Too much faith in stealth technology?

[wuzak]

I was arguing that the F-35 is not the solution to Australia's needs, and certainly is not suitable for all the roles required by Australia. And surely air superiority is one of the most important roles for our aircraft.

I think we need a mixture of aircraft to fulfill our needs. Not just a single aircraft to do the whole job.

The US won't sell us F-22s, so why wouldn't Australia look at what else is available for the different roles required.

I would suggest that the Su-35 is probably the best airframe available (to Australia) at the moment for air superiority and can be available for roughly the same cost as the F-18E/Fs we bought. And surely they would have some strike capability.

At worst the Su-35 would give us equivalent capabilities in air to air with the air forces in our region, though we could probably afford more of them than they could.

Then if we reall still wanted the F-35 we could concentrate it in the strike role.

 

[Matt308]

Understood.

But no manufacturing offsets and spares are held hostage by a dubious regime. Tough choices.

 

[nuuumannn]

There isn't really any ideal airframe for what you are proposing for Australia's needs, wuzak. Buying Russian equipment, no matter how attractive the airframe, is not a viable option because, as Matt pointed out, the Russians are notoriously bad at spares supply. That is without mentioning the incompatibility of avionic systems, weaponry etc. I guess you also have to examine what the RAAF is likely to go into combat against once it has its F-35s.

 

[Glider]

The Typhoon has come a long way in the GA role over recent months. I tend to view the Typhoon as Fighter first and GA second and the F35 as a GA first and Fighter second. Both are going to be capable of doing a decent job of the secondary role.

A combination similar to the RAF is I agree the ideal solution, but the additional costs over a small fleet are probably out of reach.

The Su35 would not be the correct solution, spares, support, lack of political stability and reliability issues would be stacked against it.

 

[wuzak]

There isn't really any ideal airframe for what you are proposing for Australia's needs, wuzak. Buying Russian equipment, no matter how attractive the airframe, is not a viable option because, as Matt pointed out, the Russians are notoriously bad at spares supply. That is without mentioning the incompatibility of avionic systems, weaponry etc. I guess you also have to examine what the RAAF is likely to go into combat against once it has its F-35s.

As I undestand it, India uses a mixture of western and Russian equipment. And I understand that they use western weaponry on their Russian aircraft.

Also, back in the Cold War weren't Soviet jets designed so that they would be compatible with US ground equipment?

 

[Matt308]

India has a real problem with their mish-mash of equipment, systems and airplanes.

And Cold War Soviet jets compatible with US ground equipment? That's news to me. What are you talking about?

 

[pbfoot]

India has a real problem with their mish-mash of equipment, systems and airplanes.

And Cold War Soviet jets compatible with US ground equipment? That's news to me. What are you talking about?

I nelieve the soviet aircraft were capable of using NATO Start Carts, Oxygen stuff fueling equipment and dumb bombs without mods

 

[Glider]

In view of this topic the latest news is interesting

BBC News - Why Iran's capture of US drone will shake CIA

 

[FLYBOYJ]

As I undestand it, India uses a mixture of western and Russian equipment. And I understand that they use western weaponry on their Russian aircraft.

Also, back in the Cold War weren't Soviet jets designed so that they would be compatible with US ground equipment?

India and Pakistan both blended Russian and Western systems into their aircraft on several occasions. As far as the starting units. I believe you're looking at the 28V electrical power cord with a 3 prong socket, a common off the shelf item depending what specific aircraft we're talking about. I don't believe breathing O2 and N2 (used for the brakes) adapters were common with NATO equipment from the Soviet/ East Bloc equipment I've been around (L-29, 39, Iskra, MiG-15, MiG-17, MiG-21)

In view of this topic the latest news is interesting

BBC News - Why Iran's capture of US drone will shake CIA

That's been all over the news here. For the most part I believe its much to do about nothing. If Iran really shot down this drone they would be filming it and showing it off on their media. Even if it was brought down by what ever means, I"ll bet dollars to donuts that the more sophicated items on board fried themselves the minute the drone pilot lost control of the aircraft (I believe there are some computerized systems that will "crash" in the event of the drone becoming uncontrollable). My take on it, like all the other advanced drones that came before it, it is a drone and it was made to be expendable and I'm sure the CIA knew the risks of one being brought down over hostile territory.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Well the Iranians just posted the first pics of the drone. Looks like its in tact. Personally I think they got a big RC jet with a bunch of fried computers

 

[pbfoot]

India and Pakistan both blended Russian and Western systems into their aircraft on several occasions. As far as the starting units. I believe you're looking at the 28V electrical power cord with a 3 prong socket, a common off the shelf item depending what specific aircraft we're talking about. I don't believe breathing O2 and N2 (used for the brakes) adapters were common with NATO equipment from the Soviet/ East Bloc equipment I've been around (L-29, 39, Iskra, MiG-15, MiG-17, MiG-21)
.

I was just going from memory what I'd been told from the lower castes so your probably correct and should be filed under mysteries dispelled

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I was just going from memory what I'd been told from the lower castes so your probably correct and should be filed under mysteries dispelled

 

[pbfoot]

found this recent article and it answers a lot of questions and back up some statements
Valour

 

[Glider]

That's been all over the news here. For the most part I believe its much to do about nothing. If Iran really shot down this drone they would be filming it and showing it off on their media. Even if it was brought down by what ever means, I"ll bet dollars to donuts that the more sophicated items on board fried themselves the minute the drone pilot lost control of the aircraft (I believe there are some computerized systems that will "crash" in the event of the drone becoming uncontrollable). My take on it, like all the other advanced drones that came before it, it is a drone and it was made to be expendable and I'm sure the CIA knew the risks of one being brought down over hostile territory.

From what I have seen on the TV there is little doubt that the Iranians have it intact but drone or not, it was obviously spotted and its that impact on the stealth that I had in mind adding it to the thread.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

From what I have seen on the TV there is little doubt that the Iranians have it intact but drone or not, it was obviously spotted and its that impact on the stealth that I had in mind adding it to the thread.

I guess we'll have to see how they really acquired it. I have doubts they shot it down or even took control of it.

 

[Glider]

I certainly don't believe that it was shot down.

 

[nuuumannn]

I nelieve the soviet aircraft were capable of using NATO Start Carts, Oxygen stuff fueling equipment and dumb bombs without mods

Yep, they did this so that when the Warpac nations invaded Western Europe it would be simple for their aircraft to plug in and go at Western airfields. I spoke to a Polish guy who has former South Vietnam Cessna A-37 Dragonfly and F-5 in his museum collection, he said the North Vietnamese sent Western equipment to sympathetic governments for assimilation of ideas and equipment.

Wuzac, you're right about India, but there are lots of issues surrounding incompatibility, as Matt308 stated. I suspect if they can't get the Seasprites' avionics to work, I'm sure as certain they'd find it hard to get Russian avionic equipment to interface with existing Western gear. Do you really think the Aussie govt would buy Russian equipment, though?

 

[wuzak]

Wuzac, you're right about India, but there are lots of issues surrounding incompatibility, as Matt308 stated. I suspect if they can't get the Seasprites' avionics to work, I'm sure as certain they'd find it hard to get Russian avionic equipment to interface with existing Western gear. Do you really think the Aussie govt would buy Russian equipment, though?

The Seasprite's avionics weren't developed in Australia.

No, I don't think that we'll ever buy Russian equipment. In fact, I think that we may never buy anything other than American equipment. The decisions are totally political.

 

[Matt308]

It's only single point of failure is its single engine. Other systems are likely double or triple redundant. I would bet a paycheck that the engine failed and it glided in. The RQ-170 has never been touted as leading edge. It has a cranked kite shape and hidden engine inlet. Its payload is probably more expensive than the airframe/avionics themselves. China has announced similar stealth UCAVs in the past with much more impressive stealth airframe qualities. But sensor fusion (in software) has always been the Achilles heel.

I suspect that the drone was fitted with expendable IR/visual light cameras and radioactive particle sensors/brooms. Likely nothing too leading edge, but reliant upon its inherent and publically known stealth qualities (small airframe, planform, hidden inlet, etc) to avoid detection. Hell just look at the engine exhaust outlet. Nothing fancy there. AvWeek has been reporting this UAS overflying Iran for 2+ years and I would bet dollars to donuts that any technology lost is 30+ years old in novelty.

 

[wuzak]

Unfortunately the F-35 in Australian service will have to be the be-all and do-all aircraft. There will not be any air superiority fighters like the F-22 or dedicated close air support aircraft. The F-35 will be the only fighter/fighter-bomber/bomber/strike aircraft we wil have.

I suppose this is also true of the US services, since the F-22 program has ben cancelled and the F-3 will replace the A-10 and F-117 in the long term.