|
Post by steel selachian on Jul 11, 2015 14:13:37 GMT -6
The issue is that we only have 180-some F-22s to handle the pure AtoA load (plus some F-15Cs that are getting really long in the tooth), and a number of countries will be buying this thing as their primary fighter aircraft. From what you're describing, this report isn't as bad as it looks. One would think the Pentagon would be a little better at getting that word out though. This is more in your field - foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/absolute-youngest-marine-in-the-f-35-test-force-shares-1716981177
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jul 11, 2015 18:28:01 GMT -6
The issue is that we only have 180-some F-22s to handle the pure AtoA load (plus some F-15Cs that are getting really long in the tooth), and a number of countries will be buying this thing as their primary fighter aircraft. From what you're describing, this report isn't as bad as it looks. One would think the Pentagon would be a little better at getting that word out though. This is more in your field - foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/absolute-youngest-marine-in-the-f-35-test-force-shares-1716981177The Pentagon cannot divulge all the information about how tests have proceeded and their results. They play with the figures to deflect possible opponents. Pilots are in on all this, the actual engineering results are usually top secret between the manufacturer and the Defense department. Is dogfighting dead? People have been discussing and analyzing this question from Vietnam to the present. I don't think it is completely dead, it has just changed. The paradigm has changed. This will mean that the requirements have changed and as such, the specifications for the aircraft will be different. Is the F-35 a dogfighter? In the new paradigm, yes. The days of the leather helmet and Camel cigarette smoking pilot are over. We need to get more detailed information on how the F-35 performs during air combat test at Nellis and Pax River.
The article was interesting. I have always had a fondness for the kids in "O" level and "I" level maintenance. When possible and asked, I always went to Miramar to help train them on certain assemblies that were causing trouble. When aircraft have a lot combat hours on them, they age very quickly. Post Vietnam we saw much of that on the old F-4. Airframes crack and corrode etc.
|
|
|
Post by steel selachian on Jul 16, 2015 17:16:26 GMT -6
The issue is that we only have 180-some F-22s to handle the pure AtoA load (plus some F-15Cs that are getting really long in the tooth), and a number of countries will be buying this thing as their primary fighter aircraft. From what you're describing, this report isn't as bad as it looks. One would think the Pentagon would be a little better at getting that word out though. This is more in your field - foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/absolute-youngest-marine-in-the-f-35-test-force-shares-1716981177The Pentagon cannot divulge all the information about how tests have proceeded and their results. They play with the figures to deflect possible opponents. Pilots are in on all this, the actual engineering results are usually top secret between the manufacturer and the Defense department. Is dogfighting dead? People have been discussing and analyzing this question from Vietnam to the present. I don't think it is completely dead, it has just changed. The paradigm has changed. This will mean that the requirements have changed and as such, the specifications for the aircraft will be different. Is the F-35 a dogfighter? In the new paradigm, yes. The days of the leather helmet and Camel cigarette smoking pilot are over. We need to get more detailed information on how the F-35 performs during air combat test at Nellis and Pax River.
The article was interesting. I have always had a fondness for the kids in "O" level and "I" level maintenance. When possible and asked, I always went to Miramar to help train them on certain assemblies that were causing trouble. When aircraft have a lot combat hours on them, they age very quickly. Post Vietnam we saw much of that on the old F-4. Airframes crack and corrode etc.
medium.com/war-is-boring/don-t-think-the-f-35-can-fight-it-does-in-this-realistic-war-game-fc10706ba9f4
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jul 16, 2015 20:52:26 GMT -6
The Pentagon cannot divulge all the information about how tests have proceeded and their results. They play with the figures to deflect possible opponents. Pilots are in on all this, the actual engineering results are usually top secret between the manufacturer and the Defense department. Is dogfighting dead? People have been discussing and analyzing this question from Vietnam to the present. I don't think it is completely dead, it has just changed. The paradigm has changed. This will mean that the requirements have changed and as such, the specifications for the aircraft will be different. Is the F-35 a dogfighter? In the new paradigm, yes. The days of the leather helmet and Camel cigarette smoking pilot are over. We need to get more detailed information on how the F-35 performs during air combat test at Nellis and Pax River.
The article was interesting. I have always had a fondness for the kids in "O" level and "I" level maintenance. When possible and asked, I always went to Miramar to help train them on certain assemblies that were causing trouble. When aircraft have a lot combat hours on them, they age very quickly. Post Vietnam we saw much of that on the old F-4. Airframes crack and corrode etc.
medium.com/war-is-boring/don-t-think-the-f-35-can-fight-it-does-in-this-realistic-war-game-fc10706ba9f4Remember this comment:
Comment by the F-35 Joint Program Office Now, will there be a time or an engagement where dogfighting might be necessary? Absolutely, we found that out in Vietnam. You have to be able to interrogate the radar target and determine friend or foe, the F-4's couldn't do that until the introduction of the APX-76. Now they could interrogate a target that Red Crown had identified but that wasn't always effective. The solution was Red Flag and Top Gun. Time to go back to school and develop the skills to use the aircraft's best features. For the F-4 it was it's roll rate and climb rate.
Another aspect of ACM is the addition of AEW aircraft and sophisticated surface search and of course, satellites. These tools will as they already have, improved the chances of our aircraft. There is very little chance of someone staying low and sneaking up on us or using their stealth to get into a turning battle with the F-35. If you look at most Russian aircraft, stealth isn't one of their best feature.
We will have to wait until a fully equipped production F-35 competes in Red Flag or Top Gun to really get an idea of how this plane will react to various air combat situations. With the aid of the air resources mentioned, the plane may do better than we think. If not, it will be modified to do so.
I have no comments about using a commercial game to try to answer the questions. They are not, in my opinion, realistic especially in air combat.
Update: I found this piece from the Center For Strategic and Budgetary Assessments - It is predictive about the dogfight capability of the F-35 - I 've downloaded it and am going to get it read after my granddaughter heads home this evening.
csbaonline.org/publications/2015/04/trends-in-air-to-air-combat-implications-for-future-air-superiority/
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jul 31, 2015 17:04:05 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by steel selachian on Aug 9, 2015 15:19:38 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Aug 9, 2015 15:50:13 GMT -6
I love this comment
Ya Think!! What kind of "low-observable features", maybe a different tail, wings, engines intakes, exhaust. Where do you start? Maybe the drawing boards. This is another "atta boy for Vladimir"
|
|
|
Post by steel selachian on Aug 9, 2015 16:39:56 GMT -6
Maybe more of a one for MiG. Since the demise of the Soviet Union Sukhoi has been heavily favored by the Kremlin, and it's shown - aside from this display piece, the only thing they've put out in the last thirty years has been a succession of warmed-over MiG-29 derivatives that haven't sold well to either the Russian military or foreign clients. Sad end for a legendary aircraft design firm. Also not a good move for the Russians - their fighter force is now built on the Flanker series, which are all heavy, complex airframes.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Aug 10, 2015 8:39:07 GMT -6
Maybe more of a one for MiG. Since the demise of the Soviet Union Sukhoi has been heavily favored by the Kremlin, and it's shown - aside from this display piece, the only thing they've put out in the last thirty years has been a succession of warmed-over MiG-29 derivatives that haven't sold well to either the Russian military or foreign clients. Sad end for a legendary aircraft design firm. Also not a good move for the Russians - their fighter force is now built on the Flanker series, which are all heavy, complex airframes. The Russian government must realize that globalization has changed their geostrategic position and that even with Chinese help, they must turn to the west for assistance. This means leaving the Ukraine and reducing military spending by eliminating obsolete aircraft and ship lines. The Russian government is in denial about the demise of the Soviet Union.
|
|
|
Post by sirchaos on Aug 10, 2015 11:02:37 GMT -6
I love this comment
Ya Think!! What kind of "low-observable features", maybe a different tail, wings, engines intakes, exhaust. Where do you start? Maybe the drawing boards. This is another "atta boy for Vladimir"
Hey... the best way not to be spotted is not to be there, and the MiG 1.44 never was there, so it´s basically the master of stealth.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Aug 10, 2015 13:11:19 GMT -6
I love this comment
Ya Think!! What kind of "low-observable features", maybe a different tail, wings, engines intakes, exhaust. Where do you start? Maybe the drawing boards. This is another "atta boy for Vladimir"
Hey... the best way not to be spotted is not to be there, and the MiG 1.44 never was there, so it´s basically the master of stealth. They do have a lot of "stealth" aircraft, that's for sure. Most likely, a lot of a "hangar queens" also. If jet engines could run on vodka, the Russian's would be set.
|
|
|
Post by sirchaos on Aug 11, 2015 9:59:01 GMT -6
Hey... the best way not to be spotted is not to be there, and the MiG 1.44 never was there, so it´s basically the master of stealth. They do have a lot of "stealth" aircraft, that's for sure. Most likely, a lot of a "hangar queens" also. If jet engines could run on vodka, the Russian's would be set. If jet engines could run on vodka, you´d have the air force personnel drink away all the aviation fuel. Life in the Russian armed forces is way too depressing to face while sober.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Aug 11, 2015 12:09:26 GMT -6
They do have a lot of "stealth" aircraft, that's for sure. Most likely, a lot of a "hangar queens" also. If jet engines could run on vodka, the Russian's would be set. If jet engines could run on vodka, you´d have the air force personnel drink away all the aviation fuel. Life in the Russian armed forces is way too depressing to face while sober. In the book "MiG Pilot", Lt. Belenko describes the Soviets having to put guards on the MiG-25 because of the quantity of alcohol used as coolant for some function (radar?) of the aircraft that escapes me at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Aug 11, 2015 15:16:16 GMT -6
If jet engines could run on vodka, you´d have the air force personnel drink away all the aviation fuel. Life in the Russian armed forces is way too depressing to face while sober. In the book "MiG Pilot", Lt. Belenko describes the Soviets having to put guards on the MiG-25 because of the quantity of alcohol used as coolant for some function (radar?) of the aircraft that escapes me at the moment. Alcohol was used by the intercept radar which was high powered. This required alcohol evaporation to maintain a constant temperature. The set was all tubes, and they get very hot. the F-4B had the same issues with the APQ-72. All tubes and it did get hot. The use of alcohol was cheaper, had low weight and was not toxic like our coolants. However, it did have to be stored differently and reloaded after each flight. Most times the Mig-21 and Mig-25 did not turn on their radar until GCI got them within visual range, then they would engage the radar, lock up the target and fire. This was done to limit the use of the alcohol and remain undetected by our ECM systems.
Update: Picture of a Smerch A radar - s138.photobucket.com/user/delisa_07/media/Mig-25/Smerch-A.jpg.html -follow the pictures for the tubes
|
|
|
Post by sirchaos on Aug 12, 2015 10:56:18 GMT -6
Hey... the best way not to be spotted is not to be there, and the MiG 1.44 never was there, so it´s basically the master of stealth. They do have a lot of "stealth" aircraft, that's for sure. Most likely, a lot of a "hangar queens" also. If jet engines could run on vodka, the Russian's would be set. And as for stealth aircraft, I recall "Baghdad Bob" scoring a few kills without even existing, so why wouldn´t a new "undetectable" Russian stealth aircraft do the same, if it ever came to be used in war.
|
|