Max Headroom Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 It's hopeless! That metallic shiny paint will be awful to paint and I bet the stickers will silver too. I'll get my Duncan B (bringing it down to my level) I wonder how the Israelis will paint theirs? Trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antoine Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 To Antoine, I'm not dinging Rafale - it's clearly a very capable platform. It's just a question of horses for courses. If the potential customer has already invested in large stocks of weapons that can't be loaded on Rafale, then clearly that factor must be considered in the procurement process. It may put off some customers while others may not care. It all comes down to cost, schedule and risk - standard procurement assessment factors. Cheers, Mark Mark, agree, but your large stock of weapons not qualified for the Rafale is reduced to just two types, AIM-9X and AMRAAM. Large stock of those missiles means what, 200 shot at best for most air forces? And again, not qualified doesn't mean not compatible, they can be qualified if the customer really needs them. So I consider this being absolutely not relevant. I'll also add that there are already some air forces operating both Mirage and F-something, with French and US missiles together. Greece, Taiwan and some Gulf emirates. One last thing.. I know of some air forces that prefer to have their MICA available at home, than have their AMRAAM secured in continental US depots, to be delivered under certain conditions only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhaselden Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 You're also missing AGM-65, AGM-88, AGM-154, AGM-158 and probably others so it's not just AIM-9X and AMRAAM. Again, I stress it's down to the customer and their particular CONOPS as to whether or not this represents a significant factor regarding procurement of Rafale over other types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antoine Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) As I've already said, agree for the HARM, as we don't have anything near in our inventory. For the rest, what did you miss in my last sentence? MICA-IR and MICA-EM. Yes, so far, AMRAAM and AIM-9X are not allowed on the Rafale. Is it definitive? No, Rafale is in conformity with Mil-Std-1760 (as the F-15/16, etc...) so in principle, no current US missile integration is impossible. But then why do Rafale customer would want AMRAAM instead of MICA? But again, One last thing.. I know of some air forces that prefer to have their MICA available at home, than have their AMRAAM secured in continental US depots, to be delivered under certain conditions only. It's far from being an exception, and it's not the case of MICA only. Some air forces just don't want to have to rely on a unique provider. So yes, what you see as a "significant factor" can really be a positive significant factor when selling the Rafale. Edited January 28, 2016 by Antoine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhaselden Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) Antoine, You seem intent on picking a fight when I'm not trying to make one. You're also putting words in my mouth. I never said it was a "significant factor". I said it was for the customer to determine whether it's a significant factor. I did indeed read all your post. "In principle, no current US missile integration is impossible" is saying the same thing as me - Rafale can't currently carry those weapons. Could it, given funding and resources? Of course...but today it can't. And that's where the procurement decision comes in. Any upgrades to an existing platform will incur cost, risk and schedule impacts...and it's down to the customer to determine whether they want to bear those impacts. Cheers,Mark Edited January 28, 2016 by mhaselden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homerlovesbeer Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Some vids which are very informative and factual for a change. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antoine Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Mark, don't take this posture now, as at first you did came to answer to a question asked to someone else. The one thing holding the Rafale back as far as export sales go is its lack of flexibility to anything but French weapons and systems. You can't just buy a fleet of Rafales and hang any weapons on them, you have to buy French gear for it. That's just France shooting itself in the foot with its own nationalism. And your statement then seems to be much more definitive. The Rafale can carry standard Paveway II and III LGBs but the remaining weapons are all of French origin which means potential customers can't load up Sidewinders, Mavericks, AMRAAMs etc. (assuming the customer has such weapons in their inventory). The Rafale can't even load other Brit/European weapons like Brimstone or ASRAAM. So nothing like a fight against you here, my goal was to point out the fact that Rafale IS compatible with most of US weapons, and its done, so there goes the "lack of flexibility" argument. I'm already OT since a long time, so I'm leaving you quibble with the "compatible, but not capable yet" issue, which is absolutely not relevant to me. I'll happily read and take into account your future imputs on all subject BUT the Rafale. Coming back on the main subject, is the F-35 capable yet to shoot any of the current Brits weapons, foremost in my mind is the brimstone? This is no try at some kind of mockery, but a true question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shar2 Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 ENOUGH! Play nicely or not at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Foster60 Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 Unless we are all (as human kind) very lucky it looks as if many combinations of aircraft and weapons will get a try out in the current sad situation in the Middle East. That may end up taking a lot of discussion and establishing the fact. I see the current upset as having many parallels with the Spanish Civil War. Somehow I see debate such as here preferable, ( but please be respectful to each other) Is it me or do we seem to be getting less public information on the air campaign than the Lybian war? Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cookenbacher Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 First, I would like to mention that this may be the only F-35 thread on the entire internet that has made for worthwhile reading. Thanks Britmodeller. I don't really fit into any particular camp when it comes to opinions on the F-35, but my criticisms are more toward the opinion that the F-35 may be too capable, leading to unwanted cost, schedule overruns and the ensuing controversy. In the process, Lockheed has been handed a near monopoly on future US fighter production - not a good situation, and the reason for a lot of the delays and overruns I'm sure. Interestingly, the areas where we expect the extra cost to come from (stealth airframe, internal weapons bays, powerful engine) have been complete and capable for some time. It is the software to complete the sensor integration that has caused almost all of the extra cost and delay, and gives the F-35 capabilities that far exceed those conferred by stealth. This cost and delay would also occur on any 'super' F-15/16/18/Typhoon/Rafale/Gripen that we all like to propose in the F-35's stead. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan P Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Coming back on the main subject, is the F-35 capable yet to shoot any of the current Brits weapons, foremost in my mind is the brimstone? This is no try at some kind of mockery, but a true question. Good question. The headscratcher to me for the Brimstone has always been why it hasn't been developed into suitable variants for Lynx/Wildcat or a retrofit launcher for Challenger or Warrior AFVs. It's even more mystifying why it hasn't been integrated with Typhoon or prioritised for F-35, whereas Storm Shadow has taken priority. My hope is that future Brimstone variants and SPEAR 3 are intended to integrate with F-35s from day one. In the meantime I found this (very long) video about the F-35 development and the part played by everybody's favourite panto villain, Pierre Sprey. The narration can be a bit wearing, but it covers almost all of the notable milestones, delays, pitfalls and issues during the programme. The first section serves to demonstrate how mature the programme is, and how the flying and production F-35s of 2016 are a far cry from the development and initial production examples of 2009-10 which have provoked the familiar hysterical column inches which still circulate even today. The second section shredding Pierre Sprey is simply wonderful. Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slater Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Seems there's still a bit of work to be done: http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2015/pdf/dod/2015f35jsf.pdfhttp://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2015/pdf/dod/2015f35jsf.pdf 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 So, to cut through all the fancy wordage in the .pdf.....It still doesn't work and it won't be working until somewhere around 2020. I think this sums it up quite well: "Operational suitability of all variants continues to be less than desired by the Services, and relies heavily on contractor support and workarounds that would be difficult to employ in a combat environment." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhantomBigStu Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 the f-35 really is growing on me, so much so the hasegawa kit is screaming at me to build it....though masking the RAM panels looks hellish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Housesparrow Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) There was an article yesterday in local media, about how the military of Norway might have to plan, if not having done so already, for having a downgraded version of the F-35 (I think it was a cost issue). Afaik, Norway intend to end up with about 50 jets unless I remember wrong. Edited February 5, 2016 by Housesparrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff_B Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 the f-35 really is growing on me, so much so the hasegawa kit is screaming at me to build it....though masking the RAM panels looks hellish I thought the RAM panels are decals in the Hasegawa Kit ? The Academy kit doesn't have the decals or raised panels which really makes masking tricky, but Wolfpak do a set of RAM panel decals for the Academy kit. Please note all three F-35A kits in 1/72nd are different sizes and shapes so what's designed for one probably won't worth on another. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhantomBigStu Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 I thought the RAM panels are decals in the Hasegawa Kit ? The Academy kit doesn't have the decals or raised panels which really makes masking tricky, but Wolfpak do a set of RAM panel decals for the Academy kit. Please note all three F-35A kits in 1/72nd are different sizes and shapes so what's designed for one probably won't worth on another. ah yes, got the fujimi and hasegawa flipped, thought their B was the one with decals, that changes things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff_B Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 ah yes, got the fujimi and hasegawa flipped, thought their B was the one with decals, that changes things No there are no decals in the Fujimi B and I asked Wolkpak if they were considering them, and they replied only if KittyHawk ever get round to doing theirs in 72nd. I get the feeling the Fujimi F-35B may have been a bit too premature and we really need a newer, fresher kit as a base model. That's another one missing from 2016 new kit announcements, no additional F-35 kits in 72nd just the silly scale Italeri F-35A, both Dragon and Hasegawa listed all three versions but only the A has come to light so far from Hasegawa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 I wonder if the kit-makers have to pay royalties to Lockheed Martin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Just think, if they had to pay royalties to all the sub contractors, the kit would be almost as expensive as the real thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Might have to wait a while before they actually released it too. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martian Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Just think, if they had to pay royalties to all the sub contractors, the kit would be almost as expensive as the real thing. The Hasegawa ones probably are! Martin 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slater Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Somewhat of a milestone, courtesy of the Italians: http://www.defensenews.com/story/breaking-news/2016/02/05/f-35-makes-first-transatlantic-crossing/79901306/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Not sure that headline is strictly accurate.....Pretty sure that Charles Lindbergh and 'Spirit of St.Louis' were actually the first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan P Posted February 7, 2016 Share Posted February 7, 2016 Not sure that headline is strictly accurate.....Pretty sure that Charles Lindbergh and 'Spirit of St.Louis' were actually the first. Poor Alcock and Brown, airbrushed from history just like that. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts