JSF/F-35...time to eject.

ARSE Aviators Airways.
Post Reply
User avatar
J.D.
Rat
Posts: 6666
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:10 pm
Location: Under a rock somewhere in Australia

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by J.D. »

norbs wrote:
Durrie wrote:My point was to balance Norbs' Abbott post.

My post simply presents the opposing party's contribution to the thing Norbs seems to be complaining about.

I understood his point to be that Abbott never misses an opportunity to prostitute his character with the help of the press, even if its about spending money on this aircraft purchase.

My point is that Abbott is not alone in either of these things, and in particular, Norbs' lot made the first order for them.

I've only scanned the rest of your post and see that it's a continuation of the main theme of this thread. I think I've seen it all before, perhaps I'll read it later.
I thought it was Howard's government that got the ball rolling on these?

Away from the political debate, do we actually need such air superiority? I know fuck all about military hardware, but it seems like a lot of planes to me.
It was that well-known expert on air combat John Howard who committed us to the JSF programme, without waiting for the conclusions of the AIR6000 analysis. The original budget was $16Bn and that was in FY2002. That's why this figure of $12Bn for 58 aircraft has to be carefully examined. All figures for aircraft are in USD.

In an ideal world we wouldn't need an air force. New Zealand decided about 10 years ago to get rid of their fighter wing altogether but they don't really have any potential adversaries. Realistically, for the moment, we don't either.

But this would be a lousy time to waste an opportunity to restructure our air force, especially when we are talking about this sort of cost. The numbers are a major issue and this relates directly to the size of Australia and the slightly higher attrition rate you can expect with a single engine.
сначала мы убиваем американского лося и белку.

"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell.

Proudly never a mod or admin at RSC from 2001 - 2009.
User avatar
wobblysauce
Seen it, Done it, Invented it!
Posts: 10489
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 9:53 am
Location: On an Island in the south

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by wobblysauce »

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/buying- ... -1.2669476" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Buying single-engine F-35s for Canada a 'serious mistake': report
Michael Byers's One Dead Pilot report urges government to look at 2-engine options to replace CF-18s

Seems another one is pulling out.
Some play it safe on the merry-go-round, others go for the thrills of the roller-coaster.

ᕙ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ᕗ vs ლ(ಠ益ಠ)ლ

I have a joke for you. I have a prediction that you are going to walk into a bar, my prediction was wrong and your wallet is gone.
User avatar
wobblysauce
Seen it, Done it, Invented it!
Posts: 10489
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 9:53 am
Location: On an Island in the south

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by wobblysauce »

[youtube] [/youtube]

[youtube] [/youtube]

2054 usdb could only buy 1 plane.. is are stupid ideas that would never happen, when you could just have more of the older styles.
Some play it safe on the merry-go-round, others go for the thrills of the roller-coaster.

ᕙ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ᕗ vs ლ(ಠ益ಠ)ლ

I have a joke for you. I have a prediction that you are going to walk into a bar, my prediction was wrong and your wallet is gone.
User avatar
Jamo
Posts: 2297
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:55 am
Location: Sydney

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by Jamo »

Jesus hearing Pierre Sprey whom I highly respect really tearing this thing apart.. Wow really drives home what a fucking piece of shit this thing is. Not to mention the mess the RAAF will be forced to deal with.

We should've bought 120 SU-35's. Sure it would've royally pissed off the yanks but change of regime and it'd be forgotten.
I drink a great deal, I sleep a little and I smoke cigar after cigar. That is why I am in two hundred percent form - Sir Winston Churchill
User avatar
wobblysauce
Seen it, Done it, Invented it!
Posts: 10489
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 9:53 am
Location: On an Island in the south

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by wobblysauce »

Getting the Su's would of been nice, but the relations would have been put under.

Being the F-35 still might be good for the Britannia, as it is a faster then sound Harrier.

What do you think is a bigger waste of money.. the Submarines that are noisy, or the Planes that fly but not the best at any one category?
Some play it safe on the merry-go-round, others go for the thrills of the roller-coaster.

ᕙ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ᕗ vs ლ(ಠ益ಠ)ლ

I have a joke for you. I have a prediction that you are going to walk into a bar, my prediction was wrong and your wallet is gone.
User avatar
Montey
Posts: 3541
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 6:54 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by Montey »

I watched that Pierre Sprey video and one thing that stood out for me is that he criticised the F15 saying it was terrible because it had all sorts of extra stuff lumped on it, I think he said that the F16 was designed to be much better.

But.... what I believe is well established is that the F15 has proven to be the best air superiority fighter of its era, is still the dominant fighter in many parts of the world, is robust as all hell (just ask the Israeli pilot who landed one without a wing), and are also multi-role.

So, that did (to me) undermine his credibility somewhat.
- When trouble arises and things look bad, there is always one individual who perceives a solution and is willing to take command. Very often, that individual is crazy.
- If youre paddling upstream in a canoe and a wheel falls off, how many pancakes fit in a doghouse? None! Icecream doesn't have bones!!!
User avatar
Jamo
Posts: 2297
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:55 am
Location: Sydney

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by Jamo »

Sprey is like the Colin Chapman of Fighter Design. He likes them small, he likes them light and he likes them relatively simplistic. Fighters like the Eagle and Raptor are an anathema to him.
I drink a great deal, I sleep a little and I smoke cigar after cigar. That is why I am in two hundred percent form - Sir Winston Churchill
User avatar
wobblysauce
Seen it, Done it, Invented it!
Posts: 10489
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 9:53 am
Location: On an Island in the south

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by wobblysauce »

F15 planes are great, but some find them to expensive for what they do, be it better then the cheaper ones.. could so something with more Super Hornets.

Some pros and cons, Ideals pushed both ways, with the pilots.
[youtube] [/youtube]
Some play it safe on the merry-go-round, others go for the thrills of the roller-coaster.

ᕙ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ᕗ vs ლ(ಠ益ಠ)ლ

I have a joke for you. I have a prediction that you are going to walk into a bar, my prediction was wrong and your wallet is gone.
User avatar
Montey
Posts: 3541
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 6:54 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by Montey »

This article is quite a good response to Sprey's rant....

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/pierre ... 1592445665" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- When trouble arises and things look bad, there is always one individual who perceives a solution and is willing to take command. Very often, that individual is crazy.
- If youre paddling upstream in a canoe and a wheel falls off, how many pancakes fit in a doghouse? None! Icecream doesn't have bones!!!
User avatar
J.D.
Rat
Posts: 6666
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:10 pm
Location: Under a rock somewhere in Australia

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by J.D. »

Montey wrote:This article is quite a good response to Sprey's rant....

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/pierre ... 1592445665" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Interesting but I have a few points I disagree with.
Then there is the undeniable combat record of the Eagle, yet Mr. Sprey seems to think that the F-15 is a loser even after four decades of incredible success, not to mention the fact that it has never been bested in air-to-air combat and retains a kill ration of 105.5 to 0.
Putting words into Sprey's mouth doesn't actually address what he was on about. To begin with, there is more than one version of the F-15 and the controversial one is the E model, AKA, the "Strike Eagle" or "Beagle". That had a whole raft of extra shit stuffed into it for a mission the aircraft was never designed for. The original philosophy for it was "Not a pound for air to ground". Secondly, the much-vaunted "kill ration" (sic) is a political hot potato and not a realistic indication of anything much. No nation, particularly the United States (they built it), is ever going to open itself up to anything by revealing the real scoreboard. This scorecard doesn't take into account at least two F-15Es which were lost in the 1991 Gulf War. On top of that, there is a claim - still pending - that an Israeli F-15 was shot down by an Egyptian MiG-25 in about 1981. Given the amount of hot air which has been expended by fanbois decrying the MiG-25, nobody is ever going to admit to it, even if it did happen. The issue drags up chest-beating nationalism to a level of 11 on the pain scale.

The main reason why the F-15 has been so successful is that it has always been integrated into a force package involving AWACS and AEWC aircraft, jammers and other strategic and tactical advantages. It has also usually been pitted against barely functional, out-of-date aircraft with poorly trained and unsupported pilots. If you want to win in air combat, that is what you have to do. Gain air superiority. This is not to put the F-15 down in any way. It has been the dominant fighter for 35 years but the picture is rarely as simple as that statistic pretends it to be. It's not WWI any more.
Wildly successful fighter aircraft are capable of both air-to-air and air-to-ground missions, including his own baby, the F-16 Viper, along with the Hornet Series and what became the F-15 Strike Eagle, just to name some American examples. Even the F-14 Tomcat ended up being as good of an attack aircraft as it was an interceptor even though it was never originally designed to do the precision bombing mission.
Jesus Christ. All these of these examples presuppose that you have air superiority or better yet, air supremacy. In all cases over the past 25 years, that has been true. You could fly a Harvard into some of those places and get a result. That makes the success of these things relative.
So justifying saving the A-10 from a premature retirement is one thing, but trying to straight-face tell the world that multi-role fighter aircraft are crap is denying the historical successes of these aircraft.
Sprey has not said this. He has said that the F-35 is a dog of an aeroplane because of a number of salient points which he has repeatedly outlined. That should not be misinterpreted.
Without this damning requirement, the F-35 would probably have been the best fighter ever built, not just in its avionics and sensor fusion abilities, but also in its raw kinematic performance.
Nonsense. The author has provided no basis in fact for this rather silly assertion. It is exactly the kinematic inferiority that is the problem. It's no good comparing the A and B models and insisting that they are the same. They are not. There are major structural differences and therefore weight differences. The maths just don't add up. That's a basic fact.
...by and large most everyone agrees that the F-35 is as maneuverable as an F-16 with a comparable stores load-out...
Everyone does not agree. Not unless you're reading from the Lockheed Martin sales brochure. Wing area and T/W ratio just don't work out. This guy is going to have to find better references than a website which is just echoing LM's claims.
Mr. Spey's talk of wing-loading as if it were the only factor that dictates an aircraft's maneuverability is a great simplification of aerodynamics, propulsion and flight control systems, but I will save you the long technical spiel here. The F-35 does have higher wing loading than many other fighter aircraft, but the story is so much more complicated than just that, and Mr. Sprey's lack of disclosing this reality is an issue.
Oh please don't! You're supposed to be blowing the lid off his argument. You need to back up your claim. I'm not afraid of a little "long technical spiel". I'd like to know if you really know what you're talking about.

Stealth is a scam. The only radars which can't see a stealth aircraft are X-band, the ones it is designed to defeat. There are literally dozens of radar types which can see it, target it and fire on it. Again, the success of stealth aircraft has to be refracted through the fact that they have only ever been used by an air force which had complete control of the airspace (and the virtual airspace as well).

And it's no use dragging up BVR combat. I've kinda already explained why that doesn't hold any water.

The author eventually concedes that the F-35 "may not be the best way to go" but he does raise one point. Sprey is very decided about the philosophy of building single-purpose, high-performance combat aircraft. It's based on the notion that you can get more bang for your buck by designing to a purpose. The A-10 was designed for a specific role. So was the F-15. The MiG-31 is another example. Whether this is true or not is open to question but here's a sobering document to read. It's called The Rand Report:

http://www.mossekongen.no/downloads/200 ... iefing.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks Montey. Sorry for the rant.
сначала мы убиваем американского лося и белку.

"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell.

Proudly never a mod or admin at RSC from 2001 - 2009.
User avatar
wobblysauce
Seen it, Done it, Invented it!
Posts: 10489
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 9:53 am
Location: On an Island in the south

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by wobblysauce »

Fell down the rabbit hole again..

More poilets are coming out and saying 'things' about the JSF/F-35

http://arstechnica.com/information-tech ... d-by-f-16/

Which links and references this.. Nice pics also.
Test Pilot Admits the F-35 Can’t Dogfight New stealth fighter is dead meat in an air battle

-The F-35 Just Catches on Fire Sometimes And the Pentagon knew that for years
-
-F’d: How the U.S. and Its Allies Got Stuck with the World’s Worst New Warplane The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter was meant to improve the U.S. air arsenal, but has made it more vulnerable instead
-

“Magic Helmet” for F-35 ready for delivery Software fixes, new sensors on helmet that let pilot see through plane ready for action.
http://arstechnica.com/information-tech ... -delivery/
And the article from 2014 with Pierre Sprey.
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/pierre ... 1592445665
Some play it safe on the merry-go-round, others go for the thrills of the roller-coaster.

ᕙ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ᕗ vs ლ(ಠ益ಠ)ლ

I have a joke for you. I have a prediction that you are going to walk into a bar, my prediction was wrong and your wallet is gone.
User avatar
Jamo
Posts: 2297
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:55 am
Location: Sydney

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by Jamo »

"Can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run"

Nuff Said. Oh boy, still staggered we bought this piece of shit.
I drink a great deal, I sleep a little and I smoke cigar after cigar. That is why I am in two hundred percent form - Sir Winston Churchill
User avatar
J.D.
Rat
Posts: 6666
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:10 pm
Location: Under a rock somewhere in Australia

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by J.D. »

Should have waited for the next generation, which won't be manned.
сначала мы убиваем американского лося и белку.

"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell.

Proudly never a mod or admin at RSC from 2001 - 2009.
User avatar
Dr. Pain
Posts: 7431
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:17 pm
Location: Benalla, Victoria

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by Dr. Pain »

We should have bought more Super Hornets. Even though it's an old design, it still has that air/ground attack role, which we seem to be seeking. We kept F-111's going and the USAF still upgrade B-52's. B-52 will be the first aircraft design to crack 100 years of service. That is staggering! Image Germany still using Fokker Eindeckers to this day?!

Image
Minister for Religious Genocide.
User avatar
norbs
fucking right wing vegan lesbian
Posts: 24178
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:01 pm
Contact:

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by norbs »

Jamo wrote:"Can’t turn, can’t climb, can’t run"

Nuff Said. Oh boy, still staggered we bought this piece of shit.

No idea who bought them, but Abbott's ultimate fantasy would be flying one of these things whilst the Queen gave him a blow job as he mowed down boats heading towards the Australian coast! The whole time chewing some coal. Fucker.

Back to planes. :D
Sarc ; my second favourite type of gasm.
User avatar
J.D.
Rat
Posts: 6666
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:10 pm
Location: Under a rock somewhere in Australia

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by J.D. »

Howard.

Google "AIR6000" and read about it. That was what got most people off guard about the whole thing.
сначала мы убиваем американского лося и белку.

"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell.

Proudly never a mod or admin at RSC from 2001 - 2009.
User avatar
J.D.
Rat
Posts: 6666
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:10 pm
Location: Under a rock somewhere in Australia

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by J.D. »

Dr. Pain wrote:We should have bought more Super Hornets. Even though it's an old design, it still has that air/ground attack role, which we seem to be seeking.
As I understand it, we did.

The problem with that is multi-fold. Firstly, the F/A-18F is actually an enlarged F/A-18A/B and the resemblance is rather superficial. It's about 25% larger with slightly more powerful engines and some upgrades which are potentially useful to us in the longer term but not in the mission for which it was purchased.

The F/A-18F is the two seat version of what the USN flies off its carriers and was the designated replacement for both the F-14 Tomcat/Bombcat and the A-6 and EA-6 Prowler and Intruder. It has better performance that the A-6 but is significantly inferior to the F-14 for pretty obvious reasons. But the biggest criticism of the Superhornet is its aerodynamic performance. There were so many compromises and cut corners in its design that it barely made it through the US Congress. It must be the first aircraft since WWII to suffer wing drop on approach - potentially disastrous for a carrier aircraft. This was eventually fixed but not without penalty. The second problem is the splayed weapons pylons which create an excessive level of drag, although it's not as bad as it looks. The result is an aircraft which cannot go supersonic with a weapons load or external fuel. Its range is also very limited compared with the old F-111, which had excellent performance with and without weapons and also had an internal weapons bay. In many respects, the Superhornet is not very good.

Where it has an advantage - and the reason we ordered a few more - is the F/A-18G "Growler". This actually adds a facet of air combat to the RAAF that we have never had before. Or at least, not to any significant degree. Prior to this (and I'm unsure if they have been introduced yet), the RAAF's only Electronic Warfare aircraft was the HS-748, which is hardly a combat aircraft at all.
сначала мы убиваем американского лося и белку.

"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell.

Proudly never a mod or admin at RSC from 2001 - 2009.
User avatar
Jamo
Posts: 2297
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:55 am
Location: Sydney

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by Jamo »

SU-35 would've been perfect I tell ya.

And JD is right the Super Hornet is fairly rubbish, I remember reading a quote from a USN Pilot. "They took the Bug and made it worse!"
I drink a great deal, I sleep a little and I smoke cigar after cigar. That is why I am in two hundred percent form - Sir Winston Churchill
wabbit
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 6:36 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by wabbit »

Isn't the point of these 35's that they're meant to be highly connected with other 35's and other units all working together... or is that another aircraft I'm thinking of?
User avatar
wobblysauce
Seen it, Done it, Invented it!
Posts: 10489
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 9:53 am
Location: On an Island in the south

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by wobblysauce »

J.D. wrote:Howard.

Google "AIR6000" and read about it. That was what got most people off guard about the whole thing.
Thoughts on this compared to the Collins-class submarine issues.. And now it has fixed a number of issues it once had.
Some play it safe on the merry-go-round, others go for the thrills of the roller-coaster.

ᕙ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ᕗ vs ლ(ಠ益ಠ)ლ

I have a joke for you. I have a prediction that you are going to walk into a bar, my prediction was wrong and your wallet is gone.
User avatar
J.D.
Rat
Posts: 6666
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:10 pm
Location: Under a rock somewhere in Australia

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by J.D. »

wabbit wrote:Isn't the point of these 35's that they're meant to be highly connected with other 35's and other units all working together... or is that another aircraft I'm thinking of?
Yes - Network Centric Warfare is what they're trying to achieve but it takes a lot of different aspects and they all have to work. The AEWC/AWACS aircraft and tankers which are not supposed to get shot down, the jammer aircraft which is not supposed to have a databus problem, the ground control JORN network which isn't supposed to go offline because a possum got zapped on the powerline or the lone fighter jet which got stuck out there in a world of pain because of some other silly fault.

You are, of course, absolutely right: on paper, that's what is supposed to happen. The point I'm making is that modern warfare is now so complex and has so many levels of C3 that it is almost its own enemy. Network Centric Warfare has the potential to be its own undoing because everything has to work as advertised or it fails. The same problem exists even within the F-35 itself because the US Congress demanded so much of this thing in such a bargain basement package that everything got done at the cheapest possible price. Unfortunately, the cost to us is anything but. COTS components and software fixes replaced the bulletproof and gold standard hardware of earlier projects. The R&D that had to go into making this thing work soon outstripped the advantages and everyone who knew anything of what they were talking about 10 or 12 years ago knew it would. Bug propagation was - and is - always going to be a problem.

Ultimately, a fighter left on its own because of a network failure has to be good enough that the pilot can defend himself effectively or run and survive. The bottom line is that nothing else is acceptable as an outcome.
wobblysauce wrote:
J.D. wrote:Howard.

Google "AIR6000" and read about it. That was what got most people off guard about the whole thing.
Thoughts on this compared to the Collins-class submarine issues.. And now it has fixed a number of issues it once had.
The Collins Class subs were always good. The problems related to the hardware the Yanks gave us for the fire control system and some of the rafting for the internal components. They had a lot of acoustic problems which were eventually resolved and at last report they were the quietest subs in the world. The fire control problems were also resolved relatively early but despite all this, they became (quite unfairly) a byword for bad design and construction.

The AIR6000 controversy related to the fact that Howard acted unilaterally to short circuit the tender process, an action which has damaged our reputation. The acquisition of the Superhornet did nothing positive for us either for the same reason.

And Jamo is right; there are a lot of pilots who prefer the original Hornet as a fighter. The Superhornet has some technical and range advantages but as a fighter is markedly inferior to most Eurocanards* and a half-decently flown Su-35.

*The Typhoon can supercruise with external fuel. The Rafale can do M=1.6 on one engine (that the max clean speed for a Superhornet).
сначала мы убиваем американского лося и белку.

"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell.

Proudly never a mod or admin at RSC from 2001 - 2009.
User avatar
smithcorp
Occasional Visitor
Occasional Visitor
Posts: 5656
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 9:13 pm
Location: Godzone

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by smithcorp »

Canada's new PM is cancelling the F35 buy as almost his first act!

http://www.smh.com.au/world/canadas-tru ... ke0u7.html
User avatar
J.D.
Rat
Posts: 6666
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:10 pm
Location: Under a rock somewhere in Australia

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by J.D. »

Interesting development.

Let's see where that goes. Canada has some similar problems to Australia.
сначала мы убиваем американского лося и белку.

"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell.

Proudly never a mod or admin at RSC from 2001 - 2009.
User avatar
J.D.
Rat
Posts: 6666
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:10 pm
Location: Under a rock somewhere in Australia

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by J.D. »

And just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, in a mock air combat with an F-16 a while ago, the F-35 got its arse handed to it:

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/07 ... losophies/

This would make it inferior to the very aircraft it is intended to replace in the RAAF inventory: the F/A-18 (old version).
сначала мы убиваем американского лося и белку.

"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell.

Proudly never a mod or admin at RSC from 2001 - 2009.
User avatar
Jamo
Posts: 2297
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:55 am
Location: Sydney

Re: JSF/F-35...time to eject.

Post by Jamo »

Well the Bug was in a lot of ways inferior to the Mirage so nothing new there.

+ The Superbug is infinitely inferior to the Pig.
I drink a great deal, I sleep a little and I smoke cigar after cigar. That is why I am in two hundred percent form - Sir Winston Churchill
Post Reply