Do you have a link or a blog post/presento title or date? I looked at page 1 of the ELP blog and couldn't find it in amongst the multiple declarations that everyone else in the world isn’t telling the truth about the F-35. I really don’t want to go to page 2 without at least some more kind of a lead to shorten the searching process.Currently flicking very quickly the APA/Repsim "Resubmit" to Parliament after getting smacked down which you can find on the ELP website (fun times).
Loving the Chris Mills Mirage warries and implying that because Australian Fighter Pilots haven't flown a Mig29 that they are hardly in a position to participate in Man in the loop simulation... I think that he may be more delusional than Goon.ope
F-35 Multirole Joint Strike Fighter
- Thread starter SABRE
- Start date
- Status
Eric Palmer blog: RAAF boss practices deception; or just doesn't know
RAAF Boss Practices deception or Just doesnt know.
They are whipping themselves into a frenzy...
The comments regarding Chris Mills are from one of the Submissions, I cant really remember. I cant wait for his next techno-thriller novel to come out though.
RAAF Boss Practices deception or Just doesnt know.
They are whipping themselves into a frenzy...
The comments regarding Chris Mills are from one of the Submissions, I cant really remember. I cant wait for his next techno-thriller novel to come out though.
Thanks. Its probably one of the "compliants" about the RAAF and Lockheed presentos. Haven't read them yet but will do so soon.
Well it all reads like a house of cards. For example because Defence used Repsim and their Harpoon simulation to work out how many bombs they will need to drop in a future war then that validates all of their other Harpoon simulations… The difference in simulation requirements for logistics and survivability in the real world are just huge. And then this was a ‘reasonable assumption’ about the lethality of the AIM-120 against the Su-35S. So they admit to GIGO. We just made the figures up. Talk about scenario fulfilment.
Can we all sing along:
And Gigo was his name-o. G-I-G-O-G-I-G-O- G-I-G-O. And Gigo was his ... And Gigo was his name-o. (clap)-(clap)-(clap)-G-O (clap)-(clap)-(clap)-G-O ...
As to Chris Mill’s clean Mirage cruise flight. One may be able to fly optimum cruise-altitude on a VIP jaunt but on a combat air patrol flying at the right altitude is the difference between winning and losing. As surely anyone who’s looked at the RAAF experience in Korea would understand. Not to mention trained as a friggen fighter pilot.
Can we all sing along:
And Gigo was his name-o. G-I-G-O-G-I-G-O- G-I-G-O. And Gigo was his ... And Gigo was his name-o. (clap)-(clap)-(clap)-G-O (clap)-(clap)-(clap)-G-O ...
As to Chris Mill’s clean Mirage cruise flight. One may be able to fly optimum cruise-altitude on a VIP jaunt but on a combat air patrol flying at the right altitude is the difference between winning and losing. As surely anyone who’s looked at the RAAF experience in Korea would understand. Not to mention trained as a friggen fighter pilot.
The big, dumb, simple thing that leaps out to me which highlights some interesting flexibility with the truth is the winds in the high30's/low40's is generally going to be a westerly of 60-70kts. Sometimes more, rarely less. The higher the wind the worse the figures are going to be for the sake of the comparison raised by Mills.
Hence Willy to Tville = probably 40-50kts on the nose. Groundspeed probably 450kts
Tville-Willy = 40-50kts on the tail. Groundspeed probably 550kts
80-100kts of difference in ground speed is significant when you are only cruising at 500kts. So even though he claimed that he only gained 9% range or whatever for all the extra fuel it doesn't sound like apples are being compared to apples. It doesn't even pass the common sense test as if you burn 91% of fuel in the drop tanks just to carry them you wouldn't even bother and take the better clean performance so either a) the Mirage droptanks were incredibly poorly designed aerodynamically or b) he's taking the piss.
Sounds like APA methodology - dont mention the assumptions, find them to support your data, cherry pick the data. Bam it matches! Victory!
Hence Willy to Tville = probably 40-50kts on the nose. Groundspeed probably 450kts
Tville-Willy = 40-50kts on the tail. Groundspeed probably 550kts
80-100kts of difference in ground speed is significant when you are only cruising at 500kts. So even though he claimed that he only gained 9% range or whatever for all the extra fuel it doesn't sound like apples are being compared to apples. It doesn't even pass the common sense test as if you burn 91% of fuel in the drop tanks just to carry them you wouldn't even bother and take the better clean performance so either a) the Mirage droptanks were incredibly poorly designed aerodynamically or b) he's taking the piss.
Sounds like APA methodology - dont mention the assumptions, find them to support your data, cherry pick the data. Bam it matches! Victory!
They are all here...
House of Representatives Committees – Parliament of Australia
The lunacy is unbelievable. The level of hysterics is clearly rising in accordance with the improved performance of the JSF test program and the closer we come to introducing this aircraft.
When the first one lands at Williamtown, I expect their heads will explode...
I found Submission 15 most interesting. Apparently Repsim had contacted the staff at Parliament House after the Defence and Lockheed brief to the committee to try and get them to stop printing Hansard (record of Parliament meetings ) or add a “caveat” so as to not hurt Repsim’s reputation. Because the Defence and Lockheed people dismissed their ‘simulations’ as not being accurate.
What are they thinking? You go into debate you put your case and the other guy puts theirs. You can’t stop someone providing fair and reasonable criticism of your opinions. They may be entirely wrong but that’s how the crucible of ideas works.
And to support their claim that their simulations are valid (and Defence and Lockheed wrong0 they say that RAND was happy with their simulation for the “Baby Seals” report…. Mmm… Didn’t RAND let that report author go right after that conference? Doesn’t sound like a happy result to me.
And that Lt.Gen. Carlise, USAF’s comments about the need for Block III F-35 because Block I and II aren’t good enough for counter anti access operations supports their simulations. Hello! Block III was always the full combat ready block and the others just interim developmental stages along the spiral path.
So because they did the widely rejected “Baby Seals” simulation for someone from RAND who got fired the day after publishing it and because a senior USAF General says the F-35 needs to be fielded at its full combat ready condition of which the RAAF won’t accept less of for IOC their simulations are all proven accurate. Mmmm… I’m glad Hansard wasn’t stopped to insert that caveat because it wouldn’t have been good for Repsim’s reputation.
What are they thinking? You go into debate you put your case and the other guy puts theirs. You can’t stop someone providing fair and reasonable criticism of your opinions. They may be entirely wrong but that’s how the crucible of ideas works.
And to support their claim that their simulations are valid (and Defence and Lockheed wrong0 they say that RAND was happy with their simulation for the “Baby Seals” report…. Mmm… Didn’t RAND let that report author go right after that conference? Doesn’t sound like a happy result to me.
And that Lt.Gen. Carlise, USAF’s comments about the need for Block III F-35 because Block I and II aren’t good enough for counter anti access operations supports their simulations. Hello! Block III was always the full combat ready block and the others just interim developmental stages along the spiral path.
So because they did the widely rejected “Baby Seals” simulation for someone from RAND who got fired the day after publishing it and because a senior USAF General says the F-35 needs to be fielded at its full combat ready condition of which the RAAF won’t accept less of for IOC their simulations are all proven accurate. Mmmm… I’m glad Hansard wasn’t stopped to insert that caveat because it wouldn’t have been good for Repsim’s reputation.
LOL. Of course the Israelis who used their Mirage IIIs to great effect with drop tanks flying sortie after sortie without refuelling would have been better off without them. The Argentineans and South Africans who all had trouble getting their Mirage IIIs into the fight due to lack of range would have been better off without their drop tanks. Especially the Argentineans who had to pull their Mirage IIIs from the Falklands War for several weeks after exhausting their supply of tanks (by dropping them and making the British think for a while they were shooting missiles at them outside of their target acquisition range) until the Peruvians gave them more. They could have stayed in the fight for those crucial weeks if they had Chris Mills to do their mission planning…
Plus of course how does this all support his argument. Which is the f-35 is too draggy to get any range advantage from drop tanks. Hang on. Mirage III flies as far without drop tanks is like the F-35? Mmmm I’m no aerodynamicist but surely the Mirage III is not known as a draggy aircraft?
But the heart of the argument is comparing external loads on 4G fighters vs internal loads on 5G fighters. Because the F-16 can jettison its drop tanks it can revert to clean configuration and therefore outfight an F-35. But what about the weapons (hello mission kill)? What about conformal fuel tanks (hello supersonic drag)? Plus what about all the other capabilities of an F-35? LO, EO DAS, etc.
They did more than that. Here is the Presser they released shortly after the bad press explosion:
Statement Regarding Media Coverage of F-35 Joint Strike Fighter | RAND
Submission 17 from the DoD is in response to the various questions taken on notice in relation to the F-35. It is well worth a read from top to bottom.
But one interesting point is the destruction of the ‘Chase Plane Radar Blackout’ hoary chestnut used by the anti F-35 crowd.
But hang on a second why wouldn’t a chase plane’s radar be able to detect the F-35? It’s chasing the plane! Its flying in formation at close range (a few hundred feet away) so the chase pilot can assist the test pilot. Close enough to advise if something falls of the bottom of the plane or whatever. Even the stealthiest aircraft would be detected by simple radars only a short distance away.
Yet despite this barrage of facts and logic one imagines this isn’t the last we will have heard of the F-35s apparent lack of stealth.
But one interesting point is the destruction of the ‘Chase Plane Radar Blackout’ hoary chestnut used by the anti F-35 crowd.
So fancy that. The Super Hornet and other chase planes can use their radar in the vicinity of the F-35 just not when the F-35 is being tested for emissions. Wow the F-35 project is using basic scientific methodology of controlling the testing environment. And there they were thinking it is evidence writ large that the F-35 has no stealth capability and to avoid embarrassment the Super Hornet had to turn its radar off.
But hang on a second why wouldn’t a chase plane’s radar be able to detect the F-35? It’s chasing the plane! Its flying in formation at close range (a few hundred feet away) so the chase pilot can assist the test pilot. Close enough to advise if something falls of the bottom of the plane or whatever. Even the stealthiest aircraft would be detected by simple radars only a short distance away.
Yet despite this barrage of facts and logic one imagines this isn’t the last we will have heard of the F-35s apparent lack of stealth.
Y'see, there's their problem right there...
It used to be known as "situating the appreciation" when applied to battlefield tactics. You decide the outcome you want and try and make the facts fit and support the end position you want to achieve. Too bad it never worked...Good to see things haven't changed.
The Anti-F-35 mob have painted themselves into a corner and like most good politicians are not willing to admit they are wrong. Sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "I CAN'T HEAR YOU" didn't work as a kid either. One day they may realise that, but I'm not holding my breath waiting.
Air Force Brat
Member
F-35 news, rumours?
This falls under scuttlebutt category and I really haven't had time to run this down, but they hope to have the Helmet fully sorted by the end of summer, with the lag issues fully resolved, keep your fingers crossed. I believe it was in the daily Sit Rep, but I deleted it cleaning out the mailbox? Any body with any info on this? Cheers Brat
This falls under scuttlebutt category and I really haven't had time to run this down, but they hope to have the Helmet fully sorted by the end of summer, with the lag issues fully resolved, keep your fingers crossed. I believe it was in the daily Sit Rep, but I deleted it cleaning out the mailbox? Any body with any info on this? Cheers Brat
Why all the negative posts on the F35? The aircraft is going through development testing which involves all the major systems and subsystems. Seems like folks in here do not have an idea what goes on during this phase of the aircraft evolution. If this aircraft doesn't go through this process, then what will happen? All the air forces from various countries will receive the baseline configuration which would not meet the performance objectives. This aircraft will go through the test phases until decision makers make up their minds that the plane meets a certain reliability and/or performance objective. In my opinion, this plane will go through numerous engineering changes and planes already provided to the USAF will go through an retrofit operation to implement engineering changes, etc. This is an normal process for any type of armament be it an aircraft, ship, tank, armored personnel carrier, howitzer, ammunition, etc.
Air Force Brat
Member
Helmet fully sorted means fixed, as in functional, and the "aircraft" is in LRIP, which has been ordered scaled back by Vice Admiral David Ventlet, until some of the many developemental issues are fixed. Admiral Ventlet specifically noted that some of these fixes are deep in the aircraft such as the cracking bulkhead and hence very expensive to fix. The bulkhead issue is limited to the B, as the titanium bulkhead was replaced by forged aluminum, the A and the C retained the titanium bulkhead. I am well aware of aircraft and fatique cracking, as I have drilled many cracks to stop further propagation. I was not being negative, but noting that the fix is in, good news for the F-35. I believe the source is the helmet manufacturer. And this is a very positive thread for the F-35, so don't blame these guys because I have some concerns, oh and welcome to Defense Talk and I sincerely apologize if I have offended you, now I've got to go make myself another pitcher of blue koolaid!
making koolaid comments will make others wonder whether you are an APA clubber or fan of the hysteria club...
as we laboriously point out, the difference in attitude here re JSF is because people are prepared to counter the usual anti-JSF rhetoric with facts rather than just trot out the same infantile rubbish that gets thrown in as evidence of the platforms demise.
you'll note that none of the "pro" JSF posters here shy away from criticism.
balance, sense and logic are supposed to reign. there are lots of other forums available for the handwringers
as we laboriously point out, the difference in attitude here re JSF is because people are prepared to counter the usual anti-JSF rhetoric with facts rather than just trot out the same infantile rubbish that gets thrown in as evidence of the platforms demise.
you'll note that none of the "pro" JSF posters here shy away from criticism.
balance, sense and logic are supposed to reign. there are lots of other forums available for the handwringers
Some good info available in this Flight Global article from 2 days ago:
F-35 problems on their way to being fixed
In short, F-35 variants have now flown to 49,000 feet, a mere 1000 feet short of the required 50,000 feet envelope they are required to be cleared for, F-35A has flown to Mach 1.6 and B and C models have flown to Mach 1.4.
The helmet will require new camera and inertial measurement units and software tweaks, all of which are in the process of being integrated now and will be tested this summer.
Air restart and weapons testing are proceeding well and will lead to high AoA and live weapons drops this summer.
All sensor, EW, CNI, DAS, EOTS and data-link testing is proceeding very well...
Air Force Brat
Member
Well gf, the kool aid comment is to make my predispositions known, some who fly under the flag of "defense professional" have their own predispositions, which are obvious to those who do apply balance, sense and logic. What makes you think I'm not pro JSF, in any regard my only point is that progress is being made on the helmet, and that it should be sorted by the end of the summer, I thought that was good news. What is hysterical is how torqued some get in response to the APA and the handwringers and all that nonsense, the US is firmly commited to the JSF and to our partners and I fully support that commitment. My old man flew with and trained many international students in the C-130, he had high regards for you Aussies and your sense of humor, so lighten up, the American citizens are paying dearly for the JSF and I can hardly wait for my buds on here to join the party. So why don't you guys double your order and have twice as much fun. Cheers Brat
Air Force Brat
Member
Thanks ADM, thats what I was looking for, as I said it appears that lots of people are starting to get it right, and the F-35 is starting to look more like the airplane we have been promised. Admiral Ventlet seems to be getting a lot more out of this crew, since the stakes have been raised to deliver a sound aircraft, rather than a broke one we have to fix later! It is my considered opinion that we will all be happier in the long run, even if it takes a little longer than we had hoped.
lighten up?
you're the one who has misunderstood my reference.
it's about using an expression that is a favourite term of some in the hysteria seats... ie association issues
as for doubling platform numbers, even if by some magical sleight of hand JSF was half of the price we are paying ($68m pp) we still wouldn't double the orders.
its about force requirement, force balance, purple balance issues.
- Status