Wild_Bill_Kelso
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,231
- Mar 18, 2022
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
What is needed is an eventual replacement for the F-22 that can be sustained and has growth potential. The F-15EX will be a great stopgap and asset for several more years. Lastly we need a CUAV that can be integrated into a "wingman" operation with all operational fighter/ strike aircraft being used by all branches of the military.we may need an improved fighter sooner rather than later.
What is needed is an eventual replacement for the F-22 that can be sustained and has growth potential. The F-15EX will be a great stopgap and asset for several more years. Lastly we need a CUAV that can be integrated into a "wingman" operation with all operational fighter/ strike aircraft being used by all branches of the military.
And yet its operators are happy with it. Don't believe too much the garbage often posted in the media re the F-35. Instead, possibly read/listen to what the pilots themselves are saying:I think the F-35 is trying to be too many things at once, they have clearly had some issues with it (no big secret) and isn't probably ideal for the air superiority role.
The aircraft already has the most powerful military fighter engine producing up to 43,000 lbf and meets the design specification. Even if the GE XA-100 enters service, the F135 will be developed to match.more thrust which I think F-35 could definitely use
It already does.I'd really like to see the US holding a significant Tactical advantage.
Got any facts to back up such comments??The F-35 reminds me a bit of the SB2C. Initially, it was very disliked by crews and commanders, and had a ton of problems,
Well in on part you are possibly correct - I predict we will eventually see 5000 odd F-35s produced.I think we had some teething issues with some ultimately far greater aircraft as well, like the F4 phantom. I'm hoping the F-35 will follow a similar trajectory.
It already sets the standard in terms of sensors and related. It already has a combat radius equivalent to or better than contemporaries:Aside from the engine, we can help maintain an advantage by improving sensors (esp. radar) and missiles. But added range / flight endurance would be very helpful too IMO.
F-35A | F/A-18E/F | F-22 | F-16C Blk 50/52 | Typhoon | Rafale | F-15E | Gripen E/F |
1,239 km | 722 km | 850 km | 546 km | 1,389 km | 1,850 km | 722 km | 1,500 km |
Indeed. Here's one measure: remember the Radar tracking of Iraqi vehicles by E-8 JSTARS back in 1991:Those F-35s will be a force multiplier. The 4th gen fighters that have superior aeronautical capabilities will be let loose with the F-35 as quarterback.
I make no claim to knowledge of all things aviation but I've been convinced. It ain't the Red Baron anymore. It's Skynet.
It may come down to how things are measured and who includes what on the aircraft/in the measurements. It's not like there is an international standard applied. I was only trying to show that the F-35 isn't bad when compared. But again, I will emphasise that:I had no idea that the F-15 and F-16 are so short legged compared to their contemporaries.
What makes you assume I haven't?And yet its operators are happy with it. Don't believe too much the garbage often posted in the media re the F-35. Instead, possibly read/listen to what the pilots themselves are saying:
DA #8: F-35 Test Pilot Billie Flynn Destroys Myths about the Joint Strike Fighter Program - Defence Aviation
You can stream using the player above or download the mp3 to your computer or handheld devices. Right-click here to download the MP3.www.defenceaviation.com
USAF F-16 Pilot explains why he would Rather Fly the F-35 in combat than the F-22 (even in a War against Russia or China) - The Aviation Geek Club
USAF F-16 Pilot explains why he would Rather Fly the F-35 in combat than the F-22 (even in a War against Russia or China)theaviationgeekclub.com
F-35: Capabilities, Missions, Kinematics, Role In Ukrainian Crisis And Beyond. Interview With Billie Flynn
"The F-35 was designed to operate in highly contested airspace, with capabilities precisely focused on what we have been seeing in Ukraine today." We havetheaviationist.com
The F-35 has one engine which means thrust is less than a lot of 4th gen fighters, and it's very heavy.The aircraft already has the most powerful military fighter engine producing up to 43,000 lbf and meets the design specification. Even if the GE XA-100 enters service, the F135 will be developed to match.
It already does.
Got any facts to back up such comments??
Well in on part you are possibly correct - I predict we will eventually see 5000 odd F-35s produced.
Those F-35s will be a force multiplier. The 4th gen fighters that have superior aeronautical capabilities will be let loose with the F-35 as quarterback.
I make no claim to knowledge of all things aviation but I've been convinced. It ain't the Red Baron anymore. It's Skynet.
Remember that 2 engines mean much more weight - both in engines and structure + fuel consumption.The F-35 has one engine which means thrust is less than a lot of 4th gen fighters, and it's very heavy.
No, the F-35.About the SB2C?
Dogfighting the way Hollywood and equivalent like to emphasise has rarely been a key to successful aerial warfare even going back to WW1. If you look at the histories of most of the successful pilots/aces, more often than not their opponents rarely even knew what hit them. The analogy I have used before is that aerial combat isn't so much to chivalrous knights dueling but more of someone walking up behind someone and hitting them from behind with a bottle. It ain't chivalrous!There is still the issue of weapon and sensor range, and the claims that 'dogfighting' and equivalent are over have been made before.
It may come down to how things are measured and who includes what on the aircraft/in the measurements. It's not like there is an international standard applied. I was only trying to show that the F-35 isn't bad when compared. But again, I will emphasise that:
- In the era of aerial refuelling the measure is increasingly irrelevant
- The F-35 meets its design requirements.
Dogfighting the way Hollywood and equivalent like to emphasise has rarely been a key to successful aerial warfare even going back to WW1. If you look at the histories of most of the successful pilots/aces, more often than not their opponents rarely even knew what hit them. The analogy I have used before is that aerial combat isn't so much to chivalrous knights dueling but more of someone walking up behind someone and hitting them from behind with a bottle. It ain't chivalrous!