The F-35 is a piece of garbage!

[norseamd]

Cliffs: A bunch of ridiculous hand waving about how imagined, totally unproven technologies could someday blunt our military dominance. Because faster processors and "big data" and stuff.

The best part was at the end when we learn that "new radar technology can totally detect (and track!) stealth aircraft". Never heard that claim before.

Hence my use of the words putting this into perspective. Nothing is an omnipotent armageddon, but these technologies are still important.

 

[pauldun170]

Cliffs: A bunch of ridiculous hand waving about how imagined, totally unproven technologies could someday blunt our military dominance. Because faster processors and "big data" and stuff.

The best part was at the end when we learn that "new radar technology can totally detect (and track!) stealth aircraft". Never heard that claim before.

That VHF crap is making the rounds around "Military Analyst brigade" again? Its not even worth reading anymore every time it pops up.
Ever notice how a lot of them quote each other as a source for their claims? It's turning into a circle jerk.

Summary Think tanks (aka lobbyist holding pen) generate paper geared to generate talking points where industry lobbyists can hand them off to poli sci majors working for Washington officials who have budget requests in front of them. The analysts brigade nabs one of those papers and tries to incorporate it into one of the money maker\click bait articles.

The emphasis is usually on China because of the crazy doomsday Christians running around congress nowadays.

(Skimmed through article finds writer who is SURPRISE SURPRISE poli-sci guy with a China policy background.)



From the think tanks standpoint, the crap this article refers to is probably used to generate defense money.
From the blogger brigade, they grab a couple of lines to to add to there "teach the controversy" revenue generators. Shit generates clicks and clicks create revenue. Get enough traffic and your name shows up toward the top of google search results. Next thing you are being quoted by some Communications major and now you are a" respected journalist who gets a press pass"

there is nothing to be learned here.
Radar technology happens to be a "known quantity" by the people involved with the F-35 and the B-21.

"China has the technology to detect stealth!!!!"
(We know. we had a Raptor flying at 50K overhead watching them test against their mock up. We can even show you the data we gathered during their testing. Wait....what do you mean they didn't see us? Oh. we waved and everything)

F-117 was shot down!!! It's not invisible!!! We are wasting money (pick Airforce program you want to hate on and talk about how awesome Iron Eagle was.)

Lets toss aside the assumption that "Stealth" its not a star trek cloaking device. Its about detection ranges. Not Klingons.
The F-117 was a primitive first generation aircraft that was shot down by folks that knew the flight path and the mission target. The guy admitted he lied and didn't modify the system. He had spotters and used a general shot gun approach to downing the aircraft. At best, he may have gotten a brief return when it opened the bomb bay at the nearby target. They then guided it manually\optically and crossed fingers. F-117 was shot down because the Serbs were good at paying attention\spying and the Airforce fucked up its tactics. No magic radar was used.

 

[Gryz]

Didn't see this in this thread yet.
Interview with Pierre Sprey.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDSiwqM2nw

 

[norseamd]

Didn't see this in this thread yet.
Interview with Pierre Sprey.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDSiwqM2nw

LOL

Wondering if watching this is going to lead to some real funny shit.

 

[norseamd]

For what its worth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZbqkxjAK8E

 

[norseamd]

Seems the F35 actually is not that stealthy after all.

The F-22A offers full stealth, unlike the F-35 which has a very good radar profile from the front, a less stealthy profile from the sides, and a least stealthy profile from the rear quarter. Note that stealth is not invisibility. It merely shortens the range at which an aircraft can be detected by opponents on the ground or in the air, and makes radar lock for engagements harder to achieve and to keep. The F-22’s stealth level shortens those ranges considerably from all enemy positions, even those that use new VHF radars. See this surprising review from Red Flag “Colonial Flag” 2007, as an Australian exchange pilot offers his impressions:

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f-22-raptor-capabilities-and-controversies-019069/

 

[sdifox]

<p>I think in the near future we will see pattern recognition software on giant server farm coupled to optical sensors to do optical overhead detection. Drones get instruction to fire, system guides missiles.</p>

 

[Blackjack200]

From the blogger brigade, they grab a couple of lines to to add to there "teach the controversy" revenue generators. Shit generates clicks and clicks create revenue. Get enough traffic and your name shows up toward the top of google search results. Next thing you are being quoted by some Communications major and now you are a" respected journalist who gets a press pass"

The best is Pierre Sprey who routinely claims to have designed the A-10 and F-16 despite never working for GD or FC.

Seems the F35 actually is not that stealthy after all.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f-22-raptor-capabilities-and-controversies-019069/

The author offers no source, and it's not a mystery why: the radar signatures of both aircraft are obviously deeply classified.

So all we can do here is speculate, and most people that pay attention to these things believe the F-35 is probably more stealthy than the F-22 for no other reason than while both aircraft are built by the same manufacturer, the F-35 is a decade newer. Stands to reason that the engineers have had 10 years to improve the technology, and have probably done so.

<p>I think in the near future we will see pattern recognition software on giant server farm coupled to optical sensors to do optical overhead detection. Drones get instruction to fire, system guides missiles.</p>

Exactly

 

[William Gaatjes]

The best is Pierre Sprey who routinely claims to have designed the A-10 and F-16 despite never working for GD or FC.



The author offers no source, and it's not a mystery why: the radar signatures of both aircraft are obviously deeply classified.

So all we can do here is speculate, and most people that pay attention to these things believe the F-35 is probably more stealthy than the F-22 for no other reason than while both aircraft are built by the same manufacturer, the F-35 is a decade newer. Stands to reason that the engineers have had 10 years to improve the technology, and have probably done so.



Exactly

I assume so too. It is not just the shape of the plane, but also the used radar absorbing/dispersing coating. I am sure that has improved as well.

 

[Blackjack200]

I assume so too. It is not just the shape of the plane, but also the used radar absorbing/dispersing coating. I am sure that has improved as well.

I got curious so I started poking around. Apparently both Generals Hostage and Bogdan have stated that the F-35 is stealthier than the F-22.

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=27577#wrapper

So... yeah.

Also, the new B-21 will have another 15 years of technology behind it, and it's larger so it will probably be the stealthiest aircraft yet. Damn, too bad stealth doesn't work.

 

[norseamd]

Frontal stealth of the F-35 is not what I was worried about at all.

 

[Blackjack200]

Frontal stealth of the F-35 is not what I was worried about at all.

It's also not what the generals were talking about.

 

[pauldun170]

The best is Pierre Sprey who routinely claims to have designed the A-10 and F-16 despite never working for GD or FC.

That guy is locked into the year 1980. He jumped ship in the mid 80's because he couldn't handle not being relevant anymore.
He should stick to jazz.
He is popular among the kids though. That and casual buzzfeed types.

 

[norseamd]

http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...rs-controversial-dogfighting-report/81170580/

 

[JTsyo]

http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...rs-controversial-dogfighting-report/81170580/

Aviationist has the actual text.

 

[PricklyPete]

Aviationist has the actual text.

Despite everything negative being said about the F35...it sounds like a solid aircraft that's development cycle is getting way more attention than is normal. I bet people will be lamenting its departure when it is inevitably replaced by a drone.

 

[norseamd]

Despite everything negative being said about the F35...it sounds like a solid aircraft that's development cycle is getting way more attention than is normal. I bet people will be lamenting its departure when it is inevitably replaced by a drone.

The aircraft and the program are 2 different issues, and Lockheed and Pratt & Whitney have ran this program like shit. Quite honestly unlike the ultra-F35 fanatics and anti-F35 fanatics, I do not trust a word said about the F35 at all, good or bad, and I will wait to see how this aircraft eventually turns out.

 

[sm625]

$400 billion boondoggle.

 

[Brian Stirling]

As a former USAF type I have fond memories of the F16 and F15 from personal experience. One year the airshow at my base (SJAFB) was scheduled to have the T-birds but they couldn't make it. In it's place we had three C130's put on an amazing display and the finale was a sole F15.

The F15 sat at the end of the runway for quite a while then began a short takeoff roll of what couldn't have been much more than 1000 feet before he pointed 90 degrees skyward and climbed out of sight. Towards the end of this incredible performance he did a horizontal 8g+ loop near the center of the field -- the loop couldn't have been much more than 1000 feet in diameter. I happened to look over at the guy next to me, a TSGT, and he had tears streaming down his face!

I don't know that I'll ever get that kind of feeling from watching an F35 but I do hope the tech makes it lethal!


Brian

 

[norseamd]

http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...pilots-to-turn-it-off-and-on-again?CMP=twt_gu

 

[Brian Stirling]

http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...pilots-to-turn-it-off-and-on-again?CMP=twt_gu

Sounds a bit like a hit piece -- all aircraft have systems issues, if they didn't they wouldn't need avionics techs. I new aircraft is more likely to have systems issues. Just about all the great planes in history had teething issues. The P51 was a dog until it got a better engine and then it was the king of the sky.

The F-35 is something of a jack of all trades and master of none and that may well be the summation that most defines the weakness of it. As an airframe it's not looking to be all that great, but with the low observability and huge sensor advantage it should be the winner in most engagements with anything the red team flies for the foreseeable future. However, I highly doubt it will be in service half as long as they claim.


Brian

 

[maddogchen]

its ok, Russian electronic warfare will make their radars useless anyway.

 

[Brian Stirling]

its ok, Russian electronic warfare will make their radars useless anyway.

Yeah, because as we all know the Russians lead the world in electronics and have long dominated the west with there superior avionics.



Brian

 

[Blackjack200]

The F-35 is something of a jack of all trades and master of none and that may well be the summation that most defines the weakness of it. As an airframe it's not looking to be all that great, but with the low observability and huge sensor advantage it should be the winner in most engagements with anything the red team flies for the foreseeable future. However, I highly doubt it will be in service half as long as they claim.

Really? I bet it's the most capable A2A platform without an export ban.

 

[pauldun170]

http://www.theguardian.com/technolo...pilots-to-turn-it-off-and-on-again?CMP=twt_gu

That's whats known in the newspaper industry as "misleading tabloid bullshit"

That requires the reader to put zero effort into understanding the program. It's like Donald Trumps speech writer wrote this article. This article is co-authored by Kanye West's cousin Marvin. This article should come with a coloring book

Every radar in every combat aircraft in the world today occasionally requires a reboot. A Raptor requires reboots. F-15's. Hornets. F-16s. All of them.

“The next software version is block 4. It won’t be available until 2020. So there’ll be nothing but fixing bugs in the original software between 2013 and 2020.”

Oh Really?
Blocks 1A,1b,2A,2B,3i,3F? guess that was too complicated to toss in a "reader rage click bait article"

Every damn active program on the planet is in development dealing with the battle between bug fixes and releases bringing new capability. The F-15 platform is 44 years old. It's still in development.

That entire article is basically some intern helping an editor fill a fucking quota. Zero effort went into the writing of that article. Zero effort went into checking facts or even having a basic understanding of the F-35 or ANY modern military aircraft.
The fact that they make no mention that the crap they are covering have already been fixed....




All these little bullshit article are being driven by people whose business is to create controversy.