11bee Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 Hey, if you can better write eight million lines of code and integrate all the software better, than have at it. In fact, PLEASE call me when you do because I've got a bunch of idiots up in Nashville who can't get the number of HTML errors on a simple home page alone down below 300 after nearly a year working on it. No can do, Kimosabe, I'm busy this weekend. In all honesty, I probably can't write code better than those guys but then again, the taxpayers aren't giving me billions to do that work. Again, I guess it's just me setting the bar overly high and having unrealistic expectation that a when a jet reaches IOC, which seems to be happening in a short time, that it could actually fight in the dark. Anyhoo, I've taken this thread off course enough for one Saturday. Let's get it back on track. Who's gonna be first to post some more kewl F-35 pictures! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 but there was a time when pilots even whole crews bombed without night vision Using other methods to target. Here's a thought - have LM design a stealthy flare pod and then our intrepid F-35 aviators can finally fight in the dark. It worked for their granddads in the Korean War, sure as sugar it will work for today's Marines. Problem solved. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkW Posted April 19, 2015 Author Share Posted April 19, 2015 Did nobody catch the obvious with the BFM piece?! Of course the F-35 got schwacked by a F-16, it should at this point. But they are also loosening up the flight control laws with what they learned. As time passes, and the TTP crowd gets more heavily involved, this jet will become more of a player. Right now they are just loosening up the training wheels, still a long way to go. As for all the beef about NV, at least this jet was built with it in mind. It has been a slap on for every other platform. It's not an unrealistic expectation if it's never been done before. And oh by the way, once they get the damn helmet working properly, this thing will leapfrog EVERY other system period. But don't let that get in the way of a good armchair quarterbacking. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 No can do, Kimosabe, I'm busy this weekend. In all honesty, I probably can't write code better than those guys but then again, the taxpayers aren't giving me billions to do that work. Again, I guess it's just me setting the bar overly high and having unrealistic expectation that a when a jet reaches IOC, which seems to be happening in a short time, that it could actually fight in the dark. Anyhoo, I've taken this thread off course enough for one Saturday. Let's get it back on track. Who's gonna be first to post some more kewl F-35 pictures! I think if you want to throw a pair of NVGs on a pilot then we can do that, the trick is being able to see at night using the F-35s organic systems. Which again, is still something the A-10 can't do-- All night capability has to be bolted on to the pilots face or a pylon. The whole article is about how the F-35 is "short of the A-10" while of course not mentioning how short of an IOC F-35B an A-10 is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 In all honesty, I probably can't write code better than those guys but then again, the taxpayers aren't giving me billions to do that work. "I award you no points..." Again, I guess it's just me setting the bar overly high and having unrealistic expectation that a when a jet reaches IOC, which seems to be happening in a short time, that it could actually fight in the dark. When the first F-15s arrived on the ramp at places like Langley, the first thing they'd do was pull the engines out and ship them back to St. Louis so they could deliver more F-15s. There weren't enough P&W F100s going around at the time. Early F-16s were range-limited to only so far from home because of safety concerns with their early F100s. How'd those first M16s work out? Enough dead troops were found with their M16s beside them broken down for repair that it prompted a Congressional investigation. F-14 and the TF30. 'nuff said. The F-22 is only just now starting to get to a standard it was meant to enter service with back in 2005; why was it delayed? Because the budget cuts that happened during the EMD phase meant things had to be postponed (AIM-9X, software) or scrapped (HMD). THE SAME DAMN THING THAT'S HAPPENING TO THE F-35 NOW. Damn right there have been problems with the F-35, but the flip side is, some of those problems have been made worse by civilian leadership that's making the same mistakes that were made 10-20 years ago. But as someone else already said, why let that get in the way of good armchair quarterbacking? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Crazy Snap Captain Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Some fine pics Trigger. The C is almost good looking... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Like Andrew said, as always nice pictures Trigger . Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 I think if you want to throw a pair of NVGs on a pilot then we can do that, the trick is being able to see at night using the F-35s organic systems. Question - can F-35 pilots even use NVG's? I thought their helmet precluded mounting them. If that is the case, they could revert to an old-style helmet but then they would loose all the data displays and since the jet doesn't have a HUD, they would spend a good deal of time "head down" in the cockpit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Then their heads would be down as much as someone using a targeting pod And staring at the cockpit display. The same data on the hud can be put on the cockpit display how much time they spend head down would probably be equivalent to other platforms. But then again I've never flown a fighter, Waco or Murph could probably tell you more The IOC F-35s probably won't be alone but a part of packages. They are already playing the QB in exercis3s in Yuma. If there is a chance to go it alone in a deep strike they will take it, but for the most part until more is added they will fight like a team or something making up for each others shortcomings or some such garbage Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 "I award you no points..." When the first F-15s arrived on the ramp at places like Langley, the first thing they'd do was pull the engines out and ship them back to St. Louis so they could deliver more F-15s. There weren't enough P&W F100s going around at the time. Early F-16s were range-limited to only so far from home because of safety concerns with their early F100s. How'd those first M16s work out? Enough dead troops were found with their M16s beside them broken down for repair that it prompted a Congressional investigation. F-14 and the TF30. 'nuff said. The F-22 is only just now starting to get to a standard it was meant to enter service with back in 2005; why was it delayed? Because the budget cuts that happened during the EMD phase meant things had to be postponed (AIM-9X, software) or scrapped (HMD). THE SAME DAMN THING THAT'S HAPPENING TO THE F-35 NOW. Damn right there have been problems with the F-35, but the flip side is, some of those problems have been made worse by civilian leadership that's making the same mistakes that were made 10-20 years ago. But as someone else already said, why let that get in the way of good armchair quarterbacking? http://s29.postimg.org/i0ql3e2sn/NYT_July_1984.png http://s15.postimg.org/4l8aqddd7/Screenshot_2015_03_25_14_17_34.png Phantoms Phorever! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 (edited) Then their heads would be down as much as someone using a targeting pod And staring at the cockpit display. The same data on the hud can be put on the cockpit display how much time they spend head down would probably be equivalent to other platforms. But then again I've never flown a fighter, Waco or Murph could probably tell you more Can't imagine that flying head down at night, with no HUD, trying to perform CAS is a good thing but I've never flown a fighter either so maybe it's no big deal. Here is something that seems like it is a big deal. I'm too lazy to start a dedicated thread and who knows, if it goes forward, maybe the F-35 will end up with this capability. 240 seconds from when the JTAC initiated the request to when the warhead hit the forehead. Pretty impressive stuff and definitely the way of the future. http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/darpa-carries-out-full-pcas-prototype-demo-using-mv-22-411294/ Edited April 20, 2015 by 11bee Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 F-22 Helmet Mounted Cueing is being researched again ... >>> Article <<< They're going to need it to fully take advantage of AIM-9X, etc ... -Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkW Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 Question - can F-35 pilots even use NVG's? I thought their helmet precluded mounting them. If that is the case, they could revert to an old-style helmet but then they would loose all the data displays and since the jet doesn't have a HUD, they would spend a good deal of time "head down" in the cockpit. The alternative helmet looked at in the 2010 timeframe was basically NVGs with the HUD info piped in. It was an off ramp in case the real helmet continued to have issues. It was dropped when the real helmet was deemed to have made enough progress. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkW Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 Dis the A-10, get shot in the face http://m.military.com/daily-news/2015/04/10/general-who-called-protesting-a10-decision-treason-removed-post.html?ESRC=airforce-a.nl Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fulcrum1 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Dis the A-10, get shot in the face http://m.military.com/daily-news/2015/04/10/general-who-called-protesting-a10-decision-treason-removed-post.html?ESRC=airforce-a.nl Say you're committing treason by talking to Congress and you're shooting yourself in the face. I think his intentions were good, but you don't earn loyalty from your team this way and at that rank you simply can't say that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Say you're committing treason by talking to Congress and you're shooting yourself in the face. I think his intentions were good, but you don't earn loyalty from your team this way and at that rank you simply can't say that. http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=283711 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Waco Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Can't imagine that flying head down at night, with no HUD, trying to perform CAS is a good thing but I've never flown a fighter either so maybe it's no big deal.Here is something that seems like it is a big deal. I'm too lazy to start a dedicated thread and who knows, if it goes forward, maybe the F-35 will end up with this capability. 240 seconds from when the JTAC initiated the request to when the warhead hit the forehead. Pretty impressive stuff and definitely the way of the future. http://www.flightglo...g-mv-22-411294/ Notably, none of which requires the attributes toted by A-10 adherents as "absolutely essential for CAS: low, slow, eyeballs on the target, soaking up small arms fire and AAA, dodging shoulder fired SAMs, living in a titanium bathtub and getting the hell beat out of your airframe because every peasant with a rifle can shoot at you. Etc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Notably, none of which requires the attributes toted by A-10 adherents as "absolutely essential for CAS: low, slow, eyeballs on the target, soaking up small arms fire and AAA, dodging shoulder fired SAMs, living in a titanium bathtub and getting the hell beat out of your airframe because every peasant with a rifle can shoot at you. Etc. It's a dog eat dog world ... -Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 I love this thread Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 (edited) Notably, none of which requires the attributes toted by A-10 adherents as "absolutely essential for CAS: low, slow, eyeballs on the target, soaking up small arms fire and AAA, dodging shoulder fired SAMs, living in a titanium bathtub and getting the hell beat out of your airframe because every peasant with a rifle can shoot at you. Etc. Waiting for the adherents to move the goalposts yet again in 5...4...3... Edited April 23, 2015 by Trigger Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Notably, none of which requires the attributes toted by A-10 adherents as "absolutely essential for CAS: low, slow, eyeballs on the target, soaking up small arms fire and AAA, dodging shoulder fired SAMs, living in a titanium bathtub and getting the hell beat out of your airframe because every peasant with a rifle can shoot at you. Etc. I tend to agree 100%. Interestingly enough, the linked article mentions that the next phase of this program is to perform flight demonstrations with.... wait for it..... wait...... The A-10! The truth is often stranger than fiction. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fulcrum1 Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 I tend to agree 100%. Interestingly enough, the linked article mentions that the next phase of this program is to perform flight demonstrations with.... wait for it..... wait...... The A-10! The truth is often stranger than fiction. Think of the kilswitch as a tool that enables all platforms to speak a common language. The ground portion is already being used down at PLT and squad level to mixed results. The payoff is with unmanned platforms that are attached or organic to the maneuver elment with constant ISR and the ability to deliver options to the ground force commander if needed. Just my thinking, but the A-10 is used as the testing bed for the same reason light elements are the test force. Have your subject matter experts work out the kinks and develop the way forward and then implement across the force if it works. Unfortunately, you still have the 500m problem. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MarkW Posted April 23, 2015 Author Share Posted April 23, 2015 The obvious CAS solution of the future is a C-130 full of JDAMs with this link. Just have the load matter kick a bomb off the ramp when needed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.