F-35 news roundup

[MarkW]

BACN can take so many different flavors and capabilities depending on the hardware/software configuration provided, so it's difficult to pin it down to a specific capability set. The BIS-MDI version (an acronym of acronyms....BACN IFDL Subsystem-Mult-Domain Integration), however, is not an operationally fielded system.

Fair enough. There is sure a heck of a lot of BACN operationally fielded though. Might be the thick cut variety. I'm more familiar with the NG variant fielded on the E-11 and GH, but managed out of Hanscom. It is more a payload than a platform, but the packages we dealt with were pretty well defined. While it is somewhat of a science experiment, it was definitely conducting ops. If you know Star, talk to him.

More to the point, if there was a need to have a fielded system that talked to F-22s, we have an option. The only piece lacking is a combat theatre in need of F-22s.

Besides, how do you define "pushed into the field" versus operational? Regardless of having a combat air force daddy rabbit or residing ing AFMC, the system has been in theatre on the ground operationally for over five years continuously. That's bordering on a longer run than some century series jets had.

Here's how you camoflage a truck. First, make it a jingle truck. They never get hit. Mostly. The name it appropriately.

[graves_09]

http://news.yahoo.com/no-edge-f-35-most-missions-report-194652889.html

Great article. :eyeroll: Especially liked the part when they said F35 was only better in missions against a hostile country...so what other type of war do you fight?

[11bee]

http://news.yahoo.com/no-edge-f-35-most-missions-report-194652889.html

Great article. :eyeroll: Especially liked the part when they said F35 was only better in missions against a hostile country...so what other type of war do you fight?

Wow....

The analysis found the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale and Boeing Super Hornet to be capable of accomplishing most mission tasks envisioned by Canadian military leaders.

The only exception would be going to war with another state, but the reports' authors concluded that was an "exceptionally unlikely" scenario.

"It is very unlikely Canada will be the target of overt, hostile state-directed military aggression," said the report released Wednesday.

Why bother with a military at all if that is your outlook?

[TaiidanTomcat]

Wow....

The analysis found the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale and Boeing Super Hornet to be capable of accomplishing most mission tasks envisioned by Canadian military leaders.

The only exception would be going to war with another state, but the reports' authors concluded that was an "exceptionally unlikely" scenario.

"It is very unlikely Canada will be the target of overt, hostile state-directed military aggression," said the report released Wednesday.

Why bother with a military at all if that is your outlook?

To protect Canada from American imperialism of course.

[TaiidanTomcat]

So much yes

[Waco]

So stealth. Much sneaky!

Hide in plain sight!

Very camo.

[Trigger]

I had that same thought after the Orion test launch.

[TaiidanTomcat]

The analysis found the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale and Boeing Super Hornet to be capable of accomplishing most mission tasks envisioned by Canadian military leaders.

The only exception would be going to war

Had to read again, thats duffel blog level satire. Shocked it wasn't. LOL that "most mission tasks" does not include war

Edited December 12, 2014 by TaiidanTomcat

[11bee]

A bit OT but it serves to illustrate why Israel needs these aircraft. Earlier this week, it appears that they located some pop-up targets that required immediate attention. Unlike most planned raids where they fly at night, they sent 4 F-15's into the heart of Syria during daylight hours. The F-15's were engaged by SA-11 Buk missiles. All Israeli aircraft made it home but at some point, either your luck will run out or your opponent will obtain even better weapons.

A brief report on the raid is here:

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/four-israeli-f-15s-dodged-syrian-missile-fire-to-attack-urgent-targets-a28cff11323d

The report brings up another issue - one of the Popeye standoff missiles launched by the F-15's was engaged and shot down by a Syrian SAM. This highlights another challenge - most modern Russian SAM systems are advertised as being able to engage cruise missiles, anti-radiation missiles and even gravity bombs. Ordinance is going to need to be as stealthy (maybe more so since the launch aircraft can stand off a distance from the target, while the weapons launched don't have that luxury).

Won't do us any good if the F-35 can go anywhere but it's weapons can be tracked and blown out of the sky by SAM's as soon as they are launched.

[TaiidanTomcat]

A bit OT but it serves to illustrate why Israel needs these aircraft. Earlier this week, it appears that they located some pop-up targets that required immediate attention. Unlike most planned raids where they fly at night, they sent 4 F-15's into the heart of Syria during daylight hours. The F-15's were engaged by SA-11 Buk missiles. All Israeli aircraft made it home but at some point, either your luck will run out or your opponent will obtain even better weapons.

A brief report on the raid is here:

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/four-israeli-f-15s-dodged-syrian-missile-fire-to-attack-urgent-targets-a28cff11323d

The report brings up another issue - one of the Popeye standoff missiles launched by the F-15's was engaged and shot down by a Syrian SAM. This highlights another challenge - most modern Russian SAM systems are advertised as being able to engage cruise missiles, anti-radiation missiles and even gravity bombs. Ordinance is going to need to be as stealthy (maybe more so since the launch aircraft can stand off a distance from the target, while the weapons launched don't have that luxury).

Won't do us any good if the F-35 can go anywhere but it's weapons can be tracked and blown out of the sky by SAM's as soon as they are launched.

But remember kids, the F-22 being there was just a PR stunt, and we a fighting primitive cave beasts.

Thats one of the reasons stealth airplanes are prefered over stealth ordnance. (a combo of both is in the future) in one of those "cognitive dissonance" moments A lot of the same folks on the web who are upset at the evil mistreatment of the A-10, will be the first to tell you that you don't need stealth airplanes because you can just use stand off missiles.

"Ok so why do you need A-10s if you can support the troops with stand off missiles?"

"You can't support the troops with stand off weapons, you need the A-10s close in!"

"Ok so how do A-10s survive the kind of enviorment all the other airplanes can't enter?"

"Because A-10s are invincible"

[Tony Stark]

"Because A-10s are invincible"

[MarkW]

Stealth platforms and stealth weapons exist now--JSOW & JSSAM come to mind. We'll still need your basic JDAM for permissive environments, but everybody is lining up LO weapons for anti access.

[Alan in Yorktown]

But remember kids, the F-22 being there was just a PR stunt, and we a fighting primitive cave beasts.

Thats one of the reasons stealth airplanes are prefered over stealth ordnance. (a combo of both is in the future) in one of those "cognitive dissonance" moments A lot of the same folks on the web who are upset at the evil mistreatment of the A-10, will be the first to tell you that you don't need stealth airplanes because you can just use stand off missiles.

"Ok so why do you need A-10s if you can support the troops with stand off missiles?"

"You can't support the troops with stand off weapons, you need the A-10s close in!"

"Ok so how do A-10s survive the kind of enviorment all the other airplanes can't enter?"

"Because A-10s are invincible"

The thing with the A-10 is that now we are using them the same way we use F-15E & F-16 - medium altitude weapons delivery. The close-in stuff is being done w/ AC-130s. I can see the reasoning behind argument to retire the A-10 under the current use pattern, but it follows that maybe we should plus-up the AC-130 numbers as well as any needed offensive or defensive upgrades.

[MarkW]

A-10s can operate in a much less permissive environment than an AC-130. We use gunships that way today because we can.

[Alan in Yorktown]

A-10s can operate in a much less permissive environment than an AC-130. We use gunships that way today because we can.

Agreed. But (just being devil's advocate) the A-10 needs some degree of air superiority to be successful in its ground attack mission as well. Sort of like the Ju-87 in WW2 - highly effective when there were Me-109's around providing cover; not so much when the 109s were range-limited during the BoB.

[Devilleader501]

The only use for the A-10 from the AC-130 is the ability to get to the front line a little quicker. The AC-130 can loiter for hours over the A-10. Don't get me wrong the A-10 is a tank buster but I can guarantee the AC-130 can do the same sitting at 30,000 feet AGL. The 105mm they have on board is very capable of taking targets out as soon as they are visible. A-10's are badass aircraft but I believe they should be retired. save money and put that same money into other programs worthy of keeping pace with our military.

[MarkW]

I'm not arguing the merits of the A-10 over the AC-130 based on any other measure than survivability. While both have had upgrades, the A-10 is still marginally more survivable. We would not be using the AC-130 if there wasn't low to zero surface to air threat

By that same measure, of course, the F-35 is significantly more survivable than either platform.

[11bee]

Stealth platforms and stealth weapons exist now--JSOW & JSSAM come to mind. We'll still need your basic JDAM for permissive environments, but everybody is lining up LO weapons for anti access.

Seems like the only critical gap is lack of a stealth anti-radiation missiles (unless the two weapons mentioned above might have some classified ability to target radar emissions). If the bad guys can knock down incoming HARMS, it kind of puts a kink in any SEAD program.

[TaiidanTomcat]

Seems like the only critical gap is lack of a stealth anti-radiation missiles (unless the two weapons mentioned above might have some classified ability to target radar emissions). If the bad guys can knock down incoming HARMS, it kind of puts a kink in any SEAD program.

That fear coupled with a well dispersed enemy (Multiple radars, back up radars, connected radars)killing the antennae themselves may not be enough. Targetting the SAMs themselves and Command and Control is the new hotness.

[Ken Cartwright]

Seems like the only critical gap is lack of a stealth anti-radiation missiles (unless the two weapons mentioned above might have some classified ability to target radar emissions). If the bad guys can knock down incoming HARMS, it kind of puts a kink in any SEAD program.

I have no experience with them, but for what it's worth, in Dan Hampton's book "Fighter Pilot," where he flies a lot of SEAD missions, he said he wasn't impressed with the HARMs. He said they seemed to rarely work, and that there was no real way to know if they actually hit anything. He much preferred bombs of some sort, or a missile that was clearly aimed at a specific target. Might be just his opinion, though.

[TaiidanTomcat]

http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=19621&mode=view

[MarkW]

Part of the reason the F-35 is so needed is it's designed to do SEAD without relying on ARMs.

[11bee]

Part of the reason the F-35 is so needed is it's designed to do SEAD without relying on ARMs.

Understood. The new approach seems to be to to precisely locate the emitter (either through onboard sensors or through networked assets) and then chuck a SDB or similar guided munition at it from a reasonably safe stand-off distance. Of course that is just one of many new and quite interesting technologies that could be used. I also just came across this,

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-pentagons-flying-decoy-super-weapon-is-about-to-get-1669729445

Another tool in the SEAD toolbox.

[TaiidanTomcat]

Dumber and dumber:

Here's The F-35's Latest Technical Problem

The Lockheed-Martin F-35 Lightning II has faced many challenges thus far in its development and initial production, placing significant delays along the road to Initial Operational Capability.

The latest problem has manifested in the fuel system. If the fuel is too hot, the jet’s Pratt & Whitney F135 engine shuts down.

That’s a significant challenge, considering a few of the locations where the F-35 is currently flying: Edwards AFB, California; Nellis AFB, Nevada, MCAS Yuma, Arizona; and Luke AFB, Arizona.

These bases are no strangers to oppressive triple-digit temperatures. Fuel trucks positioned near the runways do not have their own sun shades, thus driving up the temperature of the fuel inside.

So instead of trying to add another modification to an aircraft already wrought with cost overruns, the decision has been made to paint the fuel trucks.

Great idea — except that having really large, white fuel trucks positioned at a base downrange will potentially make them easier targets.

The long term fix is heat-reflective coatings for the trucks, as well as sun shades made specifically for them – much like those made for the aircraft themselves.

In the meantime, shiny white fuel trucks will be the stopgap solution – at $3,900 per truck for the new paint. So far, only one truck has been repainted, and further testing will determine if it is an adequate, short-term fix.

The good news is there have been no reported incidents of the F-35 failing to fly in hotter temperatures, with military officials noting the jet performed well during desert climate test flights.

Scott Wolff , an editor and writer for Fighter Sweep, holds a private pilot certificate and has received military altitude chamber training and emergency egress training, and has logged time in a variety of civilian and military aircraft. He is also a member of the International Society of Aviation Photographers.

The latest technical problem that has yet to happen. I will forever point to the single white fuel truck story as the go to F-35 derangement piece.

Also when did everyone become an expert on the tactical disposition of fuel trucks on airfields? does no one realize that fuel trucks of all shapes and sizes and colors routinely work out and in forward areas? LOL of course not. experts everywhere!

[11bee]

Marine's to fly off of the new British carrier?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-30209960

Nice gig for the jarheads, at least they can have a cold beer after a hard day's work.