Jump to content

The F-35 Thread


Groove

Recommended Posts

I make no claim to authority, I merely stated my background and what I have access to.

I don't state my background before an argument unless it's necessary; I do my best to make an argument that stands by itself. You went on to brag about having access to additional information (which someone interested in OPSEC would not flaunt, anyway.) I'm sorry, but I'm not reading that snippet any other way. If you are directly involved with the F-35 program or have confidential information regarding the program you wouldn't flaunt it. If you really have access to something important, you don't use it for credibility on an anonymous internet forum. Your day job is irrelevant, unless you fly strike jets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

 

In terms of fighters, I think of the WVR arena exclusively as being able to find, sort, and engage targets at BVR ranges doesn't make a fighter IMO.

This sentence does not make sense. Please, clarify.

 

the F-35 is a poor performer in the WVR fight.

"7 deaths WVR" does not tell you anything about how they occurred other than the range. If you think that is enough to empirically state that the F-35 is a poor fighter, you are wildly underestimating the messy complexity of air to air combat. The F-35s could have merged, could have been shot before the merge, could have been jumped inside a WEZ, could have been outnumbered, etc.

 

Making sweeping statements based on this press release is a little absurd.


Edited by aaron886
Toning it down. Not actually trying to be a jerk.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

"7 deaths WVR" does not tell you anything about how they occurred other than the range. If you think that is enough to empirically state that the F-35 is a poor fighter, you are wildly underestimating the messy complexity of air to air combat. The F-35s could have merged, could have been shot before the merge, could have been jumped inside a WEZ, could have been outnumbered, etc.

 

Making sweeping statements based on this press release is a little absurd.

 

Spot on Aaron :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll try to post responses later when I'm at a PC. Posting my from phone is a PITA and it takes like an hour to quote, type, etc.

 

EDIT- you edited while I typed, so I edited too. Cheers bro, we're all on the same team at the of the day.


Edited by RyboPops
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weapons can be simulated quite easily. The F-16 has been doing it for years. You can pseudo-load weapons into the SMS system and the associated functionality (minus firing, obviously) is present in the jet. Symbology on the HUD is identical, DLZs and release parameters are simulated, etc.

Well they could simply simulate the gun as they do the missiles and call it a kill once the firing solution was achieved and the pipper correctly placed, that's how they usually do it anyway.

 

EDIT: Seems Rybopops beat me to it.

 

Simulated DLZs and the like aren't quite what I was getting at.

 

My idea/question/point/whatever was more like "Do you train now with a configuration you won't have until later in the year?" or something like that.

Lord of Salt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why they couldn't train with the gun & missile targeting systems as these should already be in place. Atm it's the weapons themselves which are not ready AFAIK, the gun because of vibration issues and the missiles because of further required release testing.


Edited by Hummingbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

From your Wikipedia link: "An argument from authority...is a common type of argument which can be fallacious, such as when an authority is cited on a topic outside their area of expertise or when the authority cited is not a true expert."

 

I directly stated multiple times that I am not on the F-35 program. I never claimed to have expertise, nor did I claim to be any sort of expert.

 

Do I work on the F-35 program? Nope.

 

I specifically stated that I'm not working the F-35 program.

 

Hell, I'm not even in the LM Aero LOB.

 

I refute that I ever made any attempt at an argument from authority. If you still think I did, we'll have to agree to disagree on this particular subject.

 

I don't state my background before an argument unless it's necessary; I do my best to make an argument that stands by itself. You went on to brag about having access to additional information (which someone interested in OPSEC would not flaunt, anyway.) ...If you are directly involved with the F-35 program or have confidential information regarding the program you wouldn't flaunt it. If you really have access to something important, you don't use it for credibility on an anonymous internet forum.

 

You're right, stating my background was probably unnecessary, but it certainly wasn't an attempt to brag. My apologies if it seemed that was the case. I have edited my previous post to hopefully eliminate any appearances of a "better-than-thou" attitude, if that's what was perceived. I left that I'm an LM employee because I feel it relevant to my post about reading LM test pilot reports. As already stated multiple times (beating a very dead horse here) I'm not on the F-35 program, I just enjoy reading the reports.

 

The reports I have access to on the LM unclass intranet are for any LM employee in any LOB to view. The docs I read have no portion markings whatsoever (not even so much as a FOUO or a distribution statement). There are no OPSEC concerns at all and I would never jeopardize national security or risk my career over a forum post. I think most of the reports have already been published anyway and I'm fairly confident that most people would be able to obtain the unpublished reports under the FOIA. You don't even need media/press credentials anymore...pretty much any Joe Schmoe blogger with half of a follower can get desired info. :doh: It's a failed concept IMHO and overdue for a repeal, but that's a whooooole different can of worms for another thread.

 

In terms of fighters, I think of the WVR arena exclusively as being able to find, sort, and engage targets at BVR ranges doesn't make a fighter IMO.

 

This sentence does not make sense. Please, clarify.

 

Wow, that was horrible grammar on my part. What I mean is that I define a fighter to be an aircraft that can successfully dispatch nearly any foe in an offensive, defensive, or neutral 1v1 WVR fight. The F-15C and F-22 are good examples of this. That isn't to say they are unbeatable by any means, but they are "thoroughbred" fighters. The F-35 is not among their ranks as it is a multi-role platform with heavy emphasis on the ability to strike in contested, high-threat airspace and less emphasis on its WVR capabilities. I can't imagine that there are many people that honestly believe that the F-35, a single airplane type, can take over every mission the USAF/USMC/USN flies anyway. Hopefully that clears up what I was trying to convey.

 

"7 deaths WVR" does not tell you anything about how they occurred other than the range. If you think that is enough to empirically state that the F-35 is a poor fighter, you are wildly underestimating the messy complexity of air to air combat. The F-35s could have merged, could have been shot before the merge, could have been jumped inside a WEZ, could have been outnumbered, etc.

 

Making sweeping statements based on this press release is a little absurd.

 

I'll agree with your statement. I was hasty to claim that it's a poor fighter based solely on the 7 WVR losses, although my opinion remains unchanged based on the information I have seen and read over the course of a few years. I will, however, say that the LM test pilot reports I have read generally had an increasingly positive outlook on the airplane over time and I'm hopeful that in the end we will all feel that the price tag is worth the end result.

 

Whew...I think that was my longest ever post on the internet. I need a beer, or better yet, a glass of whisky. Cheers!


Edited by RyboPops
Typos galore!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My idea/question/point/whatever was more like "Do you train now with a configuration you won't have until later in the year?" or something like that.

 

AFAIK, all of the current F-35 guys came from other jets. There hasn't been an F-35 class yet that came straight to the B Course from UPT/SUPT/ENJJPT as the Luke F-35 RTU course was just finalized in November or December of last year. So from the pilot standpoint they should all be fairly well versed in BFM and ACM. Those are arguably the most perishable skills in tactical aviation (aside from maybe trapping at the boat in the USN) so it makes sense that they would continue to practice using the stores simulations, especially during Red Flag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hardly call it unequivocal

 

It's about as unequivocal as you can reasonably expect from a such a forum...

 

Other posters have addressed most of the other issues I would otherwise raise BUT:

 

- The 7 losses in WVR are no more or less relevant than the 145 victories.

- To simply assume that none of the F35's kills occurred within WVR would be rather silly IMHO.

- If so much as ~1/5 of those victories occurred WVR (we don't know) that's still a ~4:1 kill ratio(!?)

- Very premature to dismiss the jet as a poor WVR performer when (as Sweep said) they were only lugging a pair of slammers each, with no gun while using constrained CLAW.

 

PR stunt? Maybe. It's still good news for the F35 whichever way you cut it.


Edited by Boagrius
coherence
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Red Flag Debrief Jan-Feb 2017 USAF, RAAF & RAF Participants cca 16:00

 

 

Some threats to make it trough by sheer numbers and advanced missiles they shooting at us so we have one or two losses so far (in the middle of Red Flag)

 

F-35A have 3i config so only 2 bombs and 2 missiles, no gun. There is no way anyone can sneak to F-35 in WVR (too many other assets providing SA) and I doubt there was place for any dogfights with with F-35 ...

 

Dont forget F-35A have AG role and have fighters covering it, like F-22 and Typhoons. I assume whole blue force must shot down around 1000 aggressors in 19day exercise. Raptors must have very big score...

 

 

Anyway F-35A/C dont have problem with cockpit visibility.

 

Hanche stressed that he was still able to maintain visual contact with his opponent during aggressive maneuvering, and the cockpit’s visual limitation is not “a genuine problem with the F-35.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The video posted earlier says there were 7 F-35 losses, all WVR...

 

Yes all 7 losses were in WVR enviroment, but this mean they are not detecting them on radar. There is very long way from WVR to traditional dogfight.

 

I doubt any lucky aggressor which saw F-35 visually wasting any time before he fire everything he have before somebody else have chance to kill him.... This was very large exercise, 9 F-35, at last six F-22, six Eurofighters and many more assets on blue side... on most missions. Reds have around twenty fighters and every one can regenerate three times. In debriefing video they sad there were too many advanced red air so they get to them by sheer numbers alone...

 

We also know at last one F-35 get shot down by respan bug - Aggressor regenerated near F-35.

 

Aggressors also dont suffer from morale loss (from own loses) and didnt fear do be killed. So they can push it far more that real enemy ever will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unleashing the F-35's full capabilities

 

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000595104

Mission: "To intercept and destroy aircraft and airborne missiles in all weather conditions in order to establish and maintain air superiority in a designated area. To deliver air-to-ground ordnance on time in any weather condition. And to provide tactical reconaissance imagery" - F-14 Tomcat Roll Call

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I heard that we weren't going to get the latest updates with time and that those were reserved for US aircraft only, but I hope that's just a rumor.

 

Sounds like a rumour to me. My understanding is that one of the focuses of the global program is to avoid various fleets from falling too far out of lock-step with one another (as has happened to the global fleet of Falcons and Hornets, for example). How successful that will be, I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like a rumour to me. My understanding is that one of the focuses of the global program is to avoid various fleets from falling too far out of lock-step with one another (as has happened to the global fleet of Falcons and Hornets, for example). How successful that will be, I don't know.

 

Yeah I'm hoping that's the case, and ofcourse there many wild rumours out there, like for example that the US have installed a kill switch on all F-35's so they can turn them off should the owner suddenly go rogue on them :megalol::megalol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I'm hoping that's the case, and ofcourse there many wild rumours out there, like for example that the US have installed a kill switch on all F-35's so they can turn them off should the owner suddenly go rogue on them :megalol::megalol:

 

lol. Well if Erdogan ends up with a fleet of them that might not be such a bad idea ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I make no claim to authority, I merely stated my background and what I have access to. I specifically stated that I'm not working the F-35 program. Hell, I'm not even in the LM Aero LOB. If you or anyone else chooses to disbelieve my claim I certainly wouldn't lay blame...it's the internet after all. Would you like a picture of my LM employee badge as irrefutable evidence? I'll snap a picture of it tonight when I get home with a sticky note that says "RyboPops" on it while holding it in front of this very post displayed on my monitor. :thumbup:

 

.

 

Where is it ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, got busy with real life and forgot. Face, name, and employee ID blurred for privacy.

 

gIxSSsa.jpg

 

Not bad, very few people able to back their words up on internet, so prob to that. You said you not working on F-35 program or Aero department, so would you mind telling us what are you working on ? radar ? missiles ?

Secondly, earlier you said the issue with F-35 isn't agility but visual from cockpit. But as far as i know, F-35 has infrared camera to provide 360 degrees visual around the aircraft so how can that be the case ?

das-1_zps4623a5f1.jpg

 

You also said F-35 will not be good at CAS, so in that case what make F-16 , F-15E and A-10 superior to F-35 in CAS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the F-35 has six IRSTs around the fuselage giving 360 degrees of coverage.

 

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQGCBvAwtNOoSDU_VcvZ9EMrxOMDQ8BGbds_1A_mA_5MZybVzx8LEc-vA2UJw

Mission: "To intercept and destroy aircraft and airborne missiles in all weather conditions in order to establish and maintain air superiority in a designated area. To deliver air-to-ground ordnance on time in any weather condition. And to provide tactical reconaissance imagery" - F-14 Tomcat Roll Call

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like a rumour to me. My understanding is that one of the focuses of the global program is to avoid various fleets from falling too far out of lock-step with one another (as has happened to the global fleet of Falcons and Hornets, for example). How successful that will be, I don't know.

 

Export restrictions aside, I don't think its possible to avoid that situation. Previously this has mostly been down to the willingness of different nations to spend the cash on upgrading - i.e. as upgrades became available they would purchase some, but not other depending on their specific requirements/defence budgets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said you not working on F-35 program or Aero department, so would you mind telling us what are you working on ? radar ? missiles ?

 

None of the above. I'm in the Space Systems LOB. I specifically work on satellite communication subsystems (both ground and orbital). I've worked GPS IIF, GOES-R, GOES-S, SBIRS, and a few others. I also do the majority of the pre-launch ground umbilical characterizations for Vandenberg SLC-3 launches. IIAAIAS!

 

You also said F-35 will not be good at CAS, so in that case what make F-16 , F-15E and A-10 superior to F-35 in CAS

 

First I'll preface it with the fact that in a high threat environment you likely wouldn't be flying CAS sorties anyway because the FLOT is usually several miles behind where the fighters/strikers are operating. Warfare changes with time though, so in the future perhaps that won't be the case.

 

F-16 isn't necessarily superior in the CAS role, I think they would perform quite similarly aside from the Viper having more (albeit smaller) rounds for the gun.

 

F-15E is superior in terms of payload capacity and pilot workload. The GIB can offer a lot of assistance in this role in finding targets, working the radios, prepping weapons, etc., leaving the pilot to "do some of that pilot sh!t." Some of that may be negated by the increased SA in the F-35, but that remains to be seen.

 

As for the A-10...you've got to be joking right? The Hog was designed specifically to do two things: kill tanks pouring through Fulda Gap, and provide CAS. It has incredibly long loiter times, fantastic payload capabilities, the Avenger is arguably the best CAS weapon available in today's most common combat theater, it's incredibly robust and has extreme survivability, the best pilot protection of any allied aircraft, and fighting low and slow is where it excels most. IMO, the only real advantage the F-35, F-15, or F-16 have over the Hog is the speed at which it can get to the TIC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...