[romalama]

Wikipedia - The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is a single-seat, single-engine, fifth generation multirole fighters under development to perform ground attack, reconnaissance, and air defense missions with stealth capability.The F-35 has three main models; the F-35A is a conventional takeoff and landing variant, the F-35B is a short take off and vertical-landing variant, and the F-35C is a carrier-based variant.The F-35 is descended from the X-35, the product of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program. Ok,the only reason I'm asking is Britain will have two new Aircraft carriers by 2018,both supporting the F-35B(Harrier jump-jet type).Now my current knowledge/experience of Fighter jets are movies(Top Gun) and principally games,USAF,Eurofighter Typhoon,F/A-18E Super Hornet and even HAWX 1/2(Arcade stuff).The youtube vids I've seen today are depicturing and describing that the F-35 variants as total Lemons,and a complete waste of Billions of dollars taxpayers money.Specifically the one Britain is purchasing,F-35B being most widely criticised due too instability during training exercises.Also these planes in one report are said to be inferior to Russian and Chinese rivals.Quoted"'Double inferior' relative to modern Russian/Chinese fighter designs in visual range combat."And also "Inferior acceleration, inferior climb, inferior sustained turn capability."It concludes that the JSF: "Can't turn, can't climb, can't run."

Now that may well be over elaborated BS,but it's abit worrying nonetheless.Anyway's can someone enlighten/insight me more on these or other Next Generation Jets,foreinstance like the F-22 Raptor,a non carrier version,both considered vastly superior too anything out in the skies at the moment.Also I came across this awesomeness gem of a plane lately,Boeing F/A-XX,straight out of Sci-fiction and can open fire or zap enemy opponents down with a flipping LASER! -



Cheer's.

[chuecafressds]

I just hope it won't be another Lockheed starfighter. A plane so bad that the only way they could shift it in large numbers was by bribing government officials around the world. I know the Germans bought a lot which resulted in the deaths of many of their pilots.

[rNr5Di3S]

As far as I've read/understood, theTyphoon is still the ultimate raw dogfighter, but the JSF is armed with some very nifty weaponry, thrust options (ATOL etc), sensors and unique electronic countermeasures. So it's almost like comparing a Katana to a Swiss Army Knife. If anything the future of modern warfare may require a more adaptable and configurable aircraft like the JSF, even though by many standard measures the Typhoon is the superior fighter.

[bobibnoxx]

Hopefully it costs another $ Trillion like the F-35.

[BqTyG9eS]

The F-22 Raptor is purely a Air Superiority Stealth jet (And still one of the best IMO, the SU-50 coming in almost neck-neck). But it can also do AtG runs, but with limited capacity.

The F-35(et al variants) is meant to replace the F16(et al variants 20+ year old Jet) in all Multi-role positions in the armed forces. The decision will be made THIS summer (Environmental Impact Studies) (Next 2 months hopefully) on whether a full scale training op will be decided between 4 AFB's in the US (Luke AFB here near me, being the fore-runner).

Now when the studies are completed, 73(or 79) will be dispatched to the AFB for immediate training. I am guessing that Luke AFB will be the recommended AFB due to the least amount of impact on infrastructure change to the base, i.e. Tower, Runways, Radar... Once in place (if it is Luke AFB) the 56th Squadron will be the largest training for F-35's in the US.

(As you can probably tell, I am anxious to know the results of the studies and their conclusion)

The F-35 Variants imo are VERY good for what they need to be, for each branch. VTOL, Short-Launch, Run-n-Gun, ATA, ATG, etc...


*Oh and a side-note, They did send out test F-35's to Luke AFB back in February, I watched them. They seemed VERY capable.

[layevymed]

If you need close air support, even in the near future, this can only be properly provided by specialized aircraft like the A-10 or Su-25.

If your objective is to carry a large missile or bomb for major targets and be able to do air to air combat, you need an air superiority fighter.


The Typhoon, due to being originally designed to be an interceptor is a good air to air aircraft, but not a good air superiority fighter. What many people fail to understand is that a small aircraft does not enjoy the as many advantages as a small tank does.


In the future it's between the J-20 from China, Su-50 aka PAK-FA and SU-35 from russia and the F-22 and F-35 from the USA:

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2010-01.html (read the PAK-FA budget, look at the F-35 budget, then read the PAK-FA budget again)

The website may appear critical of america at first, until you realize that they do advise buying the F-22. The knowledge on the site is certainly usefull in a technical discussion.


And then there is the Rand report that has pretty much annihilated any foreign sale of the F-35:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/42891479...ent-and-Future


May I add some critical videos about the M1 Abrams:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULC0T...D732D4D74C9FCC (yes, the source is biased and does not present his point well, does repeat too much BUT if you look at the arguments made they are very valid)

[XGoFivk7]

Hopefully it costs another $ Trillion like the F-35.

1 trillion over a 50 year life time. People moaned about how expensive the F15 was... do you think of it as expensive, now, 40 years later?

Long term programs always cost a lot. But 1 trillion over 50 years, really isn't that much when you break it down.

[zU8KbeIU]

1 trillion over a 50 year life time. People moaned about how expensive the F15 was... do you think of it as expensive, now, 40 years later?

Long term programs always cost a lot. But 1 trillion over 50 years, really isn't that much when you break it down.

Considering the set backs, I'd venture to say the bulk of that $Trillion was already spent. Don't let 50 year figure fool you.

[drugsprevi]

Considering the set backs, I'd venture to say the bulk of that $Trillion was already spent. Don't let 50 year figure fool you.

The United States is projected to spend an estimated US$323 billion for development and procurement on the F-35 program, making it the most expensive defense program ever. The total lifecycle cost for the entire American fleet is estimated to be US$1.51 trillion over its 50-year life, or $618 million per plane."

Yep the money is already spent, there are currently I believe 150 already in use right now.

With a projected 2400~ F-35's over the next couple decades.

[Cnbaapuy]

Considering the set backs, I'd venture to say the bulk of that $Trillion was already spent. Don't let 50 year figure fool you.

And you would be wrong in your venture. It is just shy of 400b now, when the majority of the work is done. It might cost 100b more before all are delivered, but half of the projected cost (the other $500B) is for parts, maintenance, upgrades, etc for the next 50 years. It is a jack of all trades that won't fight fair against it's adversaries.

[johnstylet]

And you would be wrong in your venture. It is just shy of 400b now, when the majority of the work is done. It might cost 100b more before all are delivered, but half of the projected cost (the other $500B) is for parts, maintenance, upgrades, etc for the next 50 years. It is a jack of all trades that won't fight fair against it's adversaries.

Actually it's closer to 1.5 Trillion over 50 years, but that's besides the point.

The total lifecycle cost for the entire American fleet is estimated to be US$1.51 trillion over its 50-year life, or $618 million per plane.[16] So 500Bn spent on a fleet of planes during a period that is considered the worst recession since the Great Depression. Meanwhile, education is ranked about 14th , the deficit sits nicely at 15 Trillion, and the number of uninsured americans continues to climb . Where does it end?

[violalmina]

Actually it's closer to 1.5 Trillion over 50 years, but that's besides the point.


So 500Bn spent on a fleet of planes during a period that is considered the worst recession since the Great Depression. Meanwhile, education is ranked about 14th , the deficit sits nicely at 15 Trillion, and the number of uninsured americans continues to climb . Where does it end?

Social security and medicare/caid are the top 2 things the US spends money on. This program is not the problem. Could we cut some from the military? Sure. But to pretend that military spending is our problem when SPENDING is our problem is absurd.

This is a long term cost that is worth it. The f15 gave the US air dominance over the last 40 years. The JSF combined with f22 will give the US the same for the foreseeable future.

[Necedofer]

Social security and medicare/caid are the top 2 things the US spends money on. This program is not the problem. Could we cut some from the military? Sure. But to pretend that military spending is our problem when SPENDING is our problem is absurd.

This is a long term cost that is worth it. The f15 gave the US air dominance over the last 40 years. The JSF combined with f22 will give the US the same for the foreseeable future.

No disagreement here, except I feel the F35 program is still heavily bloated. I wonder the long term damage of seniors who rely on SS who would suddenly not have that as a safety net. How would you handle the situation? A slow and steady death, or pull it off like a band aid?

[Jorcelirl]

I think the baby boomers will have drained it all by the time the last of them dies off over the next 25-30 years. Most gen X'ers I know expect no SSI, or at least not a monthly stipend.

I think it will be a slow death that will exclude this or that income level to a varying degree until there is nothing left.

(I have got to quit falling asleep ~9pm)

[Yyaqyped]

This is a long term cost that is worth it. The f15 gave the US air dominance over the last 40 years. The JSF combined with f22 will give the US the same for the foreseeable future.

Someone ignored my links, the particular problem with the F35 is that it is nowhere near good enough to secure air dominance against a real enemy.

[prpaims]

I think of it as the shotgun/rifle condition - some things are like a shotgun, hitting many points but sometimes you need a rifle, that hits one target with precision. A jack of all trades aircraft will almost invariably lose out against an aircraft designed with one (or a few) role.
BTW, that was US$30 Billion a year - and I doubt that's taking into account the inevitible upgrades, etc, during the 50 year service life.

[zawhmqswly]

Someone ignored my links, the particular problem with the F35 is that it is nowhere near good enough to secure air dominance against a real enemy.

Oh, I have seen what you said, I just never paid much attention to it. Your scenario relies on the perception that f35b's will attack squadrons of superior planes with much better dog fighting capabilities in equal numbers. Mine never does. I explicitly stated that the f35's won't fight fair. They will have f15's in tow as well as the f22. What the f35's give you over the other multipurpose planes in the US arsenal is what matters. And the gulfs between an f16/Hornet and the f35 are Grand Canyon deep in the 35's favor.

I think of it as the shotgun/rifle condition - some things are like a shotgun, hitting many points but sometimes you need a rifle, that hits one target with precision. A jack of all trades aircraft will almost invariably lose out against an aircraft designed with one (or a few) role.
BTW, that was US$30 Billion a year - and I doubt that's taking into account the inevitible upgrades, etc, during the 50 year service life.

The hornet and F16 are the US's multipurpose planes of the day. Seems to me, they have done quite well in their roll. The f35 is superior to both and has stealth and superior targeting and guidance systems. There will be no better multi purpose plane in the world when this is ready. Yeah, a Typhoon might beat one in a dogfight... if he can survive long enough to get into visual range.

Everything I read says that it does cover projected upgrades. Those will be little more than maintenance every ten or so years, and the upgrades themselves will come piggybacked off of other projects at the time (as all the f15 upgrades have been). They will be much like the Abrams. Every decade or so, they will get a full refurbish.

[kSmica]

Your first point is well put - as some General must have said at some time - "I don't fight to be fair, I fight to win" and another one "i don't want men who'll die for their country, I want men who'll make the enemy die for their country".

[rsdefwgxvcfdts]

Oh, I have seen what you said, I just never paid much attention to it. Your scenario relies on the perception that f35b's will attack squadrons of superior planes with much better dog fighting capabilities in equal numbers. Mine never does. I explicitly stated that the f35's won't fight fair. They will have f15's in tow as well as the f22. What the f35's give you over the other multipurpose planes in the US arsenal is what matters. And the gulfs between an f16/Hornet and the f35 are Grand Canyon deep in the 35's favor.

the SU35 and PAK FA are designed as multi-purpose planes that have good or better BVR capabilites as well

[VonErmad4]

low observable aircraft are designed as day 1 knock down the door missions , by day 2 the tabs are pulled off and as much ordanance as could be hung would be....

the reason why they stopped the F22 btw ^^ other than A2A its no good.

BUT , as the US is learning , just because they go down 1 road and assume its the best , others innovate in other areas`s - AIP boats being the prime example - the USN has no counter for a well driven AIP boat (case point - they hired a swedish AIP boat to test a strike carrier group asw - and the sub killed the carrier and 2 escorts before getting clean away, even with a nuke boat with them)

radar low observable is great - but other countries IRST is better than the US own kit ( to the point urgent purchase orders and addon for current hard ware is now considered the number 1 priority); so its great i cant see you on radar - but when your so hot your lit up like a flare - hey ho - here have an IR missile from 20 miles away.

the US first got hold of the best russian kit when the berlin wall came down - the AA-11 `Archer` , they were so impressed , they used the methodology in the AIM-9X.the new R-73M2 has a 60 degree off boresite aiming , helmet queing and a range of over 20 miles , 15 years ago.....