1
1
0
F-35 - The best aircraft of 2001
The Daily Beast has a good "humour" article about the F-35
Newest U.S. Stealth Fighter ‘10 Years Behind’ Older Jets
America’s $400 billion, top-of-the-line aircraft can’t see the battlefield all that well. Which means it’s actually worse than its predecessors at fighting today’s wars.
When the Pentagon’s nearly $400 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter finally enters service next year after nearly two decades in development, it won’t be able to support troops on the ground the way older planes can today. Its sensors won’t be able to see the battlefield as well; and what video the F-35 does capture, it won’t be able to transmit to infantrymen in real time.
Versions of the new single-engine stealth fighter are set to replace almost every type of fighter in the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps inventory—including aircraft specifically designed to support ground troops like the A-10 Warthog. That will leave troops in a lurch when the F-35 eventually becomes the only game in town.
“The F-35 will, in my opinion, be 10 years behind legacy fighters when it achieves [initial operational capability],” said one Air Force official affiliated with the F-35 program. “When the F-35 achieves [initial operational capability], it will not have the weapons or sensor capability, with respect to the CAS [close air support] mission set, that legacy multi-role fighters had by the mid-2000s.”
EDITORIAL COMMENT:- You do have to remember that the F-35 is way cool (which might take your mind off how much money it is costing to provide a second-rate replacement for something that costs one quarter as much).
The Daily Beast has a good "humour" article about the F-35
Newest U.S. Stealth Fighter ‘10 Years Behind’ Older Jets
America’s $400 billion, top-of-the-line aircraft can’t see the battlefield all that well. Which means it’s actually worse than its predecessors at fighting today’s wars.
When the Pentagon’s nearly $400 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter finally enters service next year after nearly two decades in development, it won’t be able to support troops on the ground the way older planes can today. Its sensors won’t be able to see the battlefield as well; and what video the F-35 does capture, it won’t be able to transmit to infantrymen in real time.
Versions of the new single-engine stealth fighter are set to replace almost every type of fighter in the U.S. Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps inventory—including aircraft specifically designed to support ground troops like the A-10 Warthog. That will leave troops in a lurch when the F-35 eventually becomes the only game in town.
“The F-35 will, in my opinion, be 10 years behind legacy fighters when it achieves [initial operational capability],” said one Air Force official affiliated with the F-35 program. “When the F-35 achieves [initial operational capability], it will not have the weapons or sensor capability, with respect to the CAS [close air support] mission set, that legacy multi-role fighters had by the mid-2000s.”
EDITORIAL COMMENT:- You do have to remember that the F-35 is way cool (which might take your mind off how much money it is costing to provide a second-rate replacement for something that costs one quarter as much).
Newest U.S. Stealth Fighter ‘10 Years Behind’ Older Jets
Posted from thedailybeast.comPosted in these groups: 
F-35
Close Air Support (CAS)
F-35 Close Air Support (CAS)
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
0
0
0
The strength in the F-35 is three fold
1. Integration into the new generation of Net Centric Warfare (NCW) with platforms like the Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air—or NIFC-CA and SM-6
2. A common air frame with common parts, logistics, maintenance and repair across the different variants, (CTOL, STOVL and CV)
3. 11 countries participating in the program so cost are shared.
The sum is more than just the addition of its individual parts.
Yet, like all new weapons systems it has been plagued with issues and I have never met a single fighter pilot that would pick it over a plane in our current inventory.
1. Integration into the new generation of Net Centric Warfare (NCW) with platforms like the Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air—or NIFC-CA and SM-6
2. A common air frame with common parts, logistics, maintenance and repair across the different variants, (CTOL, STOVL and CV)
3. 11 countries participating in the program so cost are shared.
The sum is more than just the addition of its individual parts.
Yet, like all new weapons systems it has been plagued with issues and I have never met a single fighter pilot that would pick it over a plane in our current inventory.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
LCDR (Join to see) Commander; I'll agree that those three strengths are quite prominent in the manufacturer's sales brochure and would be great things to have.
I remain as skeptical that the F-35 actually possesses them as I am about the desirability of providing CAS at Mach 2+ (especially where the design of the delivery aircraft provides it with next to no "loiter time").
I remain as skeptical that the F-35 actually possesses them as I am about the desirability of providing CAS at Mach 2+ (especially where the design of the delivery aircraft provides it with next to no "loiter time").
(0)
(0)
CW3 (Join to see)
The US has a bad habit of taking a disproportionate amount of the "fair share" when working with other countries. Out if 400 billion, I'd guess other countries combined will contribute 40 billion...
(1)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
LCDR (Join to see) LCDR, I have always thought this jet makes more sense to be a Navy plane. I have no idea why the Air Force is trying to replace a remarkably durable & time-proven platform for CAS. Stick w/ what you have until something better comes along. A platform based on a fighter model (it honestly looks like a miniature F22) just doesn't seem to mesh w/ CAS models.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
I swear this is the plane that won't die, no matter how much it needs to. I think the Pentagon thinks it has to renew its pursuit of this because it resembles the Quinjet from the Avengers movie(s). If something that looks like it was in the movies that everyone loves is in our arsenal, people will HAVE to come on-board with it, right? Ugh...
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
SSgt (Join to see) Airman; There's certainly a lot of "career progression credit" invested in the F-35.
[Sometimes I think that certain factions would still be pushing it even if it proved out that the damn thing could only fly ten times before it had to go back to the factory for a rebuild - simply because they would look really dumb if it ever got cancelled.]
[Sometimes I think that certain factions would still be pushing it even if it proved out that the damn thing could only fly ten times before it had to go back to the factory for a rebuild - simply because they would look really dumb if it ever got cancelled.]
(2)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
SSgt (Join to see) Airman; The correct formulation is "It's too big to fail on MY watch (and preferably not until AFTER I've started collecting my pension and have a nice, lucrative, consulting/lobbying job)."
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google