F35C...How Much !!!!

[beaupower32]

As for the F35 I worry that it may be so expensive and therefore so few in service that it could be overwhelmed by massive numbers of low tech planes.

The F-35 is not going to be the only aircraft on the battlefield. I dont understand why people cant see this. You will still have all the same players we have today. The F-15, F-16, and F-22 will still be providing the air dominance role. The F-35 will be using stealth to attack ground targets. Once we have have control of the air, we will be loading up the aircraft with weapons to continue dropping bombs on target. Will the F-35 be able to defend itself, yes. It is very capable to do so.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Thanks for posting that Beau - hope alls well at "Eddie."

 

[Lucky13]

Unless the gremlins find them first!

 

[beaupower32]

Thanks for posting that Beau - hope alls well at "Eddie."

Things here are good. Staying busy, lots of work happening on the planes, lots of flying as well. Lucky, we have employeed the gremlins and they do a fine job of getting into the hard to reach places. Only problem we have is they like to chew on the electrical harnesses, plus drink the jet fuel. Other than that they are great.

 

[Marcel]

Well, everybody their own, but consider the situation. We are a small country. We only use our f-16's to bomb up some terrorist group in Afganistan or so. With the current cost, we can only afford 35 airframes of this F35. That's not really much. About 33% of those will be in maintenance at any given time, 50% will be abroad, training, flying missions to bomb the hell out some wooden huts with fancy laserguiden multi milion dollar bombs. That leaves only about 6 aircraft to defend our airspace. And I didn't include accidents that will happen, making this number even less.
Okay, it might be the best aircraft in the world, but that doesn't help you if you have so few. It didn't help the germans to have the me262 as they didn't have enough numbers to make any difference. Sheer numbers help. I'd rather have 60 Grippens than 35 F35's.

 

[GrauGeist]

On the otherhand, Marcel...if the F-35 is adopted by several nations, there maybe some good deals to be had on F-18s

 

[Marcel]

Yeah, I know, but the F18 was ruled out. It's too big and some of our 'brighter' politicians decided that a single engined aircraft is better. Why not have the latest version of the F-16? Would be a big improvement on our F16A's, it's rather cheap in comparison, would be easy to adopt since we had F16's for 40 years and is able to fullfill the missions that are flown at the moment. But no, we need the most modern plane, even if it means we could only afford one.

 

[GrauGeist]

Well, there's always the F-15, if you want more bang for your buck.

As far as size goes, the F-15, F-16 and the F-18/CF-18 are all close in size (some a little longer, some a little wider) but all top performers. Though the F-15 is still a screamer at all altitudes.

 

[pbehn]

The F-35 is not going to be the only aircraft on the battlefield. I dont understand why people cant see this. You will still have all the same players we have today. The F-15, F-16, and F-22 will still be providing the air dominance role. The F-35 will be using stealth to attack ground targets. Once we have have control of the air, we will be loading up the aircraft with weapons to continue dropping bombs on target. Will the F-35 be able to defend itself, yes. It is very capable to do so.

Beaupower, I fully appreciate that for the USA. However the UK has ordered the carrier version. We are building two carriers of which one will have the F35 and the other will probably be mothballed (a one for the price of two deal). We don't have enough vessels for a support fleet so any mission would be with a USA fleet. We would have done better just buying the planes and flying off US carriers if ever the need arose. The carriers are estimated to cost 16Bn US dollars and we don't have any other carrier capable A/C Awacs electronics warfare etc. For the UK the cost is eye watering and for the life of me I cant think of a mission they will perform that couldn't be done by anything from an F4 onwards.

 

[beaupower32]

Beaupower, I fully appreciate that for the USA. However the UK has ordered the carrier version. We are building two carriers of which one will have the F35 and the other will probably be mothballed (a one for the price of two deal). We don't have enough vessels for a support fleet so any mission would be with a USA fleet. We would have done better just buying the planes and flying off US carriers if ever the need arose. The carriers are estimated to cost 16Bn US dollars and we don't have any other carrier capable A/C Awacs electronics warfare etc. For the UK the cost is eye watering and for the life of me I cant think of a mission they will perform that couldn't be done by anything from an F4 onwards.

Yes, I agree with you. But the 35 will give you a weapon system that is stealth capable. Nothing from the f4 on has that capability other than a select few. Also having the STOVL will give you supersonic aircraft, something the harrier can't do. Expensive, yes, but what program isn't.

 

[GrauGeist]

It seems to me that the F-35 and the F-22 would be comparable in radar cross-section.

I know they're probably not as sneaky as the wobbly goblin, but that's my guess based on absolute untechnical eyeballing...

 

[beaupower32]

The cross section is very small. There is a story about a flight of f4s somewhere and they were on a mission. A F-22 snuck up behind them, flew under and around without the phantoms knowing, and said on the radio that they should probably go home. Pretty funny. Also rumor is the guys at red flag are mad because the Raptor guys are killing them so fast, that they are not getting the training they need.

 

[GrauGeist]

Out of curiosity, why isn't the F-22 marketed more to NATO/Allied outfits? I thought, years ago, that the F-22 was supposed to be the bird of choice when it was being developed? It seems that they skipped over the F-22 from the F-18/CF-18 right to the F-35.

 

[parsifal]

F-35 are still very capable air superiority platforms. Not as capable as the f-22, which is not for sale anyway, but still a complete generation ahead of the F-15 and F-18. Ive got some mates in the RAAF, and have heard them talking about this very issue. way over my head as far as the technology, but in summary they are saying the new F-35 will fly rings around our current F-18 Superhornets.....

 

[GrauGeist]

Well, several years ago (ok, it's been longer than that now, actually), I was led to believe that the F-22 was going to be a primary export platform...

 

[Lucky13]

Stealth or not, as with every new technology, weapons, radar and whatnot, new countermeasures is being developed behind the scenes (flying goblins or gremlins, who knows), for those nations who can't afford stealth, the heat signature from engines is something that you'll never get rid of, you can reduce it only that much, but not 100% hide it, same with stealth, that's the interesting thing with this, you never know what's around the corner and weapons are cheaper and quicker to develop than new aircraft, something will show up, that will make those famous Phoenix look like granddad with a walking aid....when that happens, where do you stand, but with a very expensive turkey....

(Just the famous spanner in the works, again!)

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Out of curiosity, why isn't the F-22 marketed more to NATO/Allied outfits? I thought, years ago, that the F-22 was supposed to be the bird of choice when it was being developed? It seems that they skipped over the F-22 from the F-18/CF-18 right to the F-35.

The F-22 was prohibited from foreign sales in 1997, AFAIK it was never "offered" to other countries, but Australia and Japan expressed an interest in the aircraft. The F-22 came about from the ATF program and was never intended to have a dedicated air to ground role.