F-35 Program - General Discussion
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
Carlo Kopp ran with that nonsense for a while as well, whilst crucially ignoring its actual air combat performance which was a lot better than the statistics 'said' it would...
Sprey and Kopp. Masters of the own goal and I doubt they even realise it...
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Koop's Ausairpower site has been very quite as of late. I guess Carlo has been muted by the F-35 program's recent successes.
Muted by no-one being impressed by their 'playstation' level ''simulation'' and no-one listening to their playground level analysis...
Goon is active on twitter trying to beg politicians to listen to him, which is about as active as that mob get these days...
I suspect reality has begun to sink in at last...
Hello.
Who is David Axe??
Is he representative of LM?
He wrote an article , in which he said " Pentagon plans to equip the US Air Force fighter F-35 with an incomplete set of options. Take the US Air Force claimed the number of aircraft with a full range of optional in the near future will not happen, because there is no money, and besides, not all the "filling" of the aircraft has passed the necessary improvements after a series of failed tests.To keep within the stipulated time, the possibility of the F-35 had significantly limit - in particular due to its ability to fight on equal terms with the newest aircraft of Russia and China. The aircraft, which the US plans to present in January 2017, will be a weakened version of himself."
Who is David Axe??
Is he representative of LM?
He wrote an article , in which he said " Pentagon plans to equip the US Air Force fighter F-35 with an incomplete set of options. Take the US Air Force claimed the number of aircraft with a full range of optional in the near future will not happen, because there is no money, and besides, not all the "filling" of the aircraft has passed the necessary improvements after a series of failed tests.To keep within the stipulated time, the possibility of the F-35 had significantly limit - in particular due to its ability to fight on equal terms with the newest aircraft of Russia and China. The aircraft, which the US plans to present in January 2017, will be a weakened version of himself."
Just so you know, hot coffee does not feel good ejected through the nasal cavity.
Last edited:
He's a "professional blogger". With zero military experience, knowledge, or training.
He's an outspoken critic of the F35 based on his extensive combat aviation experience
.
Last edited by a moderator:
SpazSinbad
Active Member
I guess it was a good excuse to clean your keyboard?
LOL, no he is not affiliated in any way with LM. He is a "reporter" who has a bug up his ass about F-35, he is one of the least reliable military "journalists" when it comes to that plane.
Boagrius
Well-Known Member
Axe is a clickbait generator, that's about it. His recent viral article on the F35/F16 tests is a good case in point. Portrayed an exercise in testing/programming the F35's control laws as an actual test of WVR ACM ability to draw in the masses. Fits right in with Kopp, Sprey, Goon et al... a dubious honor.
Like every other combat aircraft program on the planet, F-35 capabilities are progressively being delivered in Blocks. Some manufacturers call these tranches (Eurofighter Consortium, Dassault etc) but the reality is advanced capability takes significant time and expense to develop, significant time and expense to implement and significant time and effort to learnt to 'fight' from an operators point of view. It simply can't all be delivered at the same time and we see this with every manufacturer, not just Lockheed Martin, despite the critics seeming to enjoy portraying it this way...
F-35 is increasingly rolling out capability as the program progresses. Capability choices and compromises have to be made with any program and some of the 'advanced' capability that modern older fighters that have already had the benefit of longer development times, will take similar times to roll out in the F-35.
As a rough guide, I challenge ANYONE to compare the capability of F-35A against the capability of JAS-39A, Rafale F1, Eurofighter Tranche 1 at their respective entries to service and see how they stack up...
Then compare the funded Block upgrade program and that of the other major fighter projects and try and develop a cogent argument as to why the F-35 won't be a success...
We need a like button.... I think I just read 4 posts in a row re Axe which cleared my nostrils and messed up the keyboard and screen....
CHEERS!!!
I'm tired of those barely informed chiming in against the JSF program because they read one headline and are experts
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Canada has a federal election in October and it is interesting that virtually no mention of the fighter replacement has been mentioned so far in the campaign. When it is raised, check out the Canadian media comments and you will see the full horror of "barely informed". You will be astounded by the bovine excrement.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
I came across this somewhat dated amusing article describing the F-35D which should address the peanut gallery's concerns regarding the F-35/A-10 debate over CAS.
F-35D+ to Feature Titanium Bathtub and GAU-8 Avenger | The Tactical Air Network
F-35D+ to Feature Titanium Bathtub and GAU-8 Avenger | The Tactical Air Network
I came across this somewhat dated amusing article describing the F-35D which should address the peanut gallery's concerns regarding the F-35/A-10 debate over CAS.
F-35D+ to Feature Titanium Bathtub and GAU-8 Avenger | The Tactical Air Network
David Axe would be a full supporter of the D+ for sure!
What is wrong with ripping on the thud?Not really W. First of all as you well know, B-2 isn't getting made because they cost in excess of $750m a piece and even the USG couldn't cop that. The capability isn't the reason why that build stopped, just as it wasn't with F-22A either.
Yes the LO of the F-35 (or any aircraft for that matter) isn't a magic bullet solution under all conditions and all circumstances, but it is a huge tactical advantage compared to not having it at all, or in limited applications only. Certainly far more useful than continually investing in an incremental 'nn' percentage increase in sustained turn rate performance...
Otherwise all you have is a day only 'light' fighter with a pair of Sidewinders and an internal gun only...
But hey, it turns nice and pretty at the airshows and all that...
Edit: And I can't believe you're going with the Thunderchief comparison of all things! That aircraft more than most is THE textbook example of why asinine 'empirical' analysis of combat aircraft is such a waste of time. An aircraft that was designed for a specific role, through the application of appropriate tactics was able to excel in a vastly different and largely un-intended role.
You are 'dissing' the confirmed killer of 27.5 MiG's in ACTUAL air combat for only 17 air to air losses in against genuine role specific air to air fighters in return there my friend...
It occurs to me that if it were being used today it wouldn't be very useful.Re the B2: It's ok to use the numbers game, as this is an open thread but you know as well as I do that stealth is a more complicated game.
A couple of items that occur to me as being "facts":
- Materials tech has been stolen from the USA by China
- China doesn't appear to know how to repeat the application of said materials tech
- That doesn't stop them from trying
- how long before they "get it"?
So it occurs to me (again an opinion) that a large proportion of our LO tech seems to be protected by what people (Chinese researchers) cannot see. This kind of freaks me out as to a person with a Western perspective (culture) it might be as plain as dog balls, or it may be extremely simple for a clever chappy from a country like, um, I dunno, Iran(?) to figure out.
Anyway, we all knew that this is the game we are in a "LO race" so-to-speak. It just pisses me off that (again, an opinion) so much time and money has been spent on the F-35 and the LO gap has the potential to disappear overnight, if some Chinese guy in a white gown has a happy accident.
cheers
W
true to a point.... "getting" LO around a platform doesn't translate to them getting LO as a systems, geoint and geospatial capability
at the geoint and geospatial level they're still gripping up how to fill in the blanks and are attempting to cover off the gaps by adapting western tech such as adsb2 into a military/geospace operating picture... eventually they'll get it, but the "blue" LO construct won't have stood still.
look at the agility of generational developments in LO - in real terms we're playing with 6th gen manned and 4th gen unmanned platforms - if you just look at the comms developments just in the last 3 years we're already outstripping current operational constructs.
the warfighting constructs are getting outpaced by tech advances - the former is in "5th service" terms being constrained by earlier generation tactical constructs.
red team is not only not keeping pace with the material science issues, single platform issues, they're nowhere near the gods view geoint and tactical integration opportunity levels that the americans, israelis and a few niche players are at.
they not only need to catch up, they need to pass and counter the stuff in the shed that hasn't come into public view but which has been up and running albeit as operational CTD's
WWhat is wrong with ripping on the thud?
Re the B2: It's ok to use the numbers game, as this is an open thread but you know as well as I do that stealth is a more complicated game.
A couple of items that occur to me as being "facts":
- Materials tech has been stolen from the USA by China
- China doesn't appear to know how to repeat the application of said materials tech
- That doesn't stop them from trying
- how long before they "get it"?
So it occurs to me (again an opinion) that a large proportion of our LO tech seems to be protected by what people (Chinese researchers) cannot see. This kind of freaks me out as to a person with a Western perspective (culture) it might be as plain as dog balls, or it may be extremely simple for a clever chappy from a country like, um, I dunno, Iran(?) to figure out.
Anyway, we all knew that this is the game we are in a "LO race" so-to-speak. It just pisses me off that (again, an opinion) so much time and money has been spent on the F-35 and the LO gap has the potential to disappear overnight, if some Chinese guy in a white gown has a happy accident.
cheers
W
Thank you and I must say I couldn't agree more.
I get tired of all the F35 critics that argue with zero knowledge (David Axe)
Yes, the PLA is working on supposed 5th gen aircraft but
- it took the US years to develop and get operational
- the F35 is technically the 4th USAF aircraft with LO features and one must think It keeps the tech (F117, B2, F22)
- I feel the same about the PAK FA, looks great so far but does the tech really work?
I for one, feel confident about the LO, networked capabilities, avionics, ECCM, etc, etc, etc the F35 brings to the table and will believe it when it's proven the PLAF and the VKS 5th gen aircraft truly have 5th gen tech that operationally works
.
no, later than that, Oxcart and her ilk were the first production manned artifacts using intentionally designed sig mgt features - and they were fundamental to contributing and developing the "Have" series of artifacts
if you look at every manned LO release, every one of them has employed a completely different concept of sig mgt - none are identical but all have contributed to the same fundamental construct of what LO brings to the table
ditto for unmanned. the lightning bugs actually used chicken wire and bitumen over the body to deflect and absorb enemy radar
compare that to the 47 or Neuron ....