You say the LM Marketing Koolaid is cheap in this thread, but I'd say there's a good amount of arrogance. So, tell us, what is it you know that all of the countries buying the F-35 don't? How is it that you are immune from the marketing but Norway, Italy, Britain, Israel, among others, are not? Please tell us, we'd love to hear your inside info.


Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4361969 - 06/04/17 09:24 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
RSColonel_131st Offline
Lifer
RSColonel_131st  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
Vienna, 2nd rock left.
Hmm, interesting reaction Ken, for I know you as a very good debater and not usually so emotionally involved.

Besides Stealth, do you think other aircraft might get the same sensor/integration capabilities in the future? Are you aware what a Typhoon or Gripen NG can do? I guess so. So what is the "magic golden ability" that will see the F35 win against a bunch of Su35 (and even easier against a bunch of Jendong-whatever) where an Eurofighter or Gripen will not?

I'm not saying that the EU countries buying the F35 are making a mistake fueled by LM marketing only. But neither did Italy or Britain make a mistake when chosing to purchase and operating the Typhoon, for the foreseeable future. Which is pretty much what I read out of this thread, not from your posts but those by others. Ricunes sounds like everything BUT the F35 is a mistake, outdated, needs to be replaced. Heck, even the USN is a stupid service because they are "too slow to adapt" according to him.

So, I don't think the Stubblenose is a stupid aircraft or devoit of real-life applicable advantages. I do however resent the tone of this thread voiced by some that the only salvation for any Western Air Force these days is to buy F35 and scrap their national or multi-national own designs. That is either patriotism run amok, or LM koolaid, your pick.

#4361970 - 06/04/17 09:30 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
RSColonel_131st Offline
Lifer
RSColonel_131st  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
Vienna, 2nd rock left.
Oh and Ken, if you want something very concrete to address, you can translate me this quote please:

Originally Posted by ricnunes
If the German Air Force wants to be relevant (as well as any other western air forces) it only has a single option -> The F-35.

And also don't get with the Typhoon. The Typhoon and other 4.5th gen fighter aircraft such as the Super Hornet, Rafale, Gripen NG and older 4th gen fighter aircraft are already completely obsolete compared to the F-35 and are already obsolete against modern and advanced air defence systems such as the S-400 as they will be obsolete against 5th gen fighter aircraft currently in development such as the Russian T-50 and/or the Chinese J-20 and J-31.


1) In which scenario would a GAF with a few hundred Typhoon NOT be relevant in the next 20 years?

2) In which scenario will the GAF face a dozen of S-400?

3) Which objective reports exsist on the capabilities of a T-50, J-20 and J-31 that mark them as superior to current European designs?

BTW, here's a somewhat recent article looking at purchase and operating costs of the F35 versus Super Hornet:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a21776/f-35-cheaper/


#4361975 - 06/04/17 09:59 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Offline
Veteran
Arthonon  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
Thank you for the compliment, I appreciate that, and thank you for clarifying your view. I thought you were directing your views toward anyone who thought the F-35 was a capable aircraft and the best choice for some AFs, and not specifically responding only to what ricnunes said. I wanted to make it clear that there are things the F-35 can do that you don't have to buy into LM marketing to find unique and useful, and wasn't emotional, I just thought a lot of what you posted was inaccurate and condescending.

I also didn't really get how supporting the F-35 was a dig at Europe, because European countries are buying them and contributing to the design and building of them (and ricnunes even referenced a US aircraft in his list). The F-35 is a very international program with a fair amount of European input, so choosing it is not much different than choosing a Typhoon to me.

When you say things like "I'm not saying that the EU countries buying the F35 are making a mistake fueled by LM marketing only" (emphasis mine), it gives the impression that you still think buying the F-35 is a mistake. I am not sure if that's what you meant, but it is the same impression I've gotten from your other posts, and if that's accurate, I do think it's arrogant to feel you know their needs better than those buying the F-35. If that's not what you meant, then I was mistaken and of course that comment doesn't apply.


Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4361976 - 06/04/17 10:01 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 173
WolverineFW Offline
Member
WolverineFW  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 173
Yes they were actually very lucky get that shootdown. According to information I have read, several things had to line up for it to actually succeed. As mentioned previosly, the F-117 squadrons were getting complacent and flying the same routes night after night. The Serbs also only had a 20-30 second window to identifiy the target on radar, lock on to it and fire the missle, otherwise they would have been eating a HARM sandwich for a midnight snack. The only reason they actually got a radar lock was because the F-117 had to open and close its bomb bay doors very briefly while deploying its weapon. This was automated by the jet, so it only was a window of 5-10 seconds where its radar signature increased drastically.


Originally Posted by ricnunes
Also regarding Stealth I find odd to see some here referring to the shot down of the F-117 over Serbia as some sort of evidence on how "Stealth don't work". Really, I though that people here were mostly military aircraft "aficionados" which searched/researched more about the subject of military aviation.

Heck, there's even a Simulator which has its own room here at SimHQ, that sim being "SAM Simulator" which historically depicts this event (the F-117 shot down over Serbia). About this event and what is well known about it, is that the Serbs were lucky, very lucky indeed since:
- The F-117 basically overflew the SAM site! The F-117 was shot down (hit by an SA-3 missile) at a distance of roughly 17-19km from the SAM site and flow as close to the site as 13km away!
- Of course if a Stealth aircraft flies very close to a radar source (like it happened to that F-117) than the Stealth aircraft will be detected. Stealth doesn't means invisibility - It means that it can only be detected at much shorter ranges compared to non-stealth aircraft.
- The F-117 didn't have Electronic Warfare equipment! The F-117 didn't have ECM, it didn't have decoy (Chaffs and Flares) launchers. So even if the missile launch was detected there wasn't much the pilot could do.
- Some sources seem to point out that the F-117 wasn't even equipped with RWRs (although I'm not sure about this).

So go on, play SAM Simulator (its free) - This scenario is among the "easiest" by the way. Or together or alternatively research more about the subject. The commander of that Serbian SA-3 battery (Col. Zoltan Dani) provides very interesting and useful insight about the subject.

Finally between 1991 Desert Storm and 1999 Allied Force how many Non-Stealth aircraft were shot down and how many Stealth aircraft were shot down?? Just to ask... rolleyes

#4361988 - 06/04/17 10:58 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 79
Tazz Offline
Junior Member
Tazz  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 79
Wellington, NZ
The most important factor was the F-117s using the same routes and therefore becoming predictable, possibly caused by Air Force planners underestimating the Serbians. That probably has something to do with the USAF not fully understanding or appreciating Yugoslavian culture and independence.

While Yugoslavia had always been supported by the Soviets, it was not a Soviet satellite state and has always remained fiercely independent under Colonel Tito. That also meant that the Serbs did not necessarily apply Soviet doctrine one-on-one, as for example the Iraqi's did.
Also access to education was very different in Yugoslavia than Iraq. In other words, the Serbs weren't Iraqi's, didn't think like Iraqi's and didn't use the same tactics as Iraqi's.

The SA-3 unit that shot down the F-117 was equipped with upgraded Pechora-M SA-3's and also equipped with thermal imaging range finders. Also, the unit was commanded by Col. Zoltán Dani - who very much understood the game surface-to-aerial warfare and seemed to be very knowledge on radar technology. It is said that Col. Dani had his P-18 acquisition radar modified to operate at a much lower frequency, in an attempt to locate the F-117s. Again, this was not your average Iraqi SAM commander.

I think that ultimately the F-117 shoot down was a combination of several factors - being on an a predictable flight path, in close proximity to the SA-3 site itself, with the modified P-18 possibly having been able to alert the SA-3 unit of the F-117s presence and having been able to point the missiles in the right spot. I cannot find any conclusive statement to say that the SA-3 unit was actually able to get a firm lock on the F-117 using the X-band targeting radar or if they used the thermal imaging sights to launch the two SA-3 missiles at the F-117 but the effect remains the same, the close proximity impact was sufficient to knock the F-117 out of the skies.

What I do not believe is that this was a case of sheer luck, with the F-117 being hit by a blind volley of unguided missiles. Regardless of the final acquisition, in my mind the SA-3 unit knew the F-117s were there and were able to accurately target Lt. Col. Zelko's aircraft. Which had neither RLS (which had been removed during the 1980s for being ineffective) nor RWR, given that the F-117 wasn't supposed to be targeted by radar in the first place.


Last edited by Tazz; 06/04/17 11:00 PM.
#4361989 - 06/04/17 11:06 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: RSColonel_131st]  
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Franze Offline
Member
Franze  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Originally Posted by RSColonel_131st

Which is my main beef with the way Ricunes and some others here are painting the Stubblenose as the next coming of a weaponized Messias, and saying that the European Infidels are too stupid to grasp this relevation.

Unless you are fighting a very high tech enemy - and I don't even count China on that level because most of their copies, err.. own developments are not really so brilliant - you only need Stealth the first two to three days before the air defense network is taken care of and the enemy aircraft have no where to take off from. Then you end up using a very expensive plane with a very high maintenance requirement etc. as a dumb bomb truck for the rest of the campaign.

So unless you expect Euros to go to war versus US or us all together versus Russia (which is good at ground-based air defense, their fighters are still nothing exceptional) there is zero sense in fielding a force full of low-payload, low-RCS aircraft. And that's not even counting the fact that the Eurofighter Typhoon and other European 4+ Gen will also have methods to deal with ground defenses and capable enemy fighters.

That's why I said the LM Marketing Koolaid is cheap in this thread. For everything up to and including messing with Russia and China the "not so stealthy - just lower RCS" European aircraft would be doing a pretty decent job. If Germany should aquire a few F35 then as complimentary option to their own designs. And it's not like EADS/Airbus hasn't started working on Stealth projects themselves.


The very real problem is that there's a lot of assumptions that stealth, and stealth alone, will win any future fights; this ignores the reality that war isn't just about one small part, but a variety of pieces coming together. One of the key reasons why the F-117 was so successful in ODS, for example, had to do with the huge amount of EW support they received. The EF-111 and EA-6B were invaluable in their jamming roles, and coupled with SEAD aircraft all around, made it very difficult to effectively combat a stealth aircraft like the F-117. Nowadays, the only EW aircraft is the EA-18G and it's exclusively a Navy mission. Is the USAF going to put a full suite of EW systems on the F-35, or will they continue to rely on the Navy to carry out that task?

There can be no doubt that the F-35 represents a massive technological leap in aircraft design, systems integration, software, stealth, etc. but this all has to be tempered by the question of whether or not it will be as practical as less complex aircraft. Does it make sense to have the F-35 when unmanned systems will -- and are -- changing the future of aerial warfare?

It's also worth pointing out that one of the key reasons why the A-10 is so endeared isn't exclusively due to the aircraft itself, but the people around it. You will seldom find people who know how to do their mission as well as A-10 crews, as well as the professionalism they surround themselves with. An F-16 pilot is not going to be well trained on CAS, FAC, etc. as the guys dedicated to that mission -- it is, after all, not his primary job. If the F-35 enters that picture, the guys operating them need to make sure where their focus is -- as well as the guys above them who know and understand that the F-35 in that mission will have to take risks to accomplish it. No amount of technology is going to make up for a pilot that bombs refugees by accident because he doesn't know how to do his mission.

#4361992 - 06/04/17 11:14 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Crane Hunter Offline
Veteran
Crane Hunter  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Master Meme-er
Originally Posted by ricnunes


Nope!
You are completely missing the point that it's not only the detection ranges that have their range increased. You are missing the fact that all sorts of weapons also have had their ranges increased and vastly extended.
For example with since the 1980's one of the western longer range guided air-to-ground weapons was the AGM-65 Maverick with a maximum range of around 12 Nautical Miles (or 22Km) which today is being replaced by weapons such as the Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) which have a maximum range in excess of 60 nautical miles (or 110km).
Another example is for example the 40N6 Surface-to-Air missile (SAM) developed by the Russians for their S-400 Air Defence System, this missile (40N6) has a range of 400km (Yes, four hundred kilometers)!
Modern Air-to-air missiles have longer ranges then their predecessors, and so on...

Therefore Non-Stealth aircraft are far more vulnerable to these newest weapons (SAMs and Air-to-Air missile) while at the same time still being ineffective at releasing the newest and longer range air-to-ground weapons (without being engaged by the enemy).
So yes, Stealth will be more relevant than ever!

And there's another evidence that completely dismisses your "anti-stealth" theories which is the FACT that other countries such as Russia and China are developing their own 5th gen STEALTH fighter aircraft (T-50, J-20 and J-31).
If Stealth was so "useless" and without any future why would these other countries also try to develop such aircraft??

Again, like it or not Stealth is the future together with net-centric warfare. Actually Stealth is an extremely important component of net-centric warfare since it allows sensors to get closer to the enemy and thus providing more reliable information.

Resuming, NOT jumping into the F-35 = 2nd tier Air Force.
If Canada wants to become a 2nd tier Air Force it's their (wrong) choice. Apparently Germany doesn't want to remain a 2nd tier Air Force hence why it seems interested in the F-35.


I don't know much about the Chinese efforts, but PAK FA was intentionally only designed to be stealthy to the degree that would minimize aerodynamic compromises and make things easier on its very powerful onboard ECM system (something which the F-35 seems to lack at this point). They, like the Israelis, simply don't expect the degree of passive radar stealth that can be applied to a 5th generation fighter to be particularly useful in 10 or 15 years.

In fact, PAK FA now seems to be getting de-emphasized somewhat as its figured that further evolved Flankers would be nearly as capable, for the most part, which would allow the Flanker series to remain viable until the next generation effort is ready. That next generation effort may not even be a stealth design either.

#4361995 - 06/05/17 12:13 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Franze]  
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 79
Tazz Offline
Junior Member
Tazz  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 79
Wellington, NZ
Originally Posted by Franze

It's also worth pointing out that one of the key reasons why the A-10 is so endeared isn't exclusively due to the aircraft itself, but the people around it. You will seldom find people who know how to do their mission as well as A-10 crews, as well as the professionalism they surround themselves with. An F-16 pilot is not going to be well trained on CAS, FAC, etc. as the guys dedicated to that mission -- it is, after all, not his primary job.


I have a lot of love for the A-10C but that statement about FAC is not true. The 310th FS at Luke AFB provides the dedicated F-16 Forward Air Control-Airborne or FAC(A), school house in the Air Force, along with the general F-16 B-Course syllabus.
Depending on the specialization of the squadron, F-16 pilots *are* well trained in fast FAC operations.

#4362051 - 06/05/17 12:34 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Tazz]  
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,169
MigBuster Offline
Member
MigBuster  Offline
Member

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,169
UK
Originally Posted by Tazz

What I do not believe is that this was a case of sheer luck, with the F-117 being hit by a blind volley of unguided missiles. Regardless of the final acquisition, in my mind the SA-3 unit knew the F-117s were there and were able to accurately target Lt. Col. Zelko's aircraft. Which had neither RLS (which had been removed during the 1980s for being ineffective) nor RWR, given that the F-117 wasn't supposed to be targeted by radar in the first place.



I would agree with that not sheer luck.......maybe a bit of luck perhaps in that it came within range of their site I guess. (Dani also claimed David Goldfiens F-16CG did he not)

What I find interesting is that although Dani had advance warning through base spotters and could track it......he couldn't put any kind of fire control system on it until around 8 miles out after several attempts (Possibly aided by the open bomb doors)...the F-117A still dropped its bombs and was coming off target when it was hit.............so despite the propaganda coup and the fame I am not sure they defended a single target.....so all that moving around may have made them hard to destroy but they were border line irrelevant from a strategic point of view.

So bad planning and perhaps complacency on the USAF side quite possibly although I don't think you could plan for every dynamic threat out there............O Grady was had 4 years earlier by CAPing over an area thought to be SAM free.


'Crashing and Burning since 1987'
#4362162 - 06/05/17 07:10 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Flogger23m]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
Making the low RCS capabilities fairly useless for the operational limitations of the F-35. Clearly, the want a larger sized, longer ranged aircraft like the F-22.


And what are the F-35 limitations, may I ask??

Range??
Let me tell you this: The F-35 has a much bigger range on internal fuel than the Super Hornet has with full internal fuel plus 3 external fuel tanks. Heck, the F-35 has more range on internal fuel than the F-22 with internal fuel only as well!
I don't know why people keep insisting that the F-35 has "shot legs" when it's clearly proven otherwise. Another example is that in order for a Typhoon to get close to having a similar range as a F-35A (the F-35C as even a bit longer range due to extra fuel) it must carry 3 External Fuel Tanks!

Weapons?? Let me tell you this: The F-35 can carry a total of 18,000lb of weapons payload (15,000lb external and 3,000lb internal) while the Super Hornet carries a bit less, or 17,750lb. People seem to forget that the F-35 can carry 6 external pylons (4 of them can carry heavy air-to-ground weapons) plus 4 more internally (2 of them can carry heavy air-to-ground weapons) making a total of 8 pylons (6 of them can carry heavy air-to-ground weapons) while the Super Hornet can also carry 10 pylons where "only" 4 of them can carry heavy air-to-ground weapons - BTW, I'm excluding the center fuselage pylon on both aircraft. So and for example, good luck strapping 6 (six) 2000lb JDAM bombs (or similar weight ordinance) on the Super Hornet! Doing this on the F-35? No problem! And what do I mean with this? The F-35 performs the "bomb tuck" role even better than the Super Hornet but has the chance of going Stealth (which the Super Hornet does not) and further if desired.

What about the role of long range interceptor?? No problem on with the F-35 with it's long range (seem above) and very good weapon carrying ability (Block 4 will be able to carry 6 AMRAAMs internally) and on top of this it can give other aircraft missiles (other AMRAAMs for example) and even guide SAM missiles fired from Destroyers and Cruisers like the SM-6.

Don't worry, the US Navy will end up buying the F-35C. That's your "F-14 with a F-22 twist plus the A-6"!


The problem with the F-35 critics is that they keep ventilating the same theories from back 2010 but instantly forget (or choose to forget) that we are already in 2017 and things do evolve and get fixed. The F-35 critics for some reason believe that the F-35 development remains static while for some odd reason the development of old and already outdated (like it or not) aircraft like the existing 4.5th fighter aircraft (Super Hornet, Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen NG) can magically match the F-35 capabilities.
This is like hoping that a P-51 could match the capabilities of a F-86 Sabre, this back in the late 1940's or early 1950's.

#4362164 - 06/05/17 07:30 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Crane Hunter Offline
Veteran
Crane Hunter  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Master Meme-er
Even if the F-35 lives up to its lofty billing, the fact remains that its sucked up a disproportionate share of funding out of this procurement cycle, so that its primary users are forced to make do with upgraded legacy SAMs, armored vehicles, EW platforms etc etc, because the Jesus Jet ate up too much R&D.

#4362168 - 06/05/17 07:45 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: RSColonel_131st]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by RSColonel_131st

Which is my main beef with the way Ricunes and some others here are painting the Stubblenose as the next coming of a weaponized Messias, and saying that the European Infidels are too stupid to grasp this relevation.


It seems that you have some sort of quarrel with me. Don't know why but it seems from your post that's because I'm saying (clearly and without any doubt) that the European military aviation in terms of fighter aircraft lags WAYYYY behind the American one. I don't get you "quarrel" since everything I post I try to back it up with facts (or the best that I can).
So let me be the bearer of the "bad news" --> The European military aviation in terms of fighter aircraft lags WAYYYY behind the American!!
Sorry but that's the sad truth and stating that you have a problem with my own posts won't make this "problem" or "situation" go away!
I could spend several lines of this thread explaining you why this happens but I'll stay with this:
- The European military aviation in terms of fighter aircraft lagging behind the American is not a recent phenomenon. For example, while the US was fielding advanced aircraft such as the F/A-18 legacy Hornet with fully digital cockpit displays (MDF displays) in the early 1980's the Europeans were fielding aircraft like the Mirage 2000 or Tornado Gr.1 which cockpit displays were basically and mostly analog instruments, CAPICHE?? And I could go on, and on, and on, like the old Duracell Battery bunny commercial.

So sorry, if this bothers you so much... rolleyes


Originally Posted by RSColonel_131st

Unless you are fighting a very high tech enemy - and I don't even count China on that level because most of their copies, err.. own developments are not really so brilliant - you only need Stealth the first two to three days before the air defense network is taken care of and the enemy aircraft have no where to take off from. Then you end up using a very expensive plane with a very high maintenance requirement etc. as a dumb bomb truck for the rest of the campaign.



Again the old "F-35 is like the F-117 and only serves for combat against very high tech enemy" argument?? No it isn't and the F-35 does everything that all current 4th and 4.5th fighter aircraft does and way more.
And with it's extremely advanced sensors where 4.5th gen fighter aircraft can only dream to even get close, the F-35 will also be a great ISTAR (Intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and Reconnaissance) platform, a role where existing 4.5th gen aircraft cannot even get close.
If you want I could tell you why...

About your "you only need Stealth the first two to three days before the air defense network is taken care of and the enemy aircraft have no where to take off from", that's a "genius statement" indeed! rolleyes
What would prevent the F-35s from carrying, day 3, day 4, day X missions even if the enemy doesn't have any more Air Defence Systems, may I (again) ask??
Again, strap in the external pylons and the F-35 can even carry more ordinance than the most of other 4th and 4.5th gen fighter aircraft - Oh, and at longer range! And Oh, with much better sensors with full sensor fusion which means that the F-35 would not only be a Strike asset but at the same time an ISTAR asset!

But if you still think otherwise, well history as usual will prove you wrong as it has proven many like yourself in the past.

By the way, quoting the US General Gen. Mark Welsh:
“When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter the latter dies”
And this has always have been the case: The previous generation will end up being retired (and becoming obsolete) when the new generation arrives why would in hell this change now??

Oh, by the way I was also one of those who were wrong in the past. For example I remember to have discussed, this circa 2004 (if my memory doesn't fail me) on how the F-22 wasn't much superior to the Super Hornet - Oh boy, how was I wrong! wink

#4362173 - 06/05/17 07:56 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Crane Hunter]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Crane Hunter
Even if the F-35 lives up to its lofty billing, the fact remains that its sucked up a disproportionate share of funding out of this procurement cycle, so that its primary users are forced to make do with upgraded legacy SAMs, armored vehicles, EW platforms etc etc, because the Jesus Jet ate up too much R&D.


LoL, the lobby comment rolleyes
Oh and the other companies don't lobby too? What has Boeing being doing with the Super Hornet together with the US (and also Canadian) government, may I ask?

And Airbus with the Typhoon? And Dassault with the Rafale?? Or Saab with the Gripen NG?? They don't lobby, right? rolleyes

And what the heck are you talking about the F-35 "ate up too much R&D"?? Really could you care to expand? This promises to be fun... popcorn

Yes, the F-35 development was expensive but again critics such as yourself choose to ignore (again and again) that the F-35 is indeed a 3-in-1 aircraft - A CTOL variant (F-35A), a STOVL variant (F-35B) and a CTOL variant (F-35C). Add that to being NEW and CUTTING EDGE technology and plus a 40 year maintenance/sustainment cost that was never considered in ANY OTHER PROGRAM IN THE PAST and yes, you'll get a "massive value".
Try making a cutting edge Conventional Takeoff Aircraft, plus a completely different cutting edge STOVL aircraft plus a completely different cutting edge carrier aircraft and add it the 40 year sustainment cost and then tell me you got a cheaper value?? Really??

#4362199 - 06/05/17 09:15 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
Flogger23m Offline
Senior Member
Flogger23m  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
US
Originally Posted by ricnunes
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
Making the low RCS capabilities fairly useless for the operational limitations of the F-35. Clearly, the want a larger sized, longer ranged aircraft like the F-22.


And what are the F-35 limitations, may I ask??


You just quoted them. Without external drop tanks, the F-35 doesn't have the range the Navy seeks. And you loose the low RCS in the process. The majority of sorties the USN will be using the F-35 for will require drop tanks. There are reasons why the USN has little interest in it - it isn't the right tool for their job. It is an incremental upgrade over the Super Hornet. They want diversity in mission profiles. The F-35 is essentially a F-16 / F-18 replacement. They're looking for something else.

Internally the F-35 has a number of restrictions for payload as well. You mentioned weight, but not size and compatibility. Weight is only a fraction of the equation. If you need to carry 6 missiles with a total weight of 8000 lbs but they can't fit inside, then you're running into shortcomings of the platform. External stores bring about the same problems mentioned above. Minimizes low RCS abilities and adds drag, greatly reducing range.

To carry the same amount of A2A weaponry as the F-22, the F-35 needs to carry four missiles externally. This will kill its low RCS and add considerable drag whereas the F-22 will have a clean profile. it is a good plane, but given what USN's needs, it is not surprising they are not too fond of it. They want a weapon tailored to their mission profile.

#4362207 - 06/05/17 09:35 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Franze Offline
Member
Franze  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Originally Posted by ricnunes

Yes, the F-35 development was expensive but again critics such as yourself choose to ignore (again and again) that the F-35 is indeed a 3-in-1 aircraft - A CTOL variant (F-35A), a STOVL variant (F-35B) and a CTOL variant (F-35C). Add that to being NEW and CUTTING EDGE technology and plus a 40 year maintenance/sustainment cost that was never considered in ANY OTHER PROGRAM IN THE PAST and yes, you'll get a "massive value".
Try making a cutting edge Conventional Takeoff Aircraft, plus a completely different cutting edge STOVL aircraft plus a completely different cutting edge carrier aircraft and add it the 40 year sustainment cost and then tell me you got a cheaper value?? Really??


Would developing three different platforms be cheap? No, of course not. I don't think anyone is arguing that three programs would cost as much or more than what an F-35 costs. What we're arguing about is whether or not a platform designed exclusively for CTOL, one exclusively for STOVL, and one for conventional use would be able to do each mission better than an F-35 shoehorned into each role. The point was made earlier in this thread that, for example, an F-14 made a good fighter-bomber. But by what standard? It didn't match the A-6's payload nor range, so was it really better as a bomber than the A-6? Hence, will the F-35 be a better CAS aircraft than the A-10? A better fighter than the F-15? A better CAS aircraft than the AV-8B? There seem to be a whole bunch of people who either believe the missions won't be necessary in the future or that the F-35 can do them good enough that there won't be any need for anything else. That's very shortsighted and ignores the lessons we've learned since the 1960s.

If you look at the F-35 exclusively as a replacement to the F-16, it makes a lot of sense; since the USAF neglected to take advantage of incremental improvements done to the F-16 over the past two decades, the F-35 is a great leap ahead. Replacing the A-10? Eh... I'm not sure how they're figuring how that's going to work. Legacy Hornet? OK, that makes sense, though they're having to do a #%&*$# ton of mods to squeeze carrier capability out of the airframe. Super Hornet? No, I'm not seeing how the F-35 is going to replace a strike aircraft. AV-8B? How about we instead research STOVL exclusively and either come up with a new design for it or redefine the USMC's requirements.

I realize that not everybody may believe this, but the US DOD is very, very, very wasteful with the money it gets. Few people are going to argue what the F-35 brings to the table; what they're going to argue is if it's the right solution for the problems at hand. I saw many of the same arguments back when the RAH-66 was on the chopping block; despite it getting canned, much of what was learned was applied to other aircraft and further, we made out just fine after it was all said and done.

#4362236 - 06/05/17 11:29 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Flogger23m]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
Originally Posted by ricnunes
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
Making the low RCS capabilities fairly useless for the operational limitations of the F-35. Clearly, the want a larger sized, longer ranged aircraft like the F-22.


And what are the F-35 limitations, may I ask??


You just quoted them. Without external drop tanks, the F-35 doesn't have the range the Navy seeks. And you loose the low RCS in the process.


I've read that low RCS drop tanks are in the works.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4362258 - 06/06/17 01:20 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Crane Hunter Offline
Veteran
Crane Hunter  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Master Meme-er
The IDFAF seems to not think much of the level of passive radar stealth present on the F-35...

“We think the stealth protection will be good for 5-10 years, but the aircraft will be in service for 30-40 years, so we need EW capabilities [on the F-35] that can be rapidly improved."

http://m.aviationweek.com/awin/israel-us-agree-450-million-f-35-ew-work

#4362276 - 06/06/17 03:35 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Flogger23m]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Offline
Veteran
Arthonon  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
Originally Posted by ricnunes
Originally Posted by Flogger23m
Making the low RCS capabilities fairly useless for the operational limitations of the F-35. Clearly, the want a larger sized, longer ranged aircraft like the F-22.


And what are the F-35 limitations, may I ask??


You just quoted them. Without external drop tanks, the F-35 doesn't have the range the Navy seeks. And you loose the low RCS in the process. The majority of sorties the USN will be using the F-35 for will require drop tanks. There are reasons why the USN has little interest in it - it isn't the right tool for their job. It is an incremental upgrade over the Super Hornet. They want diversity in mission profiles. The F-35 is essentially a F-16 / F-18 replacement. They're looking for something else.

Actually, I know someone fairly high up in the Navy, and they are quite bullish on the F-35 because of some of the unique capabilities it brings. Where are you getting your info?


Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4362710 - 06/08/17 09:03 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Flogger23m]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Flogger23m


You just quoted them. Without external drop tanks, the F-35 doesn't have the range the Navy seeks. And you loose the low RCS in the process.



Then you missed entirely my post or only you simply choose to ignore the parts that don't interest your preconceived idea.

What part of the F-35 with internal fuel HAS MORE RANGE than the Super Hornet (and most legacy fighters, BTW) with external tanks, that you didn't get??

The fact that the F-35 doesn't have external tanks is because IT DOESN'T NEED them. Again and in case you missed my last sentence, the F-35 has more range than legacy fighters with external fuel tanks and this again includes the Super Hornet.



Originally Posted by Flogger23m

The majority of sorties the USN will be using the F-35 for will require drop tanks. There are reasons why the USN has little interest in it - it isn't the right tool for their job. It is an incremental upgrade over the Super Hornet. They want diversity in mission profiles. The F-35 is essentially a F-16 / F-18 replacement. They're looking for something else.


Again if the F-35 has more range than the current US Navy combat aircraft inventory - legacy Hornet and Super Hornet - why would the F-35 require fuel tanks? Moreover, the F-35C is the variant with the longest range.
BTW, did you know that external fuel tanks are expensive and take up place, specially in more "limited spaces" such as a carrier? And as such relying on external tanks isn't that effective?


Originally Posted by Flogger23m

Internally the F-35 has a number of restrictions for payload as well. You mentioned weight, but not size and compatibility. Weight is only a fraction of the equation. If you need to carry 6 missiles with a total weight of 8000 lbs but they can't fit inside, then you're running into shortcomings of the platform. External stores bring about the same problems mentioned above. Minimizes low RCS abilities and adds drag, greatly reducing range.


LoL, so more options are now restrictions?? Really you should get your facts straight!
The F-35 is not limited! The F-35 has actually MORE OPTIONS than any other legacy fighter, LOOK:
Option 1 - You want to go Stealth? Carry the weapons internally. Yes, internally you carry less weapons than externally but you'll go Stealth.
Option 2 - You want to CARRY the MORE WEAPONS with the SIMILAR PERFORMANCE compared to legacy fighters? Carry WEAPONS EXTERNALLY!

So as you can see if, there are LIMITED fighter aircraft out there, these are the legacy fighters such as the Super Hornet, Typhoon, Rafale, etc... since you will only have OPTION 1 available to you! Capiche?

Moreover with the superior network capabilities, you can have for example a 4 ship flight of F-35s where 2 of them are "Stealth configured" with internal weapons only and can get near the enemy (due to Stealth combined superior EW capabilities) while the other 2 are fully armed with external weapons. The 2 "stealth configured" F-35s will be able to detect, designate and guide the weapons of the external weapons equipped F-35s while these later F-35s stay well behind in safe airspace.

This is something that legacy aircraft can only "dream of"!
So and again as you can see the F-35 has MORE CAPABILITIES and thus LESS LIMITED than legacy aircraft and not otherwise as you claim or have "wet dreams" about.


Originally Posted by Flogger23m

To carry the same amount of A2A weaponry as the F-22, the F-35 needs to carry four missiles externally. This will kill its low RCS and add considerable drag whereas the F-22 will have a clean profile. it is a good plane, but given what USN's needs, it is not surprising they are not too fond of it. They want a weapon tailored to their mission profile.


And the F-22 doesn't have a 360º IRST in the form of DAS and doesn't have a frontal high resolution and long range IR sensor in the form of the EOTS, or resuming it can't detect enemy aircraft in the passive IR spectrum, so what's your point??

By the way, a Block 4 F-35 will carry 6 (six) AMRAAMs internally while the F-22 carries also 6 AMRAAMS plus 2 Sidewinders, so as you can see the difference isn't that big, specially considering that the F-35 is more advanced and cheaper than the F-22!

#4362711 - 06/08/17 09:04 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Crane Hunter]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Crane Hunter
The IDFAF seems to not think much of the level of passive radar stealth present on the F-35...

“We think the stealth protection will be good for 5-10 years, but the aircraft will be in service for 30-40 years, so we need EW capabilities [on the F-35] that can be rapidly improved."

http://m.aviationweek.com/awin/israel-us-agree-450-million-f-35-ew-work




Yeah right, that's why they are purchasing F-35s and they even increased their F-35s order rolleyes

#4362712 - 06/08/17 09:31 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Franze]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Franze

Would developing three different platforms be cheap? No, of course not. I don't think anyone is arguing that three programs would cost as much or more than what an F-35 costs. What we're arguing about is whether or not a platform designed exclusively for CTOL, one exclusively for STOVL, and one for conventional use would be able to do each mission better than an F-35 shoehorned into each role. The point was made earlier in this thread that, for example, an F-14 made a good fighter-bomber. But by what standard? It didn't match the A-6's payload nor range, so was it really better as a bomber than the A-6? Hence, will the F-35 be a better CAS aircraft than the A-10? A better fighter than the F-15? A better CAS aircraft than the AV-8B? There seem to be a whole bunch of people who either believe the missions won't be necessary in the future or that the F-35 can do them good enough that there won't be any need for anything else. That's very shortsighted and ignores the lessons we've learned since the 1960s.

If you look at the F-35 exclusively as a replacement to the F-16, it makes a lot of sense; since the USAF neglected to take advantage of incremental improvements done to the F-16 over the past two decades, the F-35 is a great leap ahead. Replacing the A-10? Eh... I'm not sure how they're figuring how that's going to work. Legacy Hornet? OK, that makes sense, though they're having to do a #%&*$# ton of mods to squeeze carrier capability out of the airframe. Super Hornet? No, I'm not seeing how the F-35 is going to replace a strike aircraft. AV-8B? How about we instead research STOVL exclusively and either come up with a new design for it or redefine the USMC's requirements.


With all due respect, that's "yesterday's" thinking.
"Yesterday" we have several very different aircraft performing several different roles because the technology at that time was limited.
Hence why you had the A-6 and the F-14 in the Carrier Air Wing for example. Correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to forget that technology evolves and what wasn't possible yesterday it's now possible or will be possible in the future. For example while the Super Hornet may have an inferior range compared to the A-6, the Super Hornet is nonetheless better than the A-6 at the A-6 role and by the way better than the F-14 in the F-14 role.
Heck, "yesterday" the US Navy even had a "strategic bomber" in the form of the A-3 Skywarrior. Do you wish to find a "direct" replacement for this too? I'm sure you don't, afterall the US Navy managed to develop a much smaller and better plane in the form of the A-6 - You see a smaller, more multifunctional and overall better plane - Do you get the trend, now? wink

Regarding you questions, yes the F-35 is far better than the A-10 in CAS, yes the F-35 is far better than the F-16, yes the F-35 is better than the F-15, and yes the F-35 (in this case the -B) is FAAARRRRR BETER than the AV-8B.
Just like the Super Hornet is better than the A-6 and the F-14 and like any modern strike fighter aircraft is far better than for example most post-WWII era Strategic Bombers despite the later being much larger and a very different kind of plane.

So yes, as you can see technology changes and the F-35 is by far the first aircraft that trends to replace several different aircraft and successfully so, for example:
- The legacy Hornet did this (replaced the F-4 and A-7)
- Super Hornet did this (A-6 and F-14)
- Rafale is doing this (countless variants of the Mirage F-1, F-8 Crusader, Mirage IV and Mirage 2000)
- Gripen did this (JA-37 Viggen and AJ-37 Viggen)
And so on...

Finally and again for example, look how much different types of aircraft there was in WWII and how they've been diminishing.

#4362714 - 06/08/17 09:42 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by F4UDash4


I've read that low RCS drop tanks are in the works.



There were plans to develop external fuel tanks for the F-35.
However it was found that the F-35 had similar and in most cases even better range compared with legacy fighter aircraft will full fuel load plus external tanks and therefore the external tanks for the F-35 were deemed unnecessary and at least for the time being the plans for the F-35's external fuel tanks are "cancelled".

Again, external fuel tanks are not cheap things and wasting them everytime there's a threat to the fighter aircraft is NOT efficient. And this was taken in consideration during the F-35 development.

If someone still has doubts about the F-35 range just look at the insane amount of fuel that the F-35 can carry internally and compared it to any legacy fighter aircraft. On top of this, add the fact that the F-35 is a single engine aircraft and that it's reported that the F-35 engine which is derived from the F-22 engine has even a better fuel consumption (compared to the F-22 engine), so this means that the F-35 range is for example better than the F-22 on internal fuel only, hence why the F-22 has external fuel tanks and the F-35 has not!

#4362718 - 06/08/17 10:08 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
RSColonel_131st Offline
Lifer
RSColonel_131st  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
Vienna, 2nd rock left.
Originally Posted by ricnunes
yes the F-35 is far better than the A-10 in CAS


You wrote a lot of stuff in this thread now which is wrong, and there's one main problem underneath your argument that crystallizes in this statement above. The problem is that you seem to live in a world without monetary restrictions.

By your own logic, the F-22 is better than the F-35. So in theory the ultimate solution to every mission need in every war would be to have F-22s with an extended payload bay to fit larger bombs in and maybe add some of those F-35 additional sensors.

Then instead of firing twenty rounds of DU 30mm at an Afghan camel convoy, you can fire a 1000 pound JDAM. From an aircraft that costs twice as much to operate per hour than an A-10. And because of loitering times, payload amount etc. you might need double the amount of aircraft. So each dead camel costs a gazillion more dollars. But you get the job done beautifully, congrats.

Of course you can use a laser-sighted computer-controlled super-precise 20 pound sledgehammer with knife attachment to hang up a picture frame in your apartment. And to cut the vegetables for your stew. And to file your toe nails. It does everything, perfectly.

Yet in the real world military forces operate on a limited budget, and so sadly you won't have any gas money left to drive to the grocery store.



#4362934 - 06/09/17 11:33 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: RSColonel_131st]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by RSColonel_131st
Originally Posted by ricnunes
yes the F-35 is far better than the A-10 in CAS


You wrote a lot of stuff in this thread now which is wrong, and there's one main problem underneath your argument that crystallizes in this statement above. The problem is that you seem to live in a world without monetary restrictions.


If you think that I'm wrong then point out where and why do you think that I'm wrong. Simply saying that "I'm wrong" is not an argumentation.

It feels like you don't have counter-arguments but at the same time you don't want to admit that you stand corrected.

And that's why I posted several rather long posts - I don't limit myself (or avoid to) saying that the other is wrong - I argue as opposed to you!

Regarding the "monetary restrictions" it's you that don't seem to understand the concept. You also don't seem to understand that technology evolves and what was the best technology yesterday it's likely obsolete today and will DEFINITLY become obsolete tomorrow.
I understand perfectly that we live in a world with "monetary restrictions". However contrary to what many F-35 critics which perpetuates and ventilates many BS or outdated news (some of them from 2010 or earlier) the fact is that the F-35 is by FAR the BEST solution when it comes to both "monetary restrictions" and (fast) "technology evolution":
- It's not by random chance that there are 3 variants of the baseline F-35, one for CTOL, another for STOVL and another for CATOBAR. If you're going to develop 3 completely different planes having in mind those 3 main roles (CTOL, STOVL and CATOBAR), that would be far more expensive!
- Currently a F-35A has a similar cost or even costs less than their competitors, like for example the Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen NG. A LRIP-10 F-35A costs $94.6 million USD per each aircraft and notice the F-35 is still in low rate production (LRIP):
https://www.f35.com/about/fast-facts/cost
This already puts the cost of the F-35, namely the F-35A at a similar level or even lower than the competition. Full production F-35As will cost quite less with some projections indicating a value as low as $80 Million USD per each aircraft.
So you have an aircraft which is vastly superior (I explained before why!) and probably costs even less than older 4.5th gen fighter aircraft and you come here accusing me that I live in a "world without monetary restrictions"?? If I live in such world than you must live under a rock since you cannot acknowledge that things evolve, improve and get better and eventually replace older stuff!



Originally Posted by RSColonel_131st

By your own logic, the F-22 is better than the F-35. So in theory the ultimate solution to every mission need in every war would be to have F-22s with an extended payload bay to fit larger bombs in and maybe add some of those F-35 additional sensors.


First of all where did I say that the "F-22 is better than the F-35"??
Secondly you cannot simply extend the weapon bay in the F-22 without any major airframe redesign. Resuming it's not a simple "upgrade". You would be developing a completely diferent variant albeit based on existing variant. So this is not something feasible without extensive budget/money allocated to this - And remember it was YOU that mentioned "monetary restriction"!
A similar line of thought goes in line goes with adding the F-35 sensors to the F-22. While more feasible and technically "easier" than "extending the weapons bay" it still requires MONEY and lots of it!
You're also ignoring the fact that the F-22 is MORE EXPENSIVE in everything (acquisition, maintenance, etc...) than the F-35 and then you came here accusing my that I live in a world without monetary restrictions, really??


Originally Posted by RSColonel_131st

Then instead of firing twenty rounds of DU 30mm at an Afghan camel convoy, you can fire a 1000 pound JDAM. From an aircraft that costs twice as much to operate per hour than an A-10. And because of loitering times, payload amount etc. you might need double the amount of aircraft. So each dead camel costs a gazillion more dollars. But you get the job done beautifully, congrats.

Of course you can use a laser-sighted computer-controlled super-precise 20 pound sledgehammer with knife attachment to hang up a picture frame in your apartment. And to cut the vegetables for your stew. And to file your toe nails. It does everything, perfectly.

Yet in the real world military forces operate on a limited budget, and so sadly you won't have any gas money left to drive to the grocery store.


You forget that the F-35 also HAS A GUN, no? It has a 25mm gun.
Besides there are other weapons that the F-35 can employ in larger numbers and cheaper than a 1000lb JDAM against "lighter targets" such as and namely the Small Diameter Bomb.

But if you want to kill the camel with a gun, the F-35 can do it well!
The difference is, if there's someone close to the camel's position equipped with an advanced MANPADS SAM the F-35 will have a much bigger chance to survive since it's faster, more agile, lower IR signature (the spectrum often used by many MANPADS SAMs) and a far, far , far more advanced electronic and decoy defensive suite and Missile Warner Systems which give a precise location of the incoming missile. Moreover in this case the F-35's onboard systems will be able to instantly geo-locate and target that MANPADS SAM - So the hunter instantly becomes the prey something that you can dream of in the A-10!

Finally regarding your "in the real world military forces operate on a limited budget" argument, perhaps this is why several countries in the world jumped in the JSF/F-35 development, no?? The more countries that purchase the aircraft the cheaper it will become! So as you can see, not only I do live in a world WITH monetary restrictions but I understand it better than yourself!

Welcome to the future...

#4362938 - 06/09/17 11:38 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
RSColonel_131st Offline
Lifer
RSColonel_131st  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 25,138
Vienna, 2nd rock left.
Since you seem to be unaware of the concept of "operational costs" I will quit this discussion with you. For your homework you might want to look at the totalized cost of that 25mm bullet being delivered on location, for many days in succession. Or why a F-35 isn't exactly better at being shot at from smaller caliber guns and manually guided AAA versus the A-10. Hint: If it gets a shell or two in it's engine area the pilot will have to walk.

Cheers.

#4362945 - 06/09/17 11:54 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 20,152
Top Gun Offline
Lifer
Top Gun  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 20,152
Roch-Vegas NH
Originally Posted by ricnunes
[quote=Franze]

Regarding you questions, yes the F-35 is far better than the A-10 in CAS, yes the F-35 is far better than the F-16, yes the F-35 is better than the F-15, and yes the F-35 (in this case the -B) is FAAARRRRR BETER than the AV-8B..


where the hell are you getting this data from? As far as I know the F-35 hasn't even gone into a real battle yet.... Red Flags are the closest thing to it which they've done very well in, but I don't think they practice CAS missions there. And if the F-35 is "far better" than the A-10 why did the Air Force just extend the Warthog because they realized the F-35 doesn't stand up to it during CAS....

Love how you throw out your blanket statements with no proof, just tell Helmet to have data to tell you that your wrong...

Last edited by Top Gun; 06/09/17 11:55 AM.

XboxLive Tag: DOBrienTG1969

Dave O'Brien,
Top Gun Photography
Nikon D500 & D7200
Nikkor 70-200VR AF-s F/2.8
Sigma 50-500 & 17-50 F2.8
Sigma 150-600
#4363021 - 06/09/17 06:55 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
I will have to partially disagree with ricunes on the F-35 / A-10.

It is true that in a contested environment vs a peer enemy with sophisticated air defense weapons / fighter aircraft opposition the F-35 would be superior to the A-10 in the CAS role.

But in a low intensity fight vs an enemy like the Taliban with not so much as reliable MANPAD air defenses the A-10 would be superior due to it's loiter time, loadout capacity, ruggedness, the big gun and maybe most importantly the low cost of operation.

Somewhere between those extremes the scales tip in favor of the F-35 as the combat environment becomes more deadly, with an area of overlap where both platforms could operate.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4363046 - 06/09/17 08:25 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
Flogger23m Offline
Senior Member
Flogger23m  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
US
Originally Posted by ricnunes
Originally Posted by Flogger23m


You just quoted them. Without external drop tanks, the F-35 doesn't have the range the Navy seeks. And you loose the low RCS in the process.



Then you missed entirely my post or only you simply choose to ignore the parts that don't interest your preconceived idea.

What part of the F-35 with internal fuel HAS MORE RANGE than the Super Hornet (and most legacy fighters, BTW) with external tanks, that you didn't get??

The fact that the F-35 doesn't have external tanks is because IT DOESN'T NEED them. Again and in case you missed my last sentence, the F-35 has more range than legacy fighters with external fuel tanks and this again includes the Super Hornet.



Originally Posted by Flogger23m

The majority of sorties the USN will be using the F-35 for will require drop tanks. There are reasons why the USN has little interest in it - it isn't the right tool for their job. It is an incremental upgrade over the Super Hornet. They want diversity in mission profiles. The F-35 is essentially a F-16 / F-18 replacement. They're looking for something else.


Again if the F-35 has more range than the current US Navy combat aircraft inventory - legacy Hornet and Super Hornet - why would the F-35 require fuel tanks? Moreover, the F-35C is the variant with the longest range.
BTW, did you know that external fuel tanks are expensive and take up place, specially in more "limited spaces" such as a carrier? And as such relying on external tanks isn't that effective?


Originally Posted by Flogger23m

Internally the F-35 has a number of restrictions for payload as well. You mentioned weight, but not size and compatibility. Weight is only a fraction of the equation. If you need to carry 6 missiles with a total weight of 8000 lbs but they can't fit inside, then you're running into shortcomings of the platform. External stores bring about the same problems mentioned above. Minimizes low RCS abilities and adds drag, greatly reducing range.


LoL, so more options are now restrictions?? Really you should get your facts straight!
The F-35 is not limited! The F-35 has actually MORE OPTIONS than any other legacy fighter, LOOK:
Option 1 - You want to go Stealth? Carry the weapons internally. Yes, internally you carry less weapons than externally but you'll go Stealth.
Option 2 - You want to CARRY the MORE WEAPONS with the SIMILAR PERFORMANCE compared to legacy fighters? Carry WEAPONS EXTERNALLY!

So as you can see if, there are LIMITED fighter aircraft out there, these are the legacy fighters such as the Super Hornet, Typhoon, Rafale, etc... since you will only have OPTION 1 available to you! Capiche?

Moreover with the superior network capabilities, you can have for example a 4 ship flight of F-35s where 2 of them are "Stealth configured" with internal weapons only and can get near the enemy (due to Stealth combined superior EW capabilities) while the other 2 are fully armed with external weapons. The 2 "stealth configured" F-35s will be able to detect, designate and guide the weapons of the external weapons equipped F-35s while these later F-35s stay well behind in safe airspace.

This is something that legacy aircraft can only "dream of"!
So and again as you can see the F-35 has MORE CAPABILITIES and thus LESS LIMITED than legacy aircraft and not otherwise as you claim or have "wet dreams" about.


Originally Posted by Flogger23m

To carry the same amount of A2A weaponry as the F-22, the F-35 needs to carry four missiles externally. This will kill its low RCS and add considerable drag whereas the F-22 will have a clean profile. it is a good plane, but given what USN's needs, it is not surprising they are not too fond of it. They want a weapon tailored to their mission profile.


And the F-22 doesn't have a 360º IRST in the form of DAS and doesn't have a frontal high resolution and long range IR sensor in the form of the EOTS, or resuming it can't detect enemy aircraft in the passive IR spectrum, so what's your point??

By the way, a Block 4 F-35 will carry 6 (six) AMRAAMs internally while the F-22 carries also 6 AMRAAMS plus 2 Sidewinders, so as you can see the difference isn't that big, specially considering that the F-35 is more advanced and cheaper than the F-22!


You're too emotionally invested in the F-35. The biggest mistake a lot of people, such as yourself, seem to make about military equipment is that the military must form the mission around the equipment. It is the other way around. The equipment must fit the mission. The F-35 does not have the range the USN desires. It has more range than the Super Hornet. Big deal. You seem obvious to the fact that the Super Hornet has a short range for the USN's goal, and so does the F-35. You seem to be content with shortcomings. The F-35 fits the same role as the Super Hornet. It is nice, but not what the USN wants or needs. They don't need an incrementally better strike fighter. Clearly they're looking for a larger class fighter, such as the F-22 and F-15. As for F-35 drop tanks, they're in development. Israel really wants them because the F-35's range for their mission is inadequate. It is naive to say that external drop tanks are ineffective. To be blunt, they extend range. Even the F-22 has drop tanks, because they extend the range.

And you still seem to be obvious to the difference between ordinance weight and size / compatibility. If you want to carry anti tank missiles or stand off cruise missiles, HARMs, or decent sized payload you're going to need external stores on the F-35. Negating the low RCS aspects, adding a lot of drag and weight. This greatly reduces the advantage the F-35 will have over a plane such as the Eurofighter. In the USN's case, essentially all missions flown with the F-35 will be relying on external stores. One of the major advances of the F-35 over older planes is the low RCS and clean profile - but if the majority of missions don't allow for this, then you're throwing most of that enhanced performance away. It isn't a hard concept. Eventually these issues may be minimized as more weapon types will be designed for internal weapon bays, but there isn't a lot of room in there for larger weapons such as the Storm Shadow. A shortcoming of the F-35.

Mixed flights of part low RCS and high drag are an excellent strategy, however, having all flights maintain a low profile with a larger internal weapons load and range is even better. There is also the range discrepancies between low and high drag flights, the time to the area, loiter time, and more. This has been done in the past with mixed air frames, but it will always be more efficient with a single air frame. Just because it was done in the past doesn't make it sound. A fighter with enough internal payload and range would be more ideal than different flights with mixed variables.

Also, I never mentioned anything about "extending" the F-22s internal weapons bay. I think your English is failing you here. I am also not claiming the F-35 is inferior to the legacy fighters, which you seem to imply. I'm merely telling you about the shortcomings of the platform and how it does not fit the USN's needs and future mission profile. You seem to be entirely obvious to the fact that the USN's requirements may be different from the USAF, the USMC, the RAF, Turkish Air Force, ect. The Abrams is a great tank, but it makes for a horrible infantry transport. wink

#4363068 - 06/09/17 11:07 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 79
Tazz Offline
Junior Member
Tazz  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 79
Wellington, NZ
I'm absolutely not a fan of the way the F-35 looks (and I think it's too expensive and that LM is taking the USAF for a ride here)...

But... I did find an angle that makes the F-35 looks pretty darn good if you ask me!!!!


[Linked Image]



Hang some stuff on it and it starts to look mean! I wonder what it does to the RCS though?

Last edited by Tazz; 06/09/17 11:09 PM.
#4363115 - 06/10/17 12:05 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: RSColonel_131st]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by RSColonel_131st
Since you seem to be unaware of the concept of "operational costs" I will quit this discussion with you. For your homework you might want to look at the totalized cost of that 25mm bullet being delivered on location, for many days in succession. Or why a F-35 isn't exactly better at being shot at from smaller caliber guns and manually guided AAA versus the A-10. Hint: If it gets a shell or two in it's engine area the pilot will have to walk.

Cheers.


Yes, I'm well aware of the operational costs concept. I just have a bigger picture than yourself.

A single A-10 may have a lower operational cost compared to a single F-35, sure.
However you forget that the A-10 CANNOT perform the all the F-35 roles, for example it can't perform any of the Air-to-Air roles that the F-35 performs, not to mention deep strike/interdiction, DEAD, etc.. As opposed the F-35 CAN perform all the roles of the A-10 (and plenty more).

So if you want to operate A-10s, you'll need F-16s or F-35s alongside. Now if you have F-35's you won't need the A-10s since again the F-35 can perform all the A-10 roles.
Or what I mean is that 1 (one) F-35 can perform the roles of a combination of 1 (one) F-16 and 1 (one) A-10 or 1 (one) F-35 and 1 (one) A-10 which by it's turn means that 1 (one) F-35 is cheaper to maintain than 1 (one) F-16 or 1 (one) F-35 AND 1 (one) A-10.

Or why do you think that the VAST majority of countries in the world don't operate aircraft like the A-10?? For example no other NATO or western country operates the A-10 or other similar aircraft.


Finally, in modern days if you expect to get hit you shouldn't expect to survive! If you want to survive you MUST EVADE ENEMY FIRE, you don't be able to resist to it.
Don't forget that the A-10s during Desert Storm suffered the highest losses by far from all CAS aircraft (including F-16s).

Moreover, don't be too hasty in your claim that the F-35 is "weak" against enemy fire. Recent tests indicated that the F-35 has actually a very good resistance against enemy fire due to redundant/backup systems and an engine well buried in the fuselage. Sure the A-10 is more resistant but the point is (and always as been) is to avoid getting hit not being a "bullet magnet".

#4363118 - 06/10/17 12:18 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Top Gun]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Top Gun
Originally Posted by ricnunes
[quote=Franze]

Regarding you questions, yes the F-35 is far better than the A-10 in CAS, yes the F-35 is far better than the F-16, yes the F-35 is better than the F-15, and yes the F-35 (in this case the -B) is FAAARRRRR BETER than the AV-8B..


where the hell are you getting this data from? As far as I know the F-35 hasn't even gone into a real battle yet.... Red Flags are the closest thing to it which they've done very well in, but I don't think they practice CAS missions there. And if the F-35 is "far better" than the A-10 why did the Air Force just extend the Warthog because they realized the F-35 doesn't stand up to it during CAS....

Love how you throw out your blanket statements with no proof, just tell Helmet to have data to tell you that your wrong...



Really?? So in order to prove that an aircraft is good it forcedly needs to enter in war, really??

So in the 1930's (before WWII) when for example the Brits developed the Spitfire this must have been inferior to the Camel since the Camel was combat proven by that time but the Spitfire wasn't! rolleyes

Red Flag wasn't the only exercise that the F-35 participated on. For example they participated in Green Flag which is an exercise dedicated to CAS and once again the F-35 performance was excellent as you can read here:
https://theaviationist.com/2015/07/01/f-35s-role-in-green-flag/

How's this for proof?? rolleyes

#4363119 - 06/10/17 12:30 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by F4UDash4
I will have to partially disagree with ricunes on the F-35 / A-10.

It is true that in a contested environment vs a peer enemy with sophisticated air defense weapons / fighter aircraft opposition the F-35 would be superior to the A-10 in the CAS role.

But in a low intensity fight vs an enemy like the Taliban with not so much as reliable MANPAD air defenses the A-10 would be superior due to it's loiter time, loadout capacity, ruggedness, the big gun and maybe most importantly the low cost of operation.


I don't think we are in disagreement, I agree with everything your said including the last paragraph. However the role of the gun is too much overplayed and there are weapons which are much more effective (the gun isn't effective in terms of hit to kill ratio) with a "good" or acceptable price/cost such as Small Diameter Bombs, Guided Rockets (APKWS), etc...

For the role that you mention there's already an alternative being used today (and much more often than the A-10) which is the armed UAV!
The armed UAV is better (compared to the A-10) in everything you said in the last paragraph except for the gun.


Originally Posted by F4UDash4

Somewhere between those extremes the scales tip in favor of the F-35 as the combat environment becomes more deadly, with an area of overlap where both platforms could operate.


Fully agree and that's exactly my point!

#4363122 - 06/10/17 01:00 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Flogger23m]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Flogger23m

You're too emotionally invested in the F-35. The biggest mistake a lot of people, such as yourself, seem to make about military equipment is that the military must form the mission around the equipment. It is the other way around. The equipment must fit the mission.


No I'm not "emotionally invested in the F-35". I'm "emotionally invested" in facts or in the truth and I'm a bit "sick and tired" of the same old arguments such as the one repeated by you - F-35 has short range - which has been more than proven to be FALSE but people still ventilate and insist in the same wrong arguments. With all due respect, that's almost like lying.


Originally Posted by Flogger23m

The F-35 does not have the range the USN desires. It has more range than the Super Hornet. Big deal. You seem obvious to the fact that the Super Hornet has a short range for the USN's goal, and so does the F-35. You seem to be content with shortcomings. The F-35 fits the same role as the Super Hornet. It is nice, but not what the USN wants or needs. They don't need an incrementally better strike fighter. Clearly they're looking for a larger class fighter, such as the F-22 and F-15. As for F-35 drop tanks, they're in development. Israel really wants them because the F-35's range for their mission is inadequate. It is naive to say that external drop tanks are ineffective. To be blunt, they extend range. Even the F-22 has drop tanks, because they extend the range.


And what is the range that the USN requires that the F-35C cannot attain while your "magical plane" can accomplish that you're talking about?? This promises to be fun...

So the F-35C has a too short range for the USN but I point out that the Super Hornet with external fuel tanks has an even shorter range and you say "big deal", really?? The Super Hornet with its short range (even with external fuel tanks) is OK but the F-35C with its considerably longer range is NOT, LOL rolleyes

Oh, and air-to-air refueling doesn't "ring you a bell", no?

With this argument of yours I can only remember of the following and since one says that an image is worth a thousand words, here it goes:

[Linked Image]


Oh and BTW, the USN does WANT the F-35C. It just wants to operate them alongside with the Super Hornets for the time being which is also a political move since if no more Super Hornets would be purchased (by the USN) the Boeing Super Hornet manufacturing line could SHUT DOWN this year (2017).

Originally Posted by Flogger23m

And you still seem to be obvious to the difference between ordinance weight and size / compatibility. If you want to carry anti tank missiles or stand off cruise missiles, HARMs, or decent sized payload you're going to need external stores on the F-35.


Really?? Ever hear about the JSM (Join Strike Missile), a dual role anti-ship/land-strike cruise missile which can be carried INTERNALLY in the F-35?
Ever heard about the GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb II which the F-35 can carry 8 (eight) of them INTERNALLY? How about this for a very long range Anti-Tank and DEAD (Destruction of Enemy Air Defences) weapon??
Seems to me that you must research more about the actual and true F-35 capabilities, me thinks...

#4363141 - 06/10/17 03:45 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 6,968
Jayhawk Offline
Silastic Armorfiend
Jayhawk  Offline
Silastic Armorfiend
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 6,968
Docking Bay 94
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/09/politics/f-35-grounded-oxygen-problems/index.html

Germany better hold off with a purchase for a while, even though the jet's performance is literally "breathtaking".

Face it, this thing is still in "beta", or rather, "early access". No one here knows anything more than LM and the respective nations involved with the program want you to know.

They want your tax *insert relevant currency here*, so they want you to like the F-35. How it will perform in the end, we'll see eventually. Let it fly a couple of combat missions. Let the military work out the kinks. Quoting PR/marketing-approved performance data sheets as if they were Gospel is extremely silly.


Why men throw their lives away attacking an armed Witcher... I'll never know. Something wrong with my face?
#4363159 - 06/10/17 05:32 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Jayhawk]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Offline
Veteran
Arthonon  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
Originally Posted by Jayhawk
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/09/politics/f-35-grounded-oxygen-problems/index.html

Germany better hold off with a purchase for a while, even though the jet's performance is literally "breathtaking".

Face it, this thing is still in "beta", or rather, "early access". No one here knows anything more than LM and the respective nations involved with the program want you to know.

They want your tax *insert relevant currency here*, so they want you to like the F-35. How it will perform in the end, we'll see eventually. Let it fly a couple of combat missions. Let the military work out the kinks. Quoting PR/marketing-approved performance data sheets as if they were Gospel is extremely silly.


I agree whole-heartedly that no one here knows as much as LM and the buying countries, so it is pointless to make determinations about how it will perform at our level.

However, the O2 problem is hardly unique to the F-35, so I don't know I'd say that is any indication of it being in "early access":

https://www.navytimes.com/articles/...ing-jets-after-instructors-refuse-to-fly

https://theaviationist.com/2017/03/...rivation-and-cabin-decompression-issues/

https://www.themarysue.com/raptor-o2-problem-found/


Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4363207 - 06/11/17 12:45 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
Flogger23m Offline
Senior Member
Flogger23m  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
US
Originally Posted by ricnunes
Originally Posted by Flogger23m

You're too emotionally invested in the F-35. The biggest mistake a lot of people, such as yourself, seem to make about military equipment is that the military must form the mission around the equipment. It is the other way around. The equipment must fit the mission.


No I'm not "emotionally invested in the F-35". I'm "emotionally invested" in facts or in the truth and I'm a bit "sick and tired" of the same old arguments such as the one repeated by you - F-35 has short range - which has been more than proven to be FALSE but people still ventilate and insist in the same wrong arguments. With all due respect, that's almost like lying.


Originally Posted by Flogger23m

The F-35 does not have the range the USN desires. It has more range than the Super Hornet. Big deal. You seem obvious to the fact that the Super Hornet has a short range for the USN's goal, and so does the F-35. You seem to be content with shortcomings. The F-35 fits the same role as the Super Hornet. It is nice, but not what the USN wants or needs. They don't need an incrementally better strike fighter. Clearly they're looking for a larger class fighter, such as the F-22 and F-15. As for F-35 drop tanks, they're in development. Israel really wants them because the F-35's range for their mission is inadequate. It is naive to say that external drop tanks are ineffective. To be blunt, they extend range. Even the F-22 has drop tanks, because they extend the range.


And what is the range that the USN requires that the F-35C cannot attain while your "magical plane" can accomplish that you're talking about?? This promises to be fun...

So the F-35C has a too short range for the USN but I point out that the Super Hornet with external fuel tanks has an even shorter range and you say "big deal", really?? The Super Hornet with its short range (even with external fuel tanks) is OK but the F-35C with its considerably longer range is NOT, LOL rolleyes

Oh, and air-to-air refueling doesn't "ring you a bell", no?

With this argument of yours I can only remember of the following and since one says that an image is worth a thousand words, here it goes:

[Linked Image]


Oh and BTW, the USN does WANT the F-35C. It just wants to operate them alongside with the Super Hornets for the time being which is also a political move since if no more Super Hornets would be purchased (by the USN) the Boeing Super Hornet manufacturing line could SHUT DOWN this year (2017).

Originally Posted by Flogger23m

And you still seem to be obvious to the difference between ordinance weight and size / compatibility. If you want to carry anti tank missiles or stand off cruise missiles, HARMs, or decent sized payload you're going to need external stores on the F-35.


Really?? Ever hear about the JSM (Join Strike Missile), a dual role anti-ship/land-strike cruise missile which can be carried INTERNALLY in the F-35?
Ever heard about the GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb II which the F-35 can carry 8 (eight) of them INTERNALLY? How about this for a very long range Anti-Tank and DEAD (Destruction of Enemy Air Defences) weapon??
Seems to me that you must research more about the actual and true F-35 capabilities, me thinks...


You're loosing the arguments and it shows, hence the all caps and angst in your typing. For some reason you have deemed the F-35 sufficient for the USN. Good thing the USN doesn't give a damn what people on internet forums say. wink They're already started a fighter program which will be a replacement for the Super Hornet. It will be an aircraft tailored to their mission profiles. You clearly have zero desire to realize that for everything great the F-35 brings, it isn't the right tool for every job.

The absurdness of your writings mount with each post. For example, you're still rambling on about the Super Hornet. Examples:

Problem:
The USN is looking for something with more range than the Super Hornet and F-35C.

ricnunes solution:
F*ck you USN, you can refuel mid air. Don't you know that?

Problem:
Israel is looking into drop tanks to extend the range of the F-35A.

ricnunes solution:
The F-35A has more range than the F-16. F*ck you IAF, learn how to refuel mid air.

Problem:
F-35's internal weapon bays are limited. Majority of missions by the USN will require external stores, negating the low RCS aspects.

ricnunes solution:
F*ck you USN. I literally have no counter point to that. But f*ck you anyways. Is that directed at ricnunes ? It seems to read that way.

Then you bring up the "Join Strike Missile". A program concept which is now on its 2nd (or was it 3rd?) iteration. We have no idea if this program will be the one to be completed, and we have no idea how many can fit inside the F-35's weapons bay. Tell me - how many can fit internally? 4? 6? 8? 10? Competing aircraft can carry 12+ anti tank missiles. Unless the F-35 can match that internally, to carry the same payload will result in a gain of RCS. Negating one of its most useful aspects, one of the major advantages over older designs. A point that seems to be going over your head with alarming frequency. That failure on your part to realize that many of the of the missions required of the F-35 requires external stores. All due to its shortcoming which is a small weapons bay. A shortcoming of the design.

Fact is, when talking about the USN, they want a full size fighter. Not another small size. They're eyeing a spiritual successor to the F-14 and F-15. They already received three light weight designs in a row. They're buying F-35Cs to hold them over as they retire the very old Hornets. They only ordered a small number of F-35Cs (less than 300 planned). They're running a program for a new fighter to replace the Super Hornet. Unless they loose political funding (which is very likely), they plan to buy more of those than F-35s. They know what they want and will design an air frame around their requirements. Make no mistake, they're looking for something with a larger internal payload capacity and a longer range than their current options (Super Hornet / F-35C).

Despite the F-35's shortcomings and inadequacy for certain services, it will still be an excellent aircraft. It will be a better plane than the F-16, F-18 and Harrier (not a hard feat). Just don't dissuade yourself into thinking:
- It is the best plane for every service and mission profile
- It does not have shortcomings

Take a step back and breathe to. wink

Last edited by oldgrognard; 06/11/17 12:54 AM.
#4363212 - 06/11/17 01:33 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Offline
Veteran
Arthonon  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
Flogger, you've said multiple times that the Navy is looking for a longer-ranged aircraft - can you let me know your source for that?


Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4363396 - 06/12/17 01:43 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Arthonon]  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 20,152
Top Gun Offline
Lifer
Top Gun  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 20,152
Roch-Vegas NH
Originally Posted by Arthonon
Originally Posted by Jayhawk
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/09/politics/f-35-grounded-oxygen-problems/index.html

Germany better hold off with a purchase for a while, even though the jet's performance is literally "breathtaking".

Face it, this thing is still in "beta", or rather, "early access". No one here knows anything more than LM and the respective nations involved with the program want you to know.

They want your tax *insert relevant currency here*, so they want you to like the F-35. How it will perform in the end, we'll see eventually. Let it fly a couple of combat missions. Let the military work out the kinks. Quoting PR/marketing-approved performance data sheets as if they were Gospel is extremely silly.


I agree whole-heartedly that no one here knows as much as LM and the buying countries, so it is pointless to make determinations about how it will perform at our level.

However, the O2 problem is hardly unique to the F-35, so I don't know I'd say that is any indication of it being in "early access":

https://www.navytimes.com/articles/...ing-jets-after-instructors-refuse-to-fly

https://theaviationist.com/2017/03/...rivation-and-cabin-decompression-issues/

https://www.themarysue.com/raptor-o2-problem-found/


but this just proves why you should never put all your eggs in one basket like Riccunes wants to do. If they don't fix this O2 problem and have to ground them all again, then you have 3 services how have to ground their entire fleet...

That's not very sound planning.

#4363455 - 06/12/17 05:04 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Offline
Veteran
Arthonon  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
I have thought of that, and have mentioned it too, Dave, and not only 3 services, but many allied countries as well.


Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4363462 - 06/12/17 05:50 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 6,968
Jayhawk Offline
Silastic Armorfiend
Jayhawk  Offline
Silastic Armorfiend
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 6,968
Docking Bay 94
And now, the rest of the (OP) story:

https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/arti...gt-Deutschland-die-Atombomben-Frage.html

I'll recap the gist of the article in English

- The German Luftwaffe needs to replace its aging Tornado fleet (and only! the Tornadoes) by 2035, Spain needs to replace its F-18s within a similar timeframe.
- Airbus is developing the Future Combat Defense System (https://www.aerosociety.com/news/airbus-reveals-tornado-successor-concept-for-2040s/) with which the company hopes to become the "Lockheed-Martin" of Europe.
- Problems:
a) UK and other European countries (Italy, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, possibly Spain) have already decided on the F-35, France will stick with the Rafale, so not enough potential development partners left
b) the future Tornado replacement needs to be capable of carrying nuclear weapons, for which it needs to be certified (which the F-35 is). In order to receive that certificate, the United States would be eligible to get every single piece of data. Naturally, Airbus does not want to share its design secrets with the US (and therefore Lockheed/ Boeing/ GE etc.). That's the reason the Luftwaffe's Typhoons are not "capable" of carrying nuclear bombs. Keyword: nuclear sharing. So either the FCDS "earmarked" for Germany will not be certified to carry nuclear weapons, or Airbus would need to share secret data with the US, or Germany does indeed develop its own nuclear arsenal. Or the Luftwaffe picks a US design.

My own (highly inefficient and very expensive) advice would be for the Luftwaffe and the US Navy to co-fund the (scrapped) naval variant of the F-22....because it looks like the love child of the Raptor and a Tomcat! smile


Why men throw their lives away attacking an armed Witcher... I'll never know. Something wrong with my face?
#4363463 - 06/12/17 05:53 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,384
PanzerMeyer Offline
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Offline
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,384
Miami, FL USA
Great post Jayhawk and your joke at the end was a good one. smile


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4363716 - 06/13/17 08:18 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Jayhawk]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Jayhawk
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/09/politics/f-35-grounded-oxygen-problems/index.html

Germany better hold off with a purchase for a while, even though the jet's performance is literally "breathtaking".

Face it, this thing is still in "beta", or rather, "early access". No one here knows anything more than LM and the respective nations involved with the program want you to know.

They want your tax *insert relevant currency here*, so they want you to like the F-35. How it will perform in the end, we'll see eventually. Let it fly a couple of combat missions. Let the military work out the kinks. Quoting PR/marketing-approved performance data sheets as if they were Gospel is extremely silly.




So has all USN Hornets (including Super Hornets) as well as the USN T-45's Goshawk.
With the Hornet/Super Hornet the problem is even worse since it not only affects the pilot's/crewmen oxygen supply but also suffers from cabin decompression, like you can read here:
https://theaviationist.com/2017/03/...rivation-and-cabin-decompression-issues/

Does this means that the Hornet/Super Hornet is also a "beta aircraft"?? That no-one or no country should buy Hornets?

#4363724 - 06/13/17 09:06 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Flogger23m]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted by Flogger23m

You're loosing the arguments and it shows...


LoL, you can't even prove your points or show evidence backing up your claims and posts.

For example you failed to indicate what is that USN long range fighter that the US Navy wants and supposedly will acquire in the place of the F-35C.


Originally Posted by Flogger23m

The absurdness of your writings mount with each post. For example, you're still rambling on about the Super Hornet. Examples:


Absurdness of my writings?? LoL, ever considered buying a mirror for yourself? rolleyes


Originally Posted by Flogger23m

Problem:
The USN is looking for something with more range than the Super Hornet and F-35C.


And you have the nerve to call my writings absurd?? Really??
Again what is this something with more range than the Super Hornet and F-35C?? What's the name of this something?? rolleyes
All I can hear here are crickets in the background with an occasional rant from you (Flogger23m) that the US Navy wants something other than the F-35C.

For example read here and amuse yourself:
http://www.newsweek.com/us-navy-purchase-most-expensive-fighter-jet-trump-581560

So no, your wet dreams that the US Navy won't buy the F-35C won't happen. Sorry...


Originally Posted by Flogger23m

ricnunes solution:
F*ck you USN, you can refuel mid air. Don't you know that?


Now who's loosing arguments. At least I post facts not some childish rant.

BTW, did you know that air refueling is organic to the US Navy, no??

Are you suggesting that your "wet dream super range mythical future US Navy fighter" wouldn't need air refueling?? LoL, you are even more clueless or even more delusional than I initially thought.

Ever heard about the MQ-25 Stingray?? One of the current and among the most important US Navy aircraft programs which is an UAV designed to fill in the US Navy Air Tanking Roles.

Here inform yourself first before posting nonsense:
https://news.usni.org/2016/07/15/official-mq-25a-stingray-title-navys-first-carrier-uav


Originally Posted by Flogger23m

Problem:
Israel is looking into drop tanks to extend the range of the F-35A.

ricnunes solution:
The F-35A has more range than the F-16. F*ck you IAF, learn how to refuel mid air.

Problem:
F-35's internal weapon bays are limited. Majority of missions by the USN will require external stores, negating the low RCS aspects.

ricnunes solution:
F*ck you USN. I literally have no counter point to that. But f*ck you anyways. Is that directed at ricnunes ? It seems to read that way.


More nonsense. Is Israel actually developing drop tanks for the F-35? One thing is initial plans other completely different thing is what will end up being developed.
What F-35 narrow-minded critics such as yourself seem to forget is that things DO EVOLVE and change, specially regarding a ground-breaking next-gen fighter aircraft like the F-35 or resuming the future or air combat.



Originally Posted by Flogger23m

Then you bring up the "Join Strike Missile"....


As opposed to the nonsenses that you posted about the "imaginary future long range US Navy fighter which will send the F-35C to oblivion" the JSM is actually IN DEVELOPMENT (and no my CAPS aren't because I lost an argument but because you seem to have lost your ability to READ keypoints and important information).
JSM is even being developed by 2 (two) nations as we speak, Norway and Australia.
Here amuse yourself:
http://www.baesystems.com/en-aus/article/bae-systems-australia-technology-in-joint-strike-missile

Where's your "imaginary future long range US Navy fighter which will send the F-35C to oblivion", by the way?? rolleyes


Originally Posted by Flogger23m

Fact is, when talking about the USN, they want a full size fighter. Not another small size. They're eyeing a spiritual successor to the F-14 and F-15. They already received three light weight designs in a row. They're buying F-35Cs to hold them over as they retire the very old Hornets. They only ordered a small number of F-35Cs (less than 300 planned). They're running a program for a new fighter to replace the Super Hornet. Unless they loose political funding (which is very likely), they plan to buy more of those than F-35s. They know what they want and will design an air frame around their requirements. Make no mistake, they're looking for something with a larger internal payload capacity and a longer range than their current options (Super Hornet / F-35C).


The fact is the US Navy will acquire the F-35C. Everything else is speculation and even nonsense, that's the fact!

What's the name of that "imaginary future long range US Navy fighter which will send the F-35C to oblivion" of yours?? Still waiting for it...

Oh and if you want to speak about the F-35C numbers don't forget the US Marines they will order 80 F-35Cs plus the order of 260 for the USN. That's 340 F-35Cs. For example there are currently 500 Super Hornets manufactured, including the ones exported to Australia. Since the F-35C is vastly superior to the Super Hornet and 340 F-35C will do much more than less than 500 Super Hornets, so I fail you see your F-35C low numbers argument.

How many of your "imaginary future long range US Navy fighter which will send the F-35C to oblivion" will US Navy order, genius??
Still waiting for some evidence about your "imaginary future long range US Navy fighter which will send the F-35C to oblivion" and what will be its name! Perhaps this aircraft of yours is sooooo Stealth that it doesn't even and ever exists rolleyes

#4380140 - 09/18/17 06:53 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
Arthonon Offline
Veteran
Arthonon  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,560
California
Resurrecting this old thread with news about F-35 purchases. Canada famously (infamously?) decided to not buy the F-35 while saying they were going to have a fair and open competition (without one of the main contenders being permitted to participate).

That was taking so long that they announced they were going to buy 18 Super Hornets as an interim solution. Well, the pricing came in for that 18-unit buy, and it's over half as much as the 65 F-35s they were quoted - $6.4 billion for the Super Hornets vs.$9 billion for 65 F-35s. The Danish government just did an analysis showing that they could get 27 F-35s for $3.7 billion.

So the F-35 was so horribly over priced that they couldn't buy it, but it's OK to pay more for a previous generation Super Hornet. And now that deal has an issue because Boeing, makers of the Super Hornet, sued Bombardier and if they win, it will impact Canada's aircraft industry significantly, so Canadians may not want to buy anything from Boeing at this point. What a mess.

Here's an article that talks a little about it (it has some political references, but is mostly talking about the decision-making in particular):

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/op...ref=https://www.theglobeandmail.com&


Ken Cartwright

No single drop of rain feels it is responsible for the flood.

http://www.techflyer.net

#4380162 - 09/18/17 08:51 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,534
Alicatt Offline
Hotshot
Alicatt  Offline
Hotshot

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,534
Ice Cold in Alex or Eating in ...
2 weeks ago I was at the 40th Sanicole International Airshow, they were banging on about Belgium going for the F35, they had narrowed the selection down to either the Eurofighter Typhoon or the F35, earlier this year they had just dropped the Rafale out of the running.


Chlanna nan con thigibh a so's gheibh sibh feoil
Sons of the hound come here and get flesh
Clan Cameron
#4380202 - 09/19/17 08:46 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 483
Aullido Offline
Member
Aullido  Offline
Member

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 483
Germany must save their money and invest in drones.

#4380204 - 09/19/17 09:27 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 7,747
Ssnake Offline
Virtual Shiva Beast
Ssnake  Offline
Virtual Shiva Beast
Hotshot

Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 7,747
Germoney
What's the point in drones, if we can't get them certified for general airspace. Without that certification you can't even start them. The US simply locks down airspace during launches until the Predators have reached an altitude where no interference with civilian airliners can be expected. Apparently that's a no go for European airspace as the Eurohawk procurement disaster illustrated.

#4380339 - 09/19/17 09:52 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 483
Aullido Offline
Member
Aullido  Offline
Member

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 483
The days of the manned fighter are counted. I am sure that for military applications drones will enjoy some licenses.

#4394874 - 12/14/17 10:43 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
GERMANY PREFERS EUROFIGHTER OVER F-35 TO REPLACE ITS FLEET OF TORNADO FIGHTER BOMBERS


Quote
According Reuters the German Defense Ministry said in a letter to a lawmaker that the Eurofighter is the preferred choice to replace the Tornado fighter-bomber.

The ministry’s position appears to contradict that of the Luftwaffe (German Air Force) which had indicated that its preference is the Lockheed Martin F-35, according to past media reports.

In fact a Luftwaffe official said at the International Fighter Conference on Nov. 8, 2017 that “The Tornado replacement needs to be fifth-generation aircraft that can be detected as late as possible, if at all. It must be able to identify targets from a long way off and to target them as soon as possible. The German Ministry of Defence [MoD] is looking at several aircraft today, including the F-35 – it is commercially available already, has been ordered by many nations and is being introduced into service today, and has most of the capabilities required.”


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4394882 - 12/14/17 11:24 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Aullido]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Crane Hunter Offline
Veteran
Crane Hunter  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Master Meme-er
Originally Posted by Aullido
The days of the manned fighter are counted. I am sure that for military applications drones will enjoy some licenses.


You need powerful onboard AI and/or an instantaneous and countermeasures proof means of remote control, before drone fighters can properly assume every role.

#4394897 - 12/15/17 12:20 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Arthonon]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
Flogger23m Offline
Senior Member
Flogger23m  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,168
US
Originally Posted by Arthonon
Resurrecting this old thread with news about F-35 purchases. Canada famously (infamously?) decided to not buy the F-35 while saying they were going to have a fair and open competition (without one of the main contenders being permitted to participate).

That was taking so long that they announced they were going to buy 18 Super Hornets as an interim solution. Well, the pricing came in for that 18-unit buy, and it's over half as much as the 65 F-35s they were quoted - $6.4 billion for the Super Hornets vs.$9 billion for 65 F-35s. The Danish government just did an analysis showing that they could get 27 F-35s for $3.7 billion.

So the F-35 was so horribly over priced that they couldn't buy it, but it's OK to pay more for a previous generation Super Hornet. And now that deal has an issue because Boeing, makers of the Super Hornet, sued Bombardier and if they win, it will impact Canada's aircraft industry significantly, so Canadians may not want to buy anything from Boeing at this point. What a mess.

Here's an article that talks a little about it (it has some political references, but is mostly talking about the decision-making in particular):

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/op...ref=https://www.theglobeandmail.com&


Indeed. Canada will end up buying from the Europeans due to the current administrations tantrum over the F-35. I can't imagine they will go back to the F-35 after tearing up their previous deal. And now Boeing is out of the question. I can understand that Canada doesn't necessarily need an air force, but they are part of NATO and have requirements to meet if I recall. In which case they do need to maintain at least some planes. I can't imagine they will save much long term by buying a European aircraft, and the lack of compatibility with the US can't be good.

#4394978 - 12/15/17 12:52 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Crane Hunter]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,384
PanzerMeyer Offline
Pro-Consul of Florida
PanzerMeyer  Offline
Pro-Consul of Florida
King Crimson - SimHQ's Top Poster

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 121,384
Miami, FL USA
Originally Posted by Crane Hunter
Originally Posted by Aullido
The days of the manned fighter are counted. I am sure that for military applications drones will enjoy some licenses.


You need powerful onboard AI and/or an instantaneous and countermeasures proof means of remote control, before drone fighters can properly assume every role.



Not just fighter aircraft but ground troops as well.


Imagine the political and moral implications when nations start fielding entirely robotic ground forces. It WILL happen. It's just a matter of when.


“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.”
#4395243 - 12/17/17 03:26 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 11,752
Vertigo1 Offline
Veteran
Vertigo1  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 11,752
Zeta Aquilae System
When was the last time Canadian aircraft saw service in conflict? serious question.


"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

“One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” -Milton Friedman

Quem Deus vult perdere, prius dementat
#4395254 - 12/17/17 04:53 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Vertigo1]  
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Crane Hunter Offline
Veteran
Crane Hunter  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,944
Master Meme-er
Originally Posted by The_Stupendous_Yappi
When was the last time Canadian aircraft saw service in conflict? serious question.


Syria.

Anyway the problem surrounding the F-35 buy in Canada is that Canadians have a cartoonish level of cheapness as a national trait, combined with no sense of value.

And so buying tired 2nd hand Aussie Hornets is fine with most of the Canadian public as long as it saves a few nickels and dimes.

#4395269 - 12/17/17 07:52 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Vertigo1]  
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 10,790
Weasel_Keeper Offline
SimHQ Forums Manager
Weasel_Keeper  Offline
SimHQ Forums Manager
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 10,790
Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Originally Posted by The_Stupendous_Yappi
When was the last time Canadian aircraft saw service in conflict? serious question.


I worked side by side with Canucks in 2015 where we, along with Italy and Denmark brought the fight against daesh in Iraq and Syria.

USAF A-10s and USMC MV-22 Ospreys, Canadian F-18s, Italian Tornados, Danish F-16s.


Last edited by Weasel_Keeper; 12/17/17 08:03 AM.

"Cave Putorium!"
SoWW #2485
Beware the Weasel
#4395276 - 12/17/17 10:56 AM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: Vertigo1]  
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
Tom_Weiss Offline
Veteran
Tom_Weiss  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 14,410
3rd Planet, Sun
Originally Posted by The_Stupendous_Yappi
When was the last time Canadian aircraft saw service in conflict? serious question.


they did it yesterday, will do it today and tomorrow again, if it is not the F-18 that is deployed it is a P-3 Orion.

you can learn more about their operations here

https://twitter.com/RCAF_ARC

I hope they buy the Rafale - that would be a much more suitable choice for their Aerospace industries in view of what Boeing did to them recently.

#4411707 - 03/20/18 03:03 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
German Air Force Chief fired for supporting F-35

Quote
According Jane’s Gen Müllner’s outspoken public support for the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) as a successor to the German Tornado fleet was pivotal in the decision for his early retirement. “The Luftwaffe considers the F-35’s capability as the benchmark for the selection process for the Tornado replacement, and I think I have expressed myself clearly enough as to what the favourite of the air force is,” Gen Müllner told last November.

Luftwaffe’s Chief active support of the JSF clashes with current Ministry of Defence planning, which prefers a successor solution involving the Eurofighter Typhoon.

As we have previously reported the Luftwaffe has a shortlist of existing platforms to replace its Panavia Tornado fighter bombers from 2025 to 2030 but the service “preferred choice” is the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, a German Air Force official said at the International Fighter Conference on Nov. 8, 2017.

According to the same official in fact, the Lightning II can satisfy most of Germany’s requirements and offer other benefits as well.

“The Tornado replacement needs to be fifth-generation aircraft that can be detected as late as possible, if at all. It must be able to identify targets from a long way off and to target them as soon as possible.

This print is available in multiple sizes from AircraftProfilePrints.com – CLICK HERE TO GET YOURS. F-35A Lightning II 56th OG, 61st FS, LF/12-5050 / 2014
“The German Ministry of Defence [MoD] is looking at several aircraft today, including the F-35 – it is commercially available already, has been ordered by many nations and is being introduced into service today, and has most of the capabilities required.”

Instead in a letter to a Greens lawmaker who had inquired about the deliberations, the German Defense Ministry said the F-35 and Boeing’s F-15 and F/A-18 fighters were secondary options.


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4602268 - 06/23/22 12:57 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
F4UDash4 Offline
Veteran
F4UDash4  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 13,736
SC
Germany went back and forth on what to buy for 5+ years, now they are rushing to get the F-35 in service...


https://aviationweek.com/shownews/i...martin-sprint-f-35-contract-finalization


"In the vast library of socialist books, there’s not a single volume on how to create wealth, only how to take and “redistribute” it.” - David Horowitz
#4602270 - 06/23/22 01:48 PM Re: Germany Thinking of Buying F-35? [Re: F4UDash4]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
oldgrognard Offline
Administrator
oldgrognard  Offline
Administrator
Lifer

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 24,029
USA
Geez, I wonder why the sudden change ?


Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Someday your life will flash in front of your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
10 years after 3/8/2014
by NoFlyBoy. 03/17/24 10:25 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0