|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 10, 2008 13:31:09 GMT 12
Future of US Army (Moma) CAS: (Combat Aircraft Mag'n Vol.9 No.4)   |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 10, 2008 16:46:00 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 10, 2008 18:33:40 GMT 12
A lot of information on the APA site is updated however this statement today is a little odd: "Long term export numbers for the JSF remain unclear. Many EU F-16 operators will simply opt to swap their existing fleets for incrementally better JSFs, in a truly benign post Soviet local strategic environment." www.ausairpower.net/APA-JSF-Analysis.html(Last Updated: Wed Oct 1 00:18:37 UTC 2008) Yet Australia will soon be living in a toxic Sukhoi environment? Why not Europe where these Sukhois originate. What a lot of piffle. |
|
|
|
Post by rubberduck on Oct 11, 2008 10:47:43 GMT 12
Canberra Times today: Joint Strike Fighter boss on mission to Canberra BY PHILIP DORLING NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT 11/10/2008 9:24:00 AM The American aerospace giant Lockheed Martin is stepping up its push for Australia to buy the controversial F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The chief of the JSF project, Lockheed Martin vice-president Tom Burbage, will visit Canberra next month for talks with Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon and senior Defence officials. Mr Burbage will brief Mr Fitzgibbon on the JSF program's progress and make Lockheed Martin's pitch for Australia to lock into what will be our biggest defence procurement. The Defence Department is planning to spend about $16 billion to buy up to 100 of the new fighters to replace the air force's ageing F/A-18A fighters, the soon to be retired F-111 bombers and the interim fighter-bomber, the F/A-18F Super Hornet. Some estimates of the total project acquisition and life-cycle costs for the JSF purchase range as high as $40 billion. Despite reported poor results for the JSF in a recent United States Air Force wargame exercise in Hawaii, Mr Fitzgibbon has expressed confidence that the F-35 is ''the right aircraft for Australia'', provided Lockheed Martin can provide an acceptable delivery schedule at an affordable cost. A former US Navy aviator, Mr Burbage has run Lockheed Martin's JSF program since 2001. The project has suffered setbacks, including delays and rising costs that have been criticised by US government auditors. At present only two prototype aircraft have flown. The global financial crisis is likely to increase the risks of the project for Australia as a lower Australian dollar will reduce Australia's purchasing power for a purchase in US dollars. At the same time budgetary pressures in other countries involved in the JSF project may result in fewer aircraft being purchased with the result that under the agreement between the project partners Australia will carry a significantly greater proportion of shared development and production costs. A Finance Department source familiar with the JSF project told The Canberra Times this week that financial risks were now the biggest cloud hanging over the proposed acquisition. ''Defence hasn't left Fitzgibbon and the Government with much choice other than to buy the JSF, it was always pretty much a fait accompli'', the official said. ''The real issue is going to be how many do we buy and over what time period with things looking the way they are, Defence might not get all the capability they want. ''They might have to squeeze a lot more value out of those Super Hornets.'' www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/joint-strike-fighter-boss-on-mission-to-canberra/1331047.aspx |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 11, 2008 11:17:11 GMT 12
One can see how the 'anti-JSF clowns' get lots of free publicity but of course no denial from this idiot reporter (to frekkin' lazy I betcha) "Despite reported poor results for the JSF in a recent United States Air Force wargame exercise in Hawaii,..." We are going to see this nonsense reported until we all cark it. ;D
Sensible: "''The real issue is going to be how many do we buy and over what time period..." AND what no F-22? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by flycookie on Oct 11, 2008 14:32:21 GMT 12
Mr FlyNavy Luigi-d'Flie, Time for you to show more - at least a metric CWT more - repsect to Signor Carlo and his little friends at the APA "think tank." Buck up your act, or your high-pressure nemesis may well be sprayed in your general direction....................  ............... and we all know how that story ends, don't we? |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 11, 2008 14:48:39 GMT 12
Go Ahead - Make My Day - Punk. ;D Says Louie the Fly 'Straight from Rubbish Tip to You..."
|
|
|
|
Post by flycookie on Oct 11, 2008 15:03:00 GMT 12
Now now, Mr Fly Navy, be nice.
As we all know, Carlo has "flown the Super Hornet" and is, therefore, worthy of your time and undying respect.
Anyone who's "flown the Super Hornet" the way Carlo has is the non-pariel expert on all matters 4th and 5th generation multirole fast-jets.
I beseech you to drop the contempt and criticism and make obeisance at King Carlo's court of APA.
Make obeisance, even, to his omniscience.
Jeesh..........
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 11, 2008 15:08:00 GMT 12
Comin' at ya dood!!!!! (http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2008/10/declassified-counter-electroni.html)  |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 11, 2008 18:57:09 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 14, 2008 12:57:49 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 14, 2008 13:39:47 GMT 12
Bite me JSF-B animation mit music:  |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 14, 2008 15:11:58 GMT 12
For sure we in Oz need to keep the JSF batards honest: steeljawscribe.com/2008/10/13/is-the-f-35-the-next-ddg-1000-updated#more-1478"From a recent Inside the Air Force article comes an assertion by one of the subs that the F-35 doesn’t need to turn and fight, but rather it’s new all aspect sensors will provide the ability to “shoot while scooting” - or words to that effect: NORTHROP: F-35¹S ADVANCED SENSORS WILL REVOLUTIONIZE AERIAL COMBATNorthrop Grumman officials last week sounded off on the F-35 Lightning II¹s ability to survive in air-to-air combat against enemy jets when they claimed the fifth-generation fighter¹s advanced technology will trump any speed and maneuverability advantages of adversaries. Northrop delivered this claim to reporters amidst numerous reports in the Australian and domestic press that the Lockheed Martin-built fighter was mauled by Russian Su-35 fighters in dogfights during a U.S. war gaming simulation — called Pacific Vision 2008 — at Hickam Air Force Base, HI, this summer. Northrop claimed their AN/AAQ-37 Electro Optical Distributed Aperture System — known simply as DAS — will silence concerns about the jet¹s maneuverability by giving pilots the ability to detect and kill threats from nearly any angle and situation. And as applied in the air-to-air environment? This will be particularly useful in air-to-air combat, according to Northrop. With DAS, a pilot will no longer need to turn into an enemy in order to get off the critical first shot. Instead, the F-35 can simply accelerate away from the enemy while firing a missile that will hunt down the bandit, Pete Bartos — marketing director for Northrop¹s combat avionics systems division — told reporters during a Sept. 16 briefing at an Air Force Association-sponsored conference in Washington. “When you get in close to each other, the guy who can shoot first wins and so this changes that paradigm by saying; ‘We’re not going to play that game, we¹re just going to get our speed up and get away from you’,”Bartos said after the presentation. Of course when RWR was introduced, when Sparrow and then Sidewinder were introduced, when Shrike, STARM and HARM were introduced; when the ALQ-(fill-in-the-blank) was introduced, the thoughts then were similar. Color us skeptical until DAS is actually seen in action." |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 15, 2008 12:13:53 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by Leyland P75 on Oct 16, 2008 1:27:12 GMT 12
It my or may not be the case that the JSF will have an "all aspect" engagement capability, but unless the thing is covered in radars, or the "bandits" are detected by AWACS and the threat relayed to the JSF (which I understand is a capability), the best way to detect the enemy will still be to point your antenna at him, which still means being pointed in the general direction..... AWACS are becoming more of a threatened species as heavy, long range, active radar "HVA busting" missiles come more prevalent in the environment. They don't gotta be clever, just big, to find an airliner flying lazy circles in space!
The best way to fire a weapon will always be forward no matter how much NG/LM try to defy the laws of physics. An absolute truck load of the missile's potential energy, and therefore range, will be used up in overcoming the forward motion of the aircraft at launch. This also creates a huge turning circle for the missile, thereby bleeding more energy. Hopefully the enemy is within the turning circle once all this is done. Which, unless the threat is relayed via external detection methods such as AWACS, is less likely due to the inferior detection abilities that are presumably present at the arse end of the aircraft. I'd be surprised if you got more than about half of your normal range out of any missile fired in this sort of engagement. And what about the fact that turning missiles are the ones most easily avoided? I know you can point, shoot and turnaway, but woopydoo, you've been able to do that for years. I could go on as I'm sure you're aware.
DAS sounds like a nice system, and it'd certainly be handy to have, but methinks that by opting to belittle the utility of speed and manoeuvrability, NG is tacitly agreeing to the fact that this aircraft will be slow and un-manoeuvrable. Hopefully this DAS doovilacky works, otherwise this seal is looking rather clubbed.
Seems we're taking 100 years of air combat experience and sacrificing it on the altar of untested technology. Colour me sceptical until DAS is actually seen in action...... But you knew that already.....
|
|
|
|
Post by oldnavy on Oct 16, 2008 6:30:28 GMT 12
Some valid points peter75.
Some more to think about though is that modern sensors are so much better than what you have in mind. A new radar is not just forward looking. I don't have the facts, but you can be fairly certain F35 radar will scan behind the 3-9 line to some extent.
It is true that missile shots are sweetened by facing up. As you say, in that case you only keep faced up until your missile goes active or else you stand in danger of wearing the bad guy's own head on shot. IE face up, shoot, support the missile to active and then run. If the bad guy is still coming after your head on shot times out, (IE he has survived your AMRAAM and is running you down) the last thing you are going to do is turn into him for a dogfight because he will get you for sure with his second shot or WVR missile. In recent times, your only option was to keep on running and look for mutual support...no dog fight there. That was until they invented the latest generation of modern WVR missiles. These missiles will indeed fire over the shoulder. They will indeed bleed energy in the manoeuvre. But they have the energy to pose a very real threat to the bad guy whilst not exposing you to the defensive and suicidal turn back into the fight.
Even before high energy missiles with the over the shoulder capability, all aspect missiles have changed everything. Under WVR ROE, the dogfight you dream of does not happen anymore because modern visual enhancement means the WVR shot can be self declared and taken from a "head on bandit" ident at great range.
More on sensors. Even without knowing what the F35 integrated system is capable of, infrared sensors, missile launch sensors, and various levels of defensive aids do indeed give the modern pilot an independent all around expanded view. When coupled with the modern link systems, a 5th generation fighter pilot really will have an excellent all round perspective of the fight along with all the potential threats.
Lastly, I am thinking the potential for those big, long range missile shots into the AEW are probably why the HVAs are kept so far down threat, and why so many friendly fighters are up threat. Further, HVAs can run as well. Chasing them down can seriously hurt your enemy fighter endurance and will significantly erode the long range missile threat.
As an aside, I am trying to remember if an AEW has ever been taken down by such a threat? I think it's a bit like the "vulnerable carrier" debate. Quite a few have gone into harm's way post 1945 and so far not one has been sunk by anything! The HVA is definitely more vulnerable than the fighter. That's why you take such good care of them...
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 16, 2008 7:31:59 GMT 12
Apparently the USN has a special nickname for all the USAF Colonels in that HVA "Colonel Tube". ;D That is why they also need to take special care of it. For the Baby Seals and all.
Agree about unnecessary for JSF to go suicidal into a dogfight for no reason. If it turns out that the JSF has to use those 'all aspect close-in' missiles then firing one off really puts a dent in the attacker's plans at that moment. Sure every claim and new technology needs to be tested. Remember the Sukhois need all their claims and new tech tested also. Why are we NOT so skeptical about their magical abilities? Because it ain't easy to test 'em. Mostly because also their pipe-dreams remain just that. Roll on the JSF and may all the tests go well. What an exciting aircraft. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Leyland P75 on Oct 16, 2008 9:34:17 GMT 12
Good points all fellas! You'll have to forgive my seal references, I just think they're too funny to let go!
I tend to agree that the day of the "dogfight" is probably over, probably! But speed and agility still have their place in my opinion, thats why they went to so much trouble to fit supercruise and thrust vectoring to the F-22.
In fairness, I'm not really all that interested in the capablilities or otherwise of the Sukhois, only the JSF. If we were lining up to buy 100 Flankers I'd be criticising them, but we aren't so I'm not!
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 16, 2008 10:09:49 GMT 12
Know thine potential enemy! Clubbed Baby Seals don't get mad they get DAC.
Remember the F-22 was made for different times in a galaxy far far away. A new era with the JSF and whatever follows awaits. Of course all the good stuff has to work as advertised. We cannot stress that enough. If extra speed and agility helps defeat enemy missiles then that would be a good thing. However we cannot afford what would then be a trillion dollar aircraft. Compromises are made and good technology that is less expensive than the physical aircraft does all the 'airshow/dogfight' work of old.
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 18, 2008 21:15:16 GMT 12
|
|
;D 
;D
