Jump to content

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Da SWO said:

Part of the problem is an unwillingness to improve what we have.  2-4 versions of a jet and it's off the Jets R Us for the newest toy.

It's the military-industrial complex's circle of life. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Da SWO said:

Part of the problem is an unwillingness to improve what we have.  2-4 versions of a jet and it's off the Jets R Us for the newest toy.

 

kinda looks like we are starting to get sucked into that again...

 

I know we never really full replaced the F-16 or F-15 with the F-35, and F-22... but hear me out, I've got something that will replace the F-15 and F-16...

 

and this time its gonna work! 

 

it needs to be remembered that the F-35 would not be killed off if production ended, the F-35 "follow on" would continue to replace the teen series and the other last gen jets before tackling any of the newer F-22 or F-35 jets. one also finds themselves with the same problem we started with "how will we replace all these teen fighters?" welcome to 1996

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, 11bee said:

It's the military-industrial complex's circle of life. 

 

 

it works both ways. One of the most hilarious recent examples was this whizkid Roper, (who has come up with the "Digital century series" it won't work but we could get some sweet models out of it) He threatened the Lockheed Martin F-35 to shape up by "creating competition" via threats of buying Lockheed Martin F-16Vs instead. Lockheed cheerfully responded they would help any way they could LOL I guess they didn't realize how "threatening" this all was. Oh no! Don't buy even more of our products! 

 

You can't make this stuff up. 

 

Roper was no fan of the F-35. He had a new way he wanted to build aircraft that would revolutionize the pentagon. It was somehow unable to apply to the F-35 he complained about. We had to use it on something new of course. This is deeply comical to me:

 

 "I have a revolutionary way to build airplanes!"

 

Wow that perfect Mr. Roper because the F-35 Pro---

 

"oh it won't work for that. its revolutionary but not like that. I need a new program. buy F-16s instead for F-35 and I'm onto NGAD" 

 

it would use AI and computers and simulation to build airplanes (brilliant idea, computers are a new and exciting way to work with aircraft that no one has thought of) if you loved the JSF, You'd love the "Digital century series" it would be like making 12 different styles of F-35s and F-22s all at the same time, but its ok because only a handful of them would ever get past prototype stage

 

as always revolution means to complete a circle. I always chuckle at that. right back where you started. but the adventure along the way is "fun" 

 

 

people can gripe about F-35 all they want, (and they do of course) but until the system is changed you'll keep producing things that create overbudget, delayed stuff no matter what it was. I would really understand F-35 complaints if we always nailed it, but the F-35 just gave us heaps of trouble. what makes F-35 different is sheer scale, but the problems are the same throughout. Marines can't get a new amphibious vehicle, the USAF can't get the amount of Air superiority fighters they need, the Navy can't get high end ships they want. These aren't "wacky ideas"  Marines needing amphibious stuff, the air force needing planes, and the navy needing ships are pretty basic things. 

 

what's weird too, I read the outgoing sec defs "piece of s**t" thing the whole way through a few times, and its "like" and "you know" weird but hes also complaining about how people are already talking about 6th gen, and we havn't even completed 5th gen, that seems to also be his complaint which is one way i interpreted it. hes complaining that the F-35 sucks but they're already moving on seemingly.  I don't know the guy and I can't ask for clarification, but I don't even actually think its about F-35 per se. but thats just me. moreover I'm more than happy to complain about the program mistakes (the ones that actually happen and not the stuff people invent) you can still produce good products from bad programs. I seent it. I wonder if hes griping more about the progam than the plane, but again this is all interpretation. 

Edited by TaiidanTomcat
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
4 hours ago, 11bee said:

Another naysayer of negativity.   Will the hatred never cease?

No photo description available.

 

When Tanks aren't even a measure of survivability on a modern battlefield anymore but that oks because you're a "flying tank"

 

giphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1

 

 

 

I'll paraphrase Alvis on this meme as well "A person not even able to explain the advantages of the F-35 before being slapped and shouted down the the A-10 is the 'best' with no evidence or context? Seem's like a good summary of the internet" The old and outdated comic style add to the very "up to date" nature of the whole thing as well. too bad they didn't make it black and white. 

 

Don't get me wrong I like it. Once the A-10s have cleared out the Air to Air threat, applied EW, and sanitized the ground of surface to air threats, we can send in the lowly other aircraft to "mop up" what the A-10 leaves. Its the tippy tip of the spear, and it should be allowed to demonstrate that over the Ukraine or Taiwan. Just have the medals and caskets lined up, we are going to have a lot of "heroes"

Edited by TaiidanTomcat
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
39 minutes ago, GW8345 said:

The premature detonation of the round is not an aircraft or gun issue, it is a round issue and has happened before with AV-8B's.

Just posting as the thread is called the F-35 news roundup! Came up in my news feed....

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://curve.carleton.ca/system/files/etd/de37d537-9719-40cd-9f24-b0c12d50ad18/etd_pdf/ad978be1079fa74df0c16e949d21cea9/richardson-onehorseraceastudyofinteroperabilityincanadas.pdf

 

Fascinating paper especially for all the Canadians. 

 

, it remains unclear how open or competitive the process can really be, given the nature of Canada’s alliance commitments and the related interoperability requirements for the future fighter. Stephanie Carvin illustrates Canada’s larger procurement dilemma:

 

Canada is constrained by the requirement that its military be interoperable with its key allies. Being too small to chart its own technological course, yet large enough where its allies expect a substantial contribution to allied and coalition operations, Canada’s options are frequently restricted: it can only procure certain equipment, from certain countries that are interoperable with the partners it is likely to work with in an alliance and/or coalition. In this sense, Canada’s decision to procure technology is also driven by the need to work with its allies effectively.

 

Through the FFCP, the Government of Canada will solicit competitive bids for its next generation of fighter aircraft from three suppliers. This is a study of whether interoperability requirements narrow the federal government’s choice. The research question is addressed through two lines of inquiry. Fifth-generation fighters incorporate an advanced tactical networking capability that is changing the way allied platforms communicate and cooperate within the battlespace. Canada can expect to engage regularly with fifth-generation fighters and multi-domain concepts in its alliances and security partnerships. With the future fighter set to serve through the middle of the twenty-first century, this study will ascertain whether these developments effectively compel Canada to buy a fifth-generation fighter aircraft. The related second line of inquiry has already been introduced and pertains to the national origin of the selected type. This study will investigate whether Canada must buy an American fighter to guarantee compatibility with Five- and Two-Eyes networks. Finally, the author will assess whether the project requirements take these dynamics into account.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

 

@dylan

Quote

 

Can't afford and won't spend the money are 2 very different things. Canada has a lot of money for "other stuff"

and IMO we don't need much in the way of 5th gen stuff ....yet. we need an interceptor for NORAD commitment and a bomb truck to drop ordy on people 2 days after the U.S. starts a fight.

 

 

Indeed, they've managed to conjure up over a billion dollars in hornets and hornet upgrades the last few years, and now the CF-18 contract is 14 billion as opposed to the 9 billion it was for 65 F-35s. This is fascinating when one considers that 9 billion was "too much" 

 

if you want to stay compatible then its basically 5th generation or bust, and theres no interceptor on offer anyway. You should really read the above. NORAD commitment is basically 5th Gen commitment. No amount of ramming new avionics into a Hornet or god help you a Gripen is going to get to that. 

 

I think a lot of people think its all about "stealth", its not. Its all about the electronics--partnership, compatibility, and future upgrades of electronics with the US. 

 

 

In other news F-35s for the UAE appears to be a go. 

 

Chalk another one up 

Edited by TaiidanTomcat
Link to post
Share on other sites

The way things are looking in Taiwan and in the Ukraine, we might have all of our questions answered shortly about how well the F-35 would fare against a peer adversary.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 11bee said:

The way things are looking in Taiwan and in the Ukraine, we might have all of our questions answered shortly about how well the F-35 would fare against a peer adversary.   


How so?  Neither Ukraine nor Taiwan have F-35s, and no country that does have F-35s is going to war with Russian or China over them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 11bee said:

The way things are looking in Taiwan and in the Ukraine, we might have all of our questions answered shortly about how well the F-35 would fare against a peer adversary.   

Nope, just read an article (war zone?) where an AF 3star said the F35 isn't ready for prime time and won't be ready for some time.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dave Williams said:


How so?  Neither Ukraine nor Taiwan have F-35s, and no country that does have F-35s is going to war with Russian or China over them.

Pretty sad if we just sit back and watch two allies, one a long-term one, get run over.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Back in 2017 when the "Boeing clause" was first floated it basically meant that sooner or later, the eventual pick would be the JSF. For a brief period in time I was starting to suspect the Eurofighter might be in with a chance given Airbus' increased involvement in Canadian manufacturing (it seems like they're constantly expanding their presence at YMX) it could have been a domestically built jet... but they withdrew it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Switzerland has selected the F-35 for it’s future fighter.  They also opted for the Patriot SAM system.    Given Swiss internal politics, it’s anyone’s guess if these jets will ever be delivered.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...