More F-35 issues

[alex]

10 minutes ago, PattheCat said:

 

- the French Rafale story - a plane I find quite achieved - is not  what we can call a "healthy walk". Let's remember it was put into service with air-to-air capabilities only, also first flight in 1991 with the F2 multirole standard arriving in 2005 only.

 

 

So maybe the F-35 story is not "that" appalling ..... considering the technological challenge. It's a disturbing situation, still.

 

Not a real issue that it started as air to air only, it depends on the aircraft you are looking to replace. The French Navy had Crusaders (air to air) and Super Etendard (air to ground). As the crusader were older, they needed replacement first. Like with the Eurofighter. The German Air Force had Phantoms and Tornados. Phantoms needed replacement first (same for the UK and Italian, which even leased two different A/A assets!), so it's clear that the air to ground role had only second priority.

 

Alex

 

 

[jenko]

1 hour ago, Giorgio N said:

 

All Spitfires are equally perfect but some are more equally perfect than others 🤣

👍 so true 

[PattheCat]

54 minutes ago, alex said:

 

Not a real issue that it started as air to air only, it depends on the aircraft you are looking to replace. The French Navy had Crusaders (air to air) and Super Etendard (air to ground). As the crusader were older, they needed replacement first. Like with the Eurofighter. The German Air Force had Phantoms and Tornados. Phantoms needed replacement first (same for the UK and Italian, which even leased two different A/A assets!), so it's clear that the air to ground role had only second priority.

 

Alex

 

 

It sure wasn't an issue at the time but with the Rafale, the French aimed at a replacement of all their planes (either Air Force or Navy) in all their capabilities. Their famous "omnirole" concept. And that, Dassault and it's partners couldn't deliver before a long time. OK, not only their "fault", as costs, and thereby funding and politics were also widely responsible for the delays and because of the fact that a certain amount of stealthiness (discretion as they call it) was added to the requirements after the project was started.

Still, it has been like the F-35, long to come to fruition with inflating costs and techn(olog)ical issues - what's quite common in the miltary air industry sector, after all.

 

I find the F-35 story more disappointing because the US have vastly larger means (technically and financially).

[PattheCat]

On 2/7/2020 at 10:28 AM, hairystick said:

Sadly this aircraft is being touted by the air farce as the "replacement for the A-10" which means it could see a lot of air-to-mud use.

Luckily the Warthog family is being re-winged and upgraded internally.

I remember of a training exercise in Germany during 1982 (I was just a called-up, no pro). This Warthog was flying circles low and slow and darn, I think the pilot looked at me right into the eyes as I was crouching into low bushes. Scary sight when playing the reds but how reassuring it must be to see them when being a blue. The F-35 certainly isn't on par for this close kind of job (but I suppose it has been meant to do it with standoff guided weapons, not a Gatling or unguided bombs/rockets).

Still, if I was lying in the mud, I think I'd prefer to have an A-10 roaming close and longer than a F-35 screeching over (I imagine a Marine Sarge :"I know these F-35s delivered but please, sir, could you call a Warthog. A Cobra or an Apache would also make the boys happy").

[Slater]

[Giorgio N]

5 hours ago, PattheCat said:

I remember of a training exercise in Germany during 1982 (I was just a called-up, no pro). This Warthog was flying circles low and slow and darn, I think the pilot looked at me right into the eyes as I was crouching into low bushes. Scary sight when playing the reds but how reassuring it must be to see them when being a blue. The F-35 certainly isn't on par for this close kind of job (but I suppose it has been meant to do it with standoff guided weapons, not a Gatling or unguided bombs/rockets).

Still, if I was lying in the mud, I think I'd prefer to have an A-10 roaming close and longer than a F-35 screeching over (I imagine a Marine Sarge :"I know these F-35s delivered but please, sir, could you call a Warthog. A Cobra or an Apache would also make the boys happy").

 

The problem with the A-10 is that by the end of that same decade the "reds" were accompanied into battle by mobile air defence systems that could get rid of the Warthog quite easily, so in reality they weren't as scared as we may believe. This was one of the reason why the USAF started looking at a replacement in around 1988.

What saved the A-10 from retirement was the continuous US involvement in a type of war where the only aid defence asset the enemy have are small and medium calibre machine guns. But give the enemy something heavier and possibly guided and there would be no A-10 or any other type going low and slow in the vicinity

 

[Slater]

It's the same type of war that kept the A-1 Skyraider heavily employed in Vietnam. But once SA-7 made it's appearance, the handwriting was on the wall.

 

Brushfire wars populated with AK-47/RPG-7 armed insurgents have a way of popping up with no warning in far-flung places.  So in that sense, the A-10 may have more useful life ahead of it - or not. We'll see. 

[hairystick]

12 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

 

The problem with the A-10 is that by the end of that same decade the "reds" were accompanied into battle by mobile air defence systems that could get rid of the Warthog quite easily, so in reality they weren't as scared as we may believe.

 

The gulf war 1 had plenty of missile and AA activity going on. The A-10 certainly gained an enviable reputation there.

General Horner even stated "the A-10's are saving our bottom".

 

It remains, however, part of an integral aviation combat system.

[PattheCat]

4 hours ago, hairystick said:

It remains, however, part of an integral aviation combat system.

 

You indeed need the right tool for each job, being ready for conflicts that ask for "counter-insurgency" weapons as well as for an opponent with well prepared, equipped and organized modern armed forces.

 

What's annoying me is that the F-35 appears to be "sold" - and quite well - to public opinion in a way that makes it look as sort of a "Wunderwaffe" that will win any game by itself. On the contrary it's a tool that should - and has been intended as to - be put to use in coop with other assets where it will contribute to a controlled combat environment and be most able to use and assert it's qualities as a top notch connected weapon system.

 

It's another subject but I am asking myself how much "worth" the F-35 would loose should the US have to remove part of their European forces to assess power or face a threat elsewhere. Less Awacs, recon, com, air refueling, F15s ...... I wonder if our high ranking officers and politicians took that into account when deciding to acquire f-35s.

[alt-92]

On 10/13/2020 at 12:47 PM, PattheCat said:

It's another subject but I am asking myself how much "worth" the F-35 would loose should the US have to remove part of their European forces to assess power or face a threat elsewhere. Less Awacs, recon, com, air refueling, F15s ...... I wonder if our high ranking officers and politicians took that into account when deciding to acquire f-35s.

 

Cue the arguments whether we should have a European Airforce/Army command where this load is shared. 

3, 2, 1....

 

 

[dov]

Well, the F-35 is our cathedral. The mankind started to build cathedrals to worship. On the way they learned math, geometry and learned to act as a group. They all, from king to peasant had to give money. It was a peaceful way to develop culture. After WW1 it changed to engineering totally. Even the space flight is our cathedral. You should see the F-35 only from this side. All western oriented countries give their money to big brother Uncle Sam. And he is doing to build a cathedral. We can worship, never to fly it.

See it that way. All other perspectives are a nowhere.

[PattheCat]

On 10/14/2020 at 11:42 PM, alt-92 said:

 

Cue the arguments whether we should have a European Airforce/Army command where this load is shared. 

3, 2, 1....

 

 

 

No, thanks. I usually step aside when I see a hornets nest.

[alt-92]

That's the F/A-18, this topic is about the F-35

 

ok ok

[Space Ranger]

This is why the F-35 could not be cancelled: