JSF labeled useless for RAAF
-
STRIKER
- Virtual Thunderbird Alumnus
- Posts: 826
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 2:02 am
- Location: Amarillo, TX
Just like anything with this sort of subject: Who in their right mind truly knows? It's a close to dark program when it comes to the JSF's true capabilities (good, bad, and ugly). Speculate all you want folks, but I for one am confident in the aircraft until "actual" proof says otherwise (which we probably won't know for a long darn time).
The Russian aircraft are optimized for dogfighting. The US built aircraft are built around the supposition that if you find yourself in a dogfight in a stealth aircraft with AMRAAM class missiles, AWACS and tanker support, then something has already gone very badly wrong.
The whole idea these days is NOT to get into a dogfight.
The RAAF will shortly have its own AWACS aircraft, the Wedgetail, based on the 737 airframe, and A330 tankers plus all the missiles the US will sell us.
I know if given a choice between a SU-27 and a F-35 with the proper support aircraft, I'd take the F-35 any day.
The whole idea these days is NOT to get into a dogfight.
The RAAF will shortly have its own AWACS aircraft, the Wedgetail, based on the 737 airframe, and A330 tankers plus all the missiles the US will sell us.
I know if given a choice between a SU-27 and a F-35 with the proper support aircraft, I'd take the F-35 any day.
This from wikipedia:
Concerns about the F-35's performance have resulted partially from reports of RAND simulations where numerous Russian Sukhoi fighters defeat a handful of F-35s by denying tanker refueling. As a result of these issues, then Australian defence minister Joel Fitzgibbon requested a formal briefing from the Australian Department of Defence on the computer simulation. This briefing stated that the reports of the simulation were inaccurate and that it did not compare the F-35's performance against that of other aircraft.
RAND has applied the same tanker-denial scenario against the F-22 Raptor and seems to favor a new medium-bomber design.
The criticism of the F-35 has been dismissed by the Pentagon and manufacturer. The USAF has conducted an analysis of the F-35's air-to-air performance against all 4th generation fighter aircraft currently available, and has found the F-35 to be at least four times more effective. Maj Gen Charles R. Davis, USAF, the F-35 program executive officer, has stated that the "F-35 enjoys a significant Combat Loss Exchange Ratio advantage over the current and future air-to-air threats, to include Sukhois". The Russian, Indian, Chinese, and other air forces operate Sukhoi Su-27/30 fighters.
Concerns about the F-35's performance have resulted partially from reports of RAND simulations where numerous Russian Sukhoi fighters defeat a handful of F-35s by denying tanker refueling. As a result of these issues, then Australian defence minister Joel Fitzgibbon requested a formal briefing from the Australian Department of Defence on the computer simulation. This briefing stated that the reports of the simulation were inaccurate and that it did not compare the F-35's performance against that of other aircraft.
RAND has applied the same tanker-denial scenario against the F-22 Raptor and seems to favor a new medium-bomber design.
The criticism of the F-35 has been dismissed by the Pentagon and manufacturer. The USAF has conducted an analysis of the F-35's air-to-air performance against all 4th generation fighter aircraft currently available, and has found the F-35 to be at least four times more effective. Maj Gen Charles R. Davis, USAF, the F-35 program executive officer, has stated that the "F-35 enjoys a significant Combat Loss Exchange Ratio advantage over the current and future air-to-air threats, to include Sukhois". The Russian, Indian, Chinese, and other air forces operate Sukhoi Su-27/30 fighters.
-
Burner
- Virtual Thunderbird Alumnus
- Posts: 1420
- Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 5:08 pm
- Location: New Orleans, LA
How would denial of AR work in real life? These Su's would get past AWACS and F-22 CAPs to take out or disrupt AR operations taking place well behind the combat front? I don't see it.
That said the F-35 program has been laughable since its inception, starting with the contract being awarded to the loser of the Boeing/LM competition at the political direction of Washington to avoid financial hardships for LM. And when has VTOL ever been an effective combat asset for a strike fighter? The stealth features are only effective when the airplane is in auto-pilot and flying specific angles to radar threats.
Overall you don't need to know top secret specs to see this plane is weak.
That said the F-35 program has been laughable since its inception, starting with the contract being awarded to the loser of the Boeing/LM competition at the political direction of Washington to avoid financial hardships for LM. And when has VTOL ever been an effective combat asset for a strike fighter? The stealth features are only effective when the airplane is in auto-pilot and flying specific angles to radar threats.
Overall you don't need to know top secret specs to see this plane is weak.
