"Opposition defends Joint Strike Fighter over simulated dogfights"

[GGTharos]

It's better than having an incorrect reminder, isn't it?

 

Anyway, I doubt the F-35's project director is a salesman - those fighters are being made to the USAF's specification, not the other way around.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Anyway, I doubt the F-35's project director is a salesman

You doubt? Well, the piece you posted looked like a sales pitch to me. There is financial statements at the end of that document. I just hope you are not goping to delete that post from this thread. It is quite interesting.

 

Remainder: SAM = Stealth STOP ;)

[Mugatu]

no need? Gotta protect us against the NZDF!

 

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=DqeURECZ8FY

 

With their recent purchases, they can now from Indonesia, which has always said that it considers Australia to be within its "sphere of influence". This is why various Australians (read F-35 "Bashers" if you like) want Australia to buy an actual air superiority fighter, not a multi-role aircraft.

F-35s serving in the Australian Airforce could conceivably find themselves facing numerically superior numbers of modern Su-27 derivatives in the future...

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

What will F-35 do with four missiles against eight or ten on modern FLankers?

[GGTharos]

What will a modern flanker do against eight or ten F-35's with four missiles?

[nscode]

It wouldn't have to do anything. A modern Flanker + some modern speed bumps is enough of a deterrent against any "preemptive" action that might see them come together :)

[Pilotasso]

What will F-35 do with four missiles against eight or ten on modern FLankers?

 

 

Shoot down 4 with missiles, gun another and disapear from the other 3. :)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

What will a modern flanker do against eight or ten F-35's with four missiles?

So, it takes eight to ten F-35's to defeat one modern Flanker. Those modern Flankers are some technological marvels.

 

So one on one, F-35 is severely handicapped with the number of AA missiles it can carry against modern Flankers.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP ;)

Edited September 24, 2008 by =4c= Hajduk Veljko

[Pilotasso]

Let me put it this way... all flankers today are still armed with old R-27's wich are completely obsolete. what do you think they will be capable off against no reflections?

 

In view of that it would take 1 missile the hit the RCS the size of a barn that the flanker is.

 

Reminder: Cruise missiles= SAM STOP

[Groove]

So one on one, F-35 is severely handicapped with the number of AA missiles it can carry against modern Flankers.

 

Depends on the situation :smartass:

[RedTiger]

So, it takes eight to ten F-35's to defeat one modern Flanker. Those modern Flankers are some technological marvels.

 

So one on one, F-35 is severely handicapped with the number of AA missiles it can carry against modern Flankers.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP ;)

 

You sound like you don't want the F-35 to be any good rather than simply having your doubts like I do at times. Why? Can you un-ignore me just for one response to answer this?

 

EDIT: You can send me a PM if you like, I won't think any less of it.

Edited September 24, 2008 by RedTiger

[RedTiger]

From the rebuttal GG posted:

 

Other erroneous allegations about the program were recently made in a letter distributed and written by industry-watchers Winston Wheeler and Pierre Sprey.

 

Thats all you need to know folks. Seriously, thats it. Sprey is an acolyte of Boyd. Not really part of the Fighter Mafia proper, but definately of the same philosophies.

 

People > Ideas > Technology

 

This is a fine way to examine things on its own, and in simplistic terms is true. The thing is, I wonder how much longer the Boyd crowd is going to push this stuff. Circa 1960s - 1970s, Boyd, Sprey, and their ilk had some very good points about how fighters should progress. Take one look at the F-111, read about what the USAF wanted the F-15 to be and you can see why. However, technology has progressed quite a bit. Are we going to be riding around in X-wings and TIE fighters and still have people pining for some sort of modern day MiG-21 equivalent?? :doh:

Edited September 24, 2008 by RedTiger

[GGTharos]

Are you being obtuse on purpose? It isn't getting you any points.

 

So, it takes eight to ten F-35's to defeat one modern Flanker. Those modern Flankers are some technological marvels.

 

So one on one, F-35 is severely handicapped with the number of AA missiles it can carry against modern Flankers.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP ;)

[Esac_mirmidon]

Ignoring or denying the great capabilities of the F-35 or F-22 is a great mistake, but in the same caliber of ignoring or denying the great grow of russian aerospace technology.

 

They are improving radars ( PESA, AESA, hybrids ), IR devices, engines ( AL-41F with supercruise capability ) and weapons ( variants of R-77, ramjet missiles, very long range missiles ). Also SAM systems in the low band to counter stealth fighters, and better ordinary SAM in all categories.

 

They are steps behind USA or Europe technology, but is only a question of time and money that Russia could catch his counterparts.

 

And of course they have the Topol-M. ( not to forgive this " little green pepper flying bastard" )

[Pilotasso]

There is no ramjet R-77. There will be a new missile, but who knows when it comes?

 

Russia has no such thing as PESA or AESA radars in service. Only India with its Su-30MKI, but I am risking reapeating myself repeatedly that the worst problem they have is not the plane but the missiles. Even if you have a good horse it wont make up for that poor potato gun.

[X-man]

Russia has no such thing as PESA or AESA radars in service.

The MiG-31 uses a PESA radar ;) Dont confuse yourself. I agree though, that Russia is lagging behind in technology. MiG-35 and Su-35 are very advanced planes, but they have yet to enter production, not to mention PAK-FA...

Edited September 24, 2008 by X-man

[Pilotasso]

I was talking about the flanker ;)

[X-man]

I was talking about the flanker ;)

Right :doh: I was just pointing out the fact, to anyone who's just as confused as I am :P (Havent really followed this thread, I only reacted to your final sentence there...)

Edited September 24, 2008 by X-man

[Esac_mirmidon]

The Mig-31 has a PESA operational radar, i think. The Su-35BM will set an AESA radar in near future ( possibly the Phazotron NIIR radar, the Sokol III (N031 Zhuk-MSFE or the Tikhomirov NIIP Irbis-E (N035E)), if an economical dissaster do not happen in Russia.

 

I think SU-35 has real chances to get opperational in tne next years, for the RUAF with AESA radar.

 

AESA, an PESA radars are now in several stages of development, and this would be a reality in a short time space. The missiles development are also in advance stages next to engines. I insist, is a question of time.

 

UHH X-Man you are really fast. XD

[Pilotasso]

What missiles?

[Esac_mirmidon]

This missiles. http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-BVR-AAM.html

 

And i know, i know, they are in development, but like always, a question of time. I am quite sure Vimpel wants his own economical survive in the weapons market, and the Su-35BM will introduce new improved variants of the R-77. ( maybe also long range air to air missiles )

 

I cant imagine such Su-35 with older R-27, R-73 combos. The pressure over Vimpel today is great enough to develop his designs if they want to sell something.

[tflash]

I am not sure that Russia is "steps behind" Europe in technology? Not in aerodynamics, for one thing, not in Thrust vectoring, for another. Not in SAM technology, not in small arms technology, ...

 

Mig-31 PESA is older than Rafale PESA. Russian anti-shipping missile technology is a serious threat.

 

Everyone is 10 years+ behind on US on stealth, in particular the RAM coating. US and Europe have a lead in lean manufacturing, Europe is world known for CAD systems in aeronautics. Some European companies are top-end avionics producers, and feed some core display technologies to e.g. F-35 program.

 

Ignoring or dismissing Russian military technology is childish and is definitely NOT something NATO and USAF are into, quite on the contrary. This does not mean that there are no realities:

 

Currently, to everyone's surprise in the European theatre it are European nations that field the most advanced fighters, because USAF consolidates its newest gear in PACAF and USAFE gear is ageing. 400+ Typhoons are on their way. Russia has indeed only started to modernize its fleet, so it will take a while before it is really a match to what Europe is lining up at its borders.

 

But the real competition is in Asia nowadays, so ...

[GGTharos]

Everyone is 10 years+ behind on US on stealth, in particular the RAM coating.

 

Physics and application, actually ... RAM coating is used at a minimum on F-22's and F-35's as it is very maintenance intensive.

 

 

But the real competition is in Asia nowadays, so ...

 

In India, and only because of the 30MKI. Nowhere else.

[Esac_mirmidon]

Ignoring or dismissing Russian military technology is childish and is definitely NOT something NATO and USAF are into, quite on the contrary. This does not mean that there are no realities:

 

 

That´s the point i want to suscribe....( Time and money enough, this is the Russian dilema )

[Groove]

Can we get back on topic?