|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Sept 26, 2008 8:15:59 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Sept 26, 2008 8:28:23 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by Leyland P75 on Oct 2, 2008 11:40:45 GMT 12
A good article in the DID about the F-35 as fighter controversy....... ".....if maintaining regional or local air superiority is a priority mission for any replacement fighter, then air to air performance against enemy aircraft becomes extremely important. This is certainly true for the US Navy’s carrier fleet, for Australia’s RAAF, and to a lesser extent for the future British Navy. With these customers, Lockheed Martin must either depend on political inertia, or advance plausible, non-classified rationales that explain why its F-35s will perform as an air superiority fighter." www.defenseindustrydaily.com/The-F-35s-Air-to-Air-Capability-Controversy-05089/ |
|
|
|
Post by Leyland P75 on Oct 2, 2008 11:49:25 GMT 12
Which also begs the question, if the F-35 is intended to be less capable than the F-22, and we can't have the F-22 because it contains technolgy too sensitive to tranfer, what classified technologies can the F-35 possibly carry that will make it a superior A2A asset? And why would they be willing to transfer these technologies on the F-35 to a diverse range of countries, but not transfer them to Australia on an F-22?  The article also makes some excellent points both for and against the JSF. I think we can see there are some very legitimate question marks with regards to JSF capability as an air superiority asset. |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 2, 2008 14:42:38 GMT 12
From the URL article above: "This is all much harder to do for the F-35, which remains a developmental aircraft and lacks key aerodynamic features like combat thrust vectoring (Harrier, SU-30 family, MiG-29OVT, F-22A), canards for fast “point and shoot” manevers with high off-boresight short-range missiles (some SU-30 family, Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen), or loaded supersonic cruise (F-22A)". Having thrust vectoring for 'dogfighting' (lets be clear dogfighting is visual range combat) includes a weight penalty for such things. The US has gone for the 'over the shoulder' weapons that the F-35 can shoot without even the pilot being able to see the target visually but he can see them virtually with the DAC device. An F-35 pilot will laugh as the airshow unfolds with his close range missile that will spoil the fun.
Bear in mind the DAC will allow standoff missiles to be fired against closing targets from a long distance that will force those targets to break their supercruise to escape (if they can) on another vector while the F-35 clears the area (fast).
Once again so called stealth seems irrelevant to the discussion. I like the claim that 'classified simulations' need to be made public. Yeah right. The whole world lives on trust, when trust is lacking we get the Wall St meltdown of today (very simple I know but an analogy). If we cannot trust the people that see the classified material to then make unclassified decisions then of course we have to trust them. Nothing knew there.
Then to address the first point raised in quote in peter75 first message (2nd above here): If the JSF-35 cannot gain air superiority in our region with its superior radar and BVR missile performance then for sure we are in trouble. HOWEVER if the JSF is detected before it detects then the enemy BVR missiles will knock it out of the sky anyway without need for any fancy flight stuff. No one needs to do dogfighting today for real.
AND I would like to repeat that the Raptor is getting on itself. The Raptor is in need of expensive avionic / weapon system upgrades to keep it in the game. I'm still wondering why we hanker after something we cannot have. Yes sure keep whining about it but I say get on with the job at hand if the JSF stacks up.
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 2, 2008 14:45:55 GMT 12
Now to peter75 second point about JSF/Raptor technology transfer. It is clear that black box avionics and weapons systems can be transferred easily enough. Transferring the 'stealth airframe' is another matter. Throw in the engine tech and other bits like variable nozzles and we can see the 'stealthy' airframe is the issue most likely.
Yes agree that we need to keep on top of the JSF promises and all the other variables to 'keep the batards honest'. ;D
AND I'll make the point again that some avionics tech in the Raptor is 'obsolete' needing an upgrade. The JSF will have really really good avionics, mostly superior to the Raptor in some respects (unless the Raptor is upgraded meantime). Sure the Stealthy Raptor is good value until that Stealth is defeated which looks on the cards as peter75 likes to remind us. Stealth is not so important. Really. ; D Stealth is good when it works but....
|
|
|
|
Post by Leyland P75 on Oct 2, 2008 15:21:07 GMT 12
FN, Well it's good to see we can agree on.... some stuff!  Although I'm not sure how with (by all reports) 140 odd to 0 kill counts the Raptor needs to be upgraded to "keep in the game". In any case, my argument isn't so much how we must have F-22 (although I think we should keep trying until the door is not only closed, but locked) but how every effort needs to be made to ensure that the JSF is capable of providing a measure of air superiority. I think we can also agree that it's a very interesting subject.... |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 2, 2008 15:33:56 GMT 12
peter75, Have we not been discussing how the tech advances (SpyVspy). This is the way. You have made the point how detection technologies will defeat stealth. No argument. This is why the Raptor now needs an expensive upgrade. Look back in this thread (I think) to see a link for that. Agree that we need to hammer LockMart about keeping their promises. AND yes it is an interesting subject because we are on the right side of it. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 3, 2008 22:25:15 GMT 12
Israel Asks to Buy F-35s: Pentagon By agence france-presse Published: 30 Sep www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3750642&c=MID&s=TOPWASHINGTON - Israel has asked to buy up to 75 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters in a deal worth as much as $15.2 billion if all options are exercised, the Pentagon said Sept. 30. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency said the sale initially would be for 25 JSFs designed for conventional take offs and landings. (Tom Harvey / Lockheed Martin) The Defense Security Cooperation Agency said the sale initially would be for 25 fighters designed for conventional take off and landing. But Israel would have the option of buying another 50 of the aircraft, either designed for conventional take off and landing or for short take off and vertical landing, the agency said. "The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as 15.2 billion dollars," it said in a statement. The F-35 is a stealthy new multi-role fighter built by Lockheed Martin that is intended to replace the F-16. Israeli officials have said they plan to buy 100 fighters over the next decade. It was unclear how soon delivery of the aircraft might begin. The DSCA disclosed the proposed sale in a notification to Congress, which has 30 days to raise any objections to the sale. A deal would then have to be concluded with the Israelis. "It is vital to the U.S. national interest to assist Israel to develop and maintain a strong and ready self-defense capability. This proposed sale is consistent with those objectives," the DSCA said. "Israel needs these aircraft to augment its present operational inventory and to enhance its air-to-air and air-to-ground self-defense capability," it said."
|
|
|
|
Post by oldnavy on Oct 3, 2008 22:52:38 GMT 12
I wonder why they don't want Su27s?
|
|
jb
Squadron Leader
Posts: 132
|
Post by jb on Oct 4, 2008 3:38:56 GMT 12
This'll bring the tech transfer issue that has been simmering in the background for quite some time, into the glaring light of day.
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 4, 2008 6:59:09 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 4, 2008 17:45:41 GMT 12
Verbose. Q: Is the 'tech transfer' TO the Israeli F-35? OR is the 'tech transfer' from whatever they put in their version of the JSF to countries like Oz for example? OR is the question of 'tech transfer' all about Israeli stealing JSF technology to improve it and transfer to 3rd parties. I could think of more variation but I'll stop because my head hurts. ;D Fanks to 'vgp' at: rnzaf.proboards43.com/index.cgi?board=world&action=display&thread=7420&page=1Israel wants own technology on F-35 stealth fighters As Israel plans to buy the Joint Strike Fighter (F-35) from the United States, the Israeli Defense Ministry is seeking American approval to install Israeli-made technology on the stealth fighter jets it buys. One reason for Israel to ask for the changes is that the version of Israel Air Force (IAF) will be unique and superior in case the aircraft is also sold to Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries, said a Thursday report by local daily The Jerusalem Post. "We have unique needs and need to retain our superiority in the region," a senior Israeli defense official was quoted as saying. "To meet these needs, we must be able to install our own systems." With the Iranian nuclear threat looming, Israel has been looking for further U.S. support on a variety of defense measures, including developing advanced missile defense capabilities, acquiring smart bomb technology and expediting the F-35 sale. On Tuesday, the U.S. Defense Department notified Congress of plans to sell up to 75 Joint Strike Fighter fifth-generation fighter jets to Israel in a 15.2-billion-U.S. dollar deal for the aircraft, which is expected to be the mainstay of air power in the U.S. and several other nations for decades. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) said it informed Congress last Friday that Israel has asked to buy 25 of the F-35s,with an option to buy an additional 50 at a later date. In its statement to Congress, the DSCA said the sale would help Israel "develop and maintain a strong self-defense capability" and that the deal would not upset the balance of military power in the region. The sale would be the first to a country outside the U.S. and the other eight partner nations that are collaborating on the F-35,which is manufactured by Lockheed Martin, the largest U.S. defense contractor, according to The Jerusalem Post. The first batch of 25 would be the variant of F-35 designed for conventional takeoff from military airfields, but the later 50 could include a version that can land and take off vertically, similar to a helicopter. If approved by Congress in the next 30 days, Israel will likelysign an official contract with the U.S. Air Force in the coming months and begin receiving the aircraft in 2014, said the report. While news of the Pentagon approval was positively received in Israeli Defense Ministry, Israeli officials said it was still too early to celebrate since Israel has yet to receive final Pentagon approval to allow the IAF to install Israeli-made systems in the plane. Israeli demands include installing an advanced radar and conformal fuel tank design for long-range missions made by Israel Aerospace Industries, as well as other electronic and weapons systems that could require changes to the configuration of the aircraft. The technology issue was discussed last week between the IAF and a team of U.S. military officers from the Joint Strike Fighter program who were in Israel. It was also at the focus of talks Israeli Defense Ministry Director-General Pinhas Buchris held in Washington earlier this month. The result of the negotiations will be a determining factor in the number of aircraft Israel decides to purchase. If Israel exercises the vertical option, it would be the first time that the IAF obtains this capability, needed out of fear that Israeli airfields would be paralyzed by enemy missiles in a future conflict and planes would have difficulty taking off in a conventional fashion, said The Jerusalem Post. Britain, Turkey and Australia are among the eight countries participating in the Joint Strike Fighter program. Israel enjoys the status of a Security Cooperation Participant after paying 20 million U.S. dollars in 2003 to obtain access to information accumulated during the development of the jet, which will be priced at somewhere between 50 million to 60 million U.S. dollars. The jet is still under development and is not yet in service. While the jet is expected to be widely used, the program has suffered delays and escalating costs that have been criticized by government auditors. news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-10/03/content_10146022.htm |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 4, 2008 20:14:00 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by flycookie on Oct 7, 2008 14:27:05 GMT 12
Ah drinkin' beer - the sport of champions! And, by Oldnavy, So, Corsair67 and Oldnavy, you two work in finance? ++++If you had purchased £1000 of Northern Rock shares one year ago they would now be worth £4.95, with HBOS, earlier this week your £1000 would have been worth £16.50, £1000 invested in XL Leisure would now be worth less than £5, but if you bought £1000 worth of Tennents Lager one year ago, drank it all, then took the empty cans to an aluminium recycling plant, you would get £214. So based on the above statistics the best current investment advice is to drink heavily and re-cycle.++++ Received in my work email today. |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 7, 2008 15:36:18 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by yak2 on Oct 7, 2008 19:21:29 GMT 12
So, Corsair67 and Oldnavy, you two work in finance?
++++If you had purchased £1000 of Northern Rock shares one year ago they would now be worth £4.95, with HBOS, earlier this week your £1000 would have been worth £16.50, £1000 invested in XL Leisure would now be worth less than £5, but if you bought £1000 worth of Tennents Lager one year ago, drank it all, then took the empty cans to an aluminium recycling plant, you would get £214.
So based on the above statistics the best current investment advice is to drink heavily and re-cycle.++++
Received in my work email today. Brilliant FC. Unfortunately this advice too late for me as I just bought a slab of James Boags long necks.  Whats the outlook on glass futures?
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 8, 2008 9:43:47 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by flycookie on Oct 8, 2008 10:56:06 GMT 12
Nah, let's not move along at all. Beer is a far more interesting topic than 90 per cent of the contents of this thread. Yak2, not sure about glass futures per se, but in these parts your empty Boags stubbies would yield five cents each. Same for cans and plastic soft drinks bottles. Actually, I think Boags is available here. Shall investigate next time I walk around the corner to the deli for a case of Cooper's. |
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Oct 8, 2008 11:19:26 GMT 12
OR the next time you are out collecting bottles and cans for the refunds? ;D
|
|
Although I'm not sure how with (by all reports) 140 odd to 0 kill counts the Raptor needs to be upgraded to "keep in the game". In any case, my argument isn't so much how we must have F-22 (although I think we should keep trying until the door is not only closed, but locked) but how every effort needs to be made to ensure that the JSF is capable of providing a measure of air superiority.
?
Whats the outlook on glass futures?