some F35 info

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules


Back in 2017, the naysayers were inferring that the F-35 was given "easy" ROE that resulted in the positive combat assessments. Reading this article in detail, it seems pretty clear that Red Flag scenarios have actually become harder in the past decade, not easier.

I guess the last bastion of defence for the naysayers is that all these Lt Cols are in on the conspiracy and are being ordered to tell lies. The "F-35 is crap" school of thought is rapidly approaching, if not already at, the untenable state.
 
Interesting, so if Germany buys the F-35, it will take jobs away from Europeans?
I think that was the basis of the multi-nation partnering where each participating nation would build a piece of their aircraft, offsetting some of the costs. There are production lines set up in Japan and Italy aside from the one in Fort Worth.
 
Whilst we don't have a [roduction line the UK does have a good sized stake in the aircraft. It's one of the often missed benefits of a situation like this. Should god forbid tensions rise quickly it would be much easier to ramp up production
 
I think that was the basis of the multi-nation partnering where each participating nation would build a piece of their aircraft, offsetting some of the costs. There are production lines set up in Japan and Italy aside from the one in Fort Worth.
The deal with Germany is, they and France are trying to come up with a next-gen fighter and the F-35 will certainly cut into their hopes of peddling their project to NATO countries.
No one is going to go hungry if the F-35 is purchased by Germany...it's just posturing by the Kaiser and her French minions.
 
Back in 2017, the naysayers were inferring that the F-35 was given "easy" ROE that resulted in the positive combat assessments. Reading this article in detail, it seems pretty clear that Red Flag scenarios have actually become harder in the past decade, not easier.


I guess the last bastion of defence for the naysayers is that all these Lt Cols are in on the conspiracy and are being ordered to tell lies. The "F-35 is crap" school of thought is rapidly approaching, if not already at, the untenable state.

As long as there is one less than perfect reporting factor the "F-35 is crap" school will have ammunition to argue on. And the only way a report will be all glowing is if someone sanitizes it, honest and unbiased reports always have lessons learned, nothing is perfect and so everything can be improved. In order to improve you must highlight deficiencies, no matter how few or small. So the nay sayers will always have ammo.

And no matter how good the F-35 is, the haters will always be able to find other platforms that do any one little thing better. If you cherry pick your data you can prove anything you want.

It is becoming apparent the F-35 is a good addition to the US inventory, with a probably long future of support.

People who claim "stealth" is useless or has been rendered obsolete have no concept of the modern battlespace. People who claim the F-35 is too expensive have not done an honest, unbiased, assessment of what any new development competitive fighter would cost. The F-15X is touted by some as a "less expensive" fighter option, obviously those people have not looked at the projected flyaway cost of that aircraft. At one time there was talk of a "reduced cross section Super Hornet" as an F-35 alternate option, but the existing F-18F's are only ~15% under the F-35A cost, is there any doubt reducing the RCS of the Hornet would not raise the cost up into the same price point as the F-35?

There is no doubt, the F-35 has been an expensive program. It has been a long project. The individual unit cost is high. But the reality is that it is unlikely a competitive aircraft could be developed and built for significantly less than what it has taken. Could China do it for less? Sure, with workers earning a fraction of the pay, MUCH fewer legal restraints and regulation to deal with, and huge portions of the development budget being obscurated or unaccounted for as part of other projects.

The eventual replacement for the F-35, or the F-22, or the F-18, will be an even more expensive project, with a longer time line. Of course, it is likely to be a UCAV, so these may be the last of the fully manned fighters.

T!
 
Meanwhile in Canada ...
... the bungling continues. It makes me so proud.
RCAF welcomes first 2 used Australian F-18 jets
I love F-18, but .... I hope they like the snow :)

Sheesh...I'd have asked them to throw in a new paint job with the purchase. Those birds look rather tired and tatty. Then again, they've been manhandled by Aussies for a fair few years...

Yeah...coat time again! :)
 
... I think they are probably well-maintained ... that is not my fear. We repeatedly elect governments in Canada who are afraid to make expensive decision about DEFENSE on the basis of defense needs.
We continue to pay our dues $$$$ on the F-35 development account and that is right and proper ... yet we dither on buying the aircraft.
It's like the Simpsons.
 
The complexities of politics versus defense hardware is perhaps the closest that humanity will ever come to a perpetual motion machine.

Let's spin the "way back" wheel to summer of 1984 and have a look see at the hand-wringing of the day over new fighters and thier costs...

The Airplane That Doesn't Cost Enough - The Atlantic
 
This is an older article, not sure if it's been posted before or not, but there's so much wrong going on, I'm not sure where to start.

In the article, they go on to say that the Super Tucano is a superior support platform because it's "a WWII fighter"and it can "fly low and slow enough, that the pilot can see friendly troops and their puffs of smoke from their guns, avoiding friendly fire..."
Wait, what? There are countless instances in WWII where Allied troops were attacked by Allied aircraft in "low and slow" ground attack missions (friendly fire by fighters during ground attack even happened in WWI, by the way) - so where does this author come up with the idea that a pilot in a WWII fighter can see ground units with such clarity?
Anyway, here's the article:
The WWII-Era Plane Giving the F-35 a Run for Its Money
 
so where does this author come up with the idea that a pilot in a WWII fighter can see ground units with such clarity?

1551295218739.png
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back