The F-35 Thread

[Weta43]

Garrya, while i commend you on using reason; your sane responses are falling on deaf ears. Weta is anti US anything, and hummingbird has shown himself to be very anti F-35. So any 'bad' news against the F-35 is good news to them.

 

Not surprising that they are backing a fake story to fit their agenda.

 

Careful, the flag you're waving seems to be obstructing your vision.

Show me the point in my posts where I say the story is true.

 

What I actually said was :

"Without accepting that the story's premise is true, in answer to that question..."

 

I repeatedly point out I'm not saying it's true, only responding to the question posed by mvsgas 'why would they risk an F-35 on a mission like that?'

 

Also - If someone had (& let me repeat, I've never said they did) detected an F-35 with an EWR, and manually guided they detonated a missile to within a range that managed to damage it, that's not a criticism of the F-35.

 

Their 'low observability' is not tuned to the wavelengths of those radars.

 

& - I'm not actually Anti US any more than I'm anti Russian or anti China. I just realise that what comes out of all sides (not only the stuff 'they' say) is usually propaganda & should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

This side of the forum, we get more western propaganda than Eastern.

Sometimes it gets tiring...

 

For the record though - I do think the F-35's going to have a service history like the Convair Hustler (an aircraft I love).

Beautiful expression of specialisation that, once that specialist trick was countered, was quickly replaced by more generally able aircraft

Edited October 31, 2017 by Weta43

[gospadin]

For the record though - I do think the F-35's going to have a service history like the Convair Hustler (an aircraft I love).

Beautiful expression of specialisation that, once that specialist trick was countered, was quickly replaced by more generally able aircraft

 

I was more-or-less with you until this assessment.

 

Nothing more capable is in the pipe. Essentially, the USN/USAF have bet everything on the success of the platform, so it'll succeed one way or another, by simply throwing money at it. On paper, it'll should be a better platform than the F-18, and we've already built more than the F-22 resulting in a far lower per-unit cost. Enough partner nations are signed up and apparently happy that I'm sure it'll do fine.

[garrya]

When has an S-200 ever scored a direct hit? Why do you think it has a 200kg warhead? A missile that was going off course and blowing up hospitals during Operation Grand Canyon in '86 is suddenly capable of nailing F-35s bang on the nose?

 

I meant according to Syrian version of the story: the missile scored a direct hit. That doesn't make any sense because a direct hit would have vaporized that aircraft

[Weta43]

I was more-or-less with you until this assessment.

 

Nothing more capable is in the pipe. Essentially, the USN/USAF have bet everything on the success of the platform, so it'll succeed one way or another, by simply throwing money at it. On paper, it'll should be a better platform than the F-18, and we've already built more than the F-22 resulting in a far lower per-unit cost. Enough partner nations are signed up and apparently happy that I'm sure it'll do fine.

 

Maybe your right - I've been wrong before :)

 

Time will tell.

[Hummingbird]

Garrya, while i commend you on using reason; your sane responses are falling on deaf ears. Weta is anti US anything, and hummingbird has shown himself to be very anti F-35. So any 'bad' news against the F-35 is good news to them.

 

Not surprising that they are backing a fake story to fit their agenda.

 

:doh:

[Hummingbird]

The F-35 was actually damaged 2 weeks earlier. According to Syrian Defense Forces side of the story, the missile score a direct hit, if that was the case the aircraft would have vaporized because S-200 has 200 kg warhead. I don't think even a tank can take that nevermind fragile aircraft

 

To be fair it can be rather hard to distinguish how "direct" a hit is from many miles away. Most likely they saw an explosion and figured the missile must have hit. No mention of any wreckage found or anything.

 

The aircraft fly a few day later, TBH bird strike can result in quite devastating damage

 

Did the F-35 fly a few days later? If so I didn't know, but it still leaves a question mark as to what the Syrians tracked and fired a missile at.

 

Either way, hit or no hit to an F-35, I don't for a second believe the general public would ever get a word on it from the Isreali government. If they did, and it turns out the S-200 did indeed manage to damage an F-35, the media would have a field day.

Edited October 31, 2017 by Hummingbird

[garrya]

To be fair it can be rather hard to distinguish how "direct" a hit is from many miles away. Most likely they saw an explosion and figured the missile must have hit.

If they don't have to command the missiles to explode then it can be considered a direct hit. With RAM, the radio proximity will need to be even closer to the aircraft to denote, and iam sure they can track something as big as S-200 on radar.

 

what the Syrians tracked and fired a missile at.

Likely F-16I or F-15I as that still the backbone of Israel air force with well-trained pilots for them. By contrast, they currently have only 5 F-35 that will reach IOC next December

 

Either way, hit or no hit to an F-35, I don't for a second believe the general public would ever get a word on it from the Isreali government. If they did, and it turns out the S-200 did indeed manage to damage an F-35, the media would have a field day.

 

If they want to hide then why bothered to publish the bird strike incident?. Make more sense to hide everything together.

Edited November 1, 2017 by garrya

[Hummingbird]

Countermeasures can set the proximity fuze off, doesn't necessarily need to be the aircraft itself.

 

As why mention a birdstrike then, well maybe because one out of five F-35's missing will likely be noticed. Nobody knows.

 

The point being it could realistically be either scenario.

[garrya]

Countermeasures can set the proximity fuze off, doesn't necessarily need to be the aircraft itself.

But then it wouldn't be a direct hit. Moreover, the SAM operator can see the airplane on screen (since we assumed that he can detect and launch missiles at it). It would make very little sense if the dot still there and moving normally after the direct hit. This is the S-200 rather than a MANPARD

 

As why mention a birdstrike then, well maybe because one out of five F-35's missing will likely be noticed. Nobody knows.

If they can allegedly hide F-35 damaged significantly by SAM while telling others about it then it would be much easier to hide the very same aircraft without telling aanyon the bird strike evidence. Which obviously draw a lot of attention. There are dozens better excuses they could have used if that was the case. Nevermind that the story originated from Southfront, which isn't a credible source either.

Edited November 2, 2017 by garrya

[gospadin]

There are dozens better excuses they could have used if that was the case. Nevermind that the story originated from Southfront, not really a credible source either.

 

If they blamed it on a bad software update or the oxygen delivery system, nobody would have written an article.

[HiJack]

The first operational ready F-35A for Norway is scheduled to land at home base «Ørland» on Friday at approximately 12:00 Zulu. Hopefully some live streaming of the flyover and landing. The main ceremony will be held on the 10. November.

 

[Hummingbird]

But then it wouldn't be a direct hit. Moreover, the SAM operator can see the airplane on screen (since we assumed that he can detect and launch missiles at it). It would make very little sense if the dot still there and moving normally after the direct hit. This is the S-200 rather than a MANPARD

 

That's the job of countermeasures & jamming, if indeed it was an F-35 then they probably had a poor track to begin with, IOW basically anything is possible when u put such an old system up against stealth.

 

If they can allegedly hide F-35 damaged significantly by SAM while telling others about it then it would be much easier to hide the very same aircraft without telling aanyon the bird strike evidence. Which obviously draw a lot of attention. There are dozens better excuses they could have used if that was the case. Nevermind that the story originated from Southfront, which isn't a credible source either.

 

You're missing one of the main points, which is that the Isreali government could have put out that story as damage control just incase someone photographed the aircraft before they could bring it and away from any prying eyes. In the end we just don't know, which is the scary part.

 

As to what story I believe the most, I'm leaning heavily towards the birdstrike and have been so from the beginning, but the timing worries me.

[GGTharos]

Because bird strikes are common, and have in fact resulted in more than one death for fighters practicing low altitude flight.

 

It's a very plausible explanation, and, as for Syria, they probably hit a drone ... or a bundle of chaff.

 

Countermeasures can set the proximity fuze off, doesn't necessarily need to be the aircraft itself.

 

As why mention a birdstrike then, well maybe because one out of five F-35's missing will likely be noticed. Nobody knows.

 

The point being it could realistically be either scenario.

[Hummingbird]

The article at National Interest pretty much sums up what I'm thinking:

 

"Did a Russian anti-aircraft missile hit one of Israel’s new F-35 stealth fighters?

 

Pro-Russian media are claiming that an Israeli F-35I was hit and damaged by a Russian-made S-200 surface-to-air missile during an Israeli air strike in Syria earlier this month. Israel says one of its F-35s was damaged—after colliding with a bird.

 

The story begins on October 16, when Israel announced that its aircraft had struck a Syrian SAM battery near Damascus that had fired two hours earlier on Israeli reconnaissance planes flying over Lebanon. The attack damaged the missile battery, and no Israeli aircraft were hit, according to Israel. Coincidentally or not, the incident happened the same day that Russia’s defense minister, Sergei Shoigu, arrived in Israel for talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

 

Recommended: Could the Battleship Make a Comeback? ​

 

However, Southfront.org, a website that covers the Russian military and its intervention in the Syrian Civil War, suggested a different story. “According to the available information, the Syrian Defense Forces used a S-200 missile against the Israeli warplane,” Southfront claimed.

 

 

Southfront could not resist pointing out that a much-vaunted F-35 stealth fighter had been hit by a missile that dates back to the 1960s. “This Soviet-made missile is the most advanced long range anti-aircraft system operated by the Syrian military. Even in this case, it’s old-fashioned in terms of modern warfare.”

 

However, the evidence cited by Southfront seems rather tenuous. Hours after the Israeli military announced the strike on the Syrian missile battery, Israeli media reported that an Israeli F-35 had been damaged by a bird strike two weeks before (Google translation here). The plane reportedly landed safely, but the Israeli Air Force did admit that it wasn’t sure whether the plane will fly again. Israel has taken delivery of only seven F-35Is so far, with a total of fifty on order.

 

 

“The incident allegedly took place ‘two weeks ago’ but was publicly reported only on October 16,” Southfront noted. “However, Israeli sources were not able to show a photo of the F-35 warplane after the ‘bird collision.’”

 

Southfront didn’t explain why the Israeli Air Force would feel a need to release a photo of a damaged stealth aircraft. As U.S. defense website The Drive points out, the F-35 is just entering Israeli service now, and wouldn’t likely be flying missions over Syria just yet unless there was some kind of emergency (and Israel has plenty of F-15s and F-16s to handle those right now). Nor is it optimized for the kind of photographic reconnaissance missions that Israel flies over Lebanon.

 

As The Drive summed up rather neatly, “Although we cannot rule the possibility out entirely, as Freud would say—sometimes a bird strike is just a bird strike.”

 

In any event, what’s most interesting about this story isn’t whether an F-35 was hit by a Russian missile. Like the existence of UFOs, the story may or not be true, but we need more than circumstantial evidence to give it any credence.

 

No, the interesting part is that the F-35 has become such a symbol of U.S. technological prowess—or incompetence—that any rumor that an F-35 has been damaged or shot down in combat will draw attention. Russia and its boosters will pounce on any suggestion that an F-35 has been hit, and no doubt the pro- F-35 crowd will counter those suggestions accordingly.

 

Already there are reports—again, just reports—that Israeli F-35s have flown combat missions. Given that the U.S. and Israeli air forces are among the most active in the world, sooner or later the F-35 will really, truly see combat. But the rumors are out there now.

 

This is just the beginning."

 

Source: http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/did-russian-missile-really-hit-israeli-f-35-22926

[Hummingbird]

Because bird strikes are common, and have in fact resulted in more than one death for fighters practicing low altitude flight.

 

It's a very plausible explanation, and, as for Syria, they probably hit a drone ... or a bundle of chaff.

 

Could be anything, the coincidence of alleged birdstrike vs missile hit is just incredibly unlucky.

[GGTharos]

The missile strike isn't even a coincidence, it is literally rumor.

[Hummingbird]

The missile strike isn't even a coincidence, it is literally rumor.

 

Both are at this point alleged as there is no photographic proof of either.

[garrya]

Could be anything, the coincidence of alleged birdstrike vs missile hit is just incredibly unlucky.

 

It isn't even coincident though, given that the bird strike happened at 2 weeks earlier.

[Boogieman]

Both are at this point alleged as there is no photographic proof of either.

 

In that case I "heard" from a "credible source" that the F35 was "allegedly" not damaged at all and that the Israelis are simply peddling a fake news piece to downplay how awesome their new capability is. :smilewink: :gun_smilie:

Edited November 3, 2017 by Boogieman

[Hummingbird]

It isn't even coincident though, given that the bird strike happened at 2 weeks earlier.

 

Did you even read the article? The alleged birdstrike wasnt even mentioned until on the day of the alleged missile hit. That's the coincidence.

[garrya]

You're missing one of the main points, which is that the Isreali government could have put out that story as damage control just incase someone photographed the aircraft before they could bring it and away from any prying eyes.

Still doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't think there will be many members of public living near Israel secret air base. Moreover since they said the aircraft need only few days until it will fly again, that means the exterior damage is extremely minimal, most likely slightly damaged to coating( otherwise it will take you months) , i don't think someone photographed the aircraft from long distance will even able to tell that the airplane was damaged. So they allegedly call up a new channel to release a damage control story only a few hours later seem illogical to me. Others facts also make that story less believable such as F-35I haven't even reach IOC, Israel only have several of them at the moment, Southfront also made up the part about "F-35 can't fly again " to make their conspiracy theory sounds more catchy... etc.

With that being said, sometimes magical things can happen, but i wouldn't bet on it. For me this has the same chance of happening as the earlier rumor about Israel destroyed S-300 site

Did you even read the article? The alleged birdstrike wasnt even mentioned until on the day of the alleged missile hit. That's the coincidence

Yes. After the alleged attack towards Israel squadron. But that is editor choice, start rumors can help drive traffic towards your website.

Edited November 3, 2017 by garrya

[garrya]

Now for something closer to reality:

New long-range missile project emerges in US budget

The existence of a two-year-old project to develop a new air-to-air missile capable of intercepting targets at great distances has emerged in US budget documents.

The Office of the Secretary Defense (OSD) launched a two-year engineering assessment of a new long-range engagement weapon (LREW) designed with the goal of “maintaining air dominance”, according to budget documents released last March.

Analyses of the design, engineering and kill chain requirements were expected to be complete in the last fiscal year, although details are classified. “When successful, LREW will transition to multiple services,” the documents show.

Though funded for more than two years, the LREW project had escaped notice in an obscure budget line item for an OSD account named “emerging capabilities technology development”, which is mostly reserved for small electronic warfare projects.

 

But the programme offers the first indication that the US military is interested in a new missile to replace or surpass the capabilities of the Raytheon AIM-120D AMRAAM.

 

An unclassified concept image of the LREW was published last April in a presentation by Chuck Perkins, the principal deputy to the assistant secretary of defense for research and engineering.

 

The image in Perkins’ presentation may not reflect the classified version of the LREW concept, but depicts a large, two-stage missile launched from an internal weapons bay of a Lockheed Martin F-22.

 

The LREW also emerges as Chinese and Russian militaries reportedly are pursuing new air intercept missiles with ranges significantly longer than the AIM-120D. The range of the AIM-120D is classified, but is thought to extend to about 100mi (160km).

 

The US Air Force also is developing two short-range weapons – the small advanced capabilities missile (SACM) and the miniature self-defence munition (MSDM).

 

 

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/new-long-range-missile-project-emerges-in-us-budget-442816/

[Hummingbird]

Still doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't think there will be many members of public living near Israel secret air base. Moreover since they said the aircraft need only few days until it will fly again, that means the exterior damage is extremely minimal, most likely slightly damaged to coating( otherwise it will take you months) ,

 

Where is this from because that's not what is written in the various articles on the incident, where doubt is expressed as to wether or not the aircraft will fly again at all (!) Big difference.

 

i don't think someone photographed the aircraft from long distance will even able to tell that the airplane was damaged. So they allegedly call up a new channel to release a damage control story only a few hours later seem illogical to me. Others facts also make that story less believable such as F-35I haven't even reach IOC, Israel only have several of them at the moment, Southfront also made up the part about "F-35 can't fly again " to make their conspiracy theory sounds more catchy... etc.

With that being said, sometimes magical things can happen, but i wouldn't bet on it. For me this has the same chance of happening as the earlier rumor about Israel destroyed S-300 site

 

Some cameras available today are capable of taking pictures of astounding quality at a distance, even in the dark.

 

Yes. After the alleged attack towards Israel squadron. But that is editor choice, start rumors can help drive traffic towards your website.

 

Editors choice? No, it was the Ireali governments choice as they released the statement.

Edited November 3, 2017 by Hummingbird

[gospadin]

Where is this from because that's not what is written in the various articles on the incident, where doubt is expressed as to wether or not the aircraft will fly again at all (!) Big difference.

 

That was a quote from someone in the IDF, in the original news report in Hebrew. I linked it a few pages back.

 

--gos

[Weta43]

That was a quote from someone in the IDF, in the original news report in Hebrew. I linked it a few pages back.

 

--gos

 

I tried searching the forum for the link - I think you might have read it and forgotten to link it,

 

Any chance you could re-post it ?