Comments on: Joint Strike Flopter: flying piano edition

By: Didact

Didact — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 19:07:14 +0000

In reply to DT.

You keep mentioning the F-22 in the same breath as the F-35.

Actually, I only mentioned the F-22 once. And the point I made was about the way one can use long-wave radar to detect stealth fighters and provide a useful early warning their opponents.

I do not dispute that the F-22 is a better aircraft, both in terms of technical capabilities and (simulated) combat record. My problem is more generally with the entire concept of high-tech "steel-on-target" warfare that this country's military establishment believes in so fervently.

The Cold War is long done. The USSR is dead and gone. Wars between powerful states are becoming less likely every year- especially as those same states are losing power and legitimacy at an alarming rate. The wars of the future will not be huge multi-theatre campaigns involving thousands of men and billions of dollars of equipment; they will be low-intensity but extremely challenging wars between states and non-state actors.

And those same non-state actors will, in 4th-Generation war scenarios, develop cheap and highly effective ways of counteracting the USA's high-tech killing machines. Because of this, they will win, and the US will lose, at a cost out of all proportion to the size and scale of the conflict.

The USA is geared toward fighting Desert Storm all over again. It is NOT geared toward winning the long war against Islam, fought using 4th-Generation tactics. It is virtually guaranteed that America will LOSE these wars, unless massively expensive and wasteful programs like the USAF's F-35, the USN's Littoral Combat Ship, and the Army's Future Combat Systems. All of these are pointless wastes of money that the United States do not have, for wars that will not be fought.

By: etype

etype — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 03:57:49 +0000

@DT
I think you are swallowing the cool aid dispensed from USAF approved spigots regarding the capabilities of the F-22. In recent war games (2012 Red Flag) the F-22 was the 'salad' course in a dogfight with the Eurofighter Typhoons – (beaten handily) – and while the German pilots conceded the overwhelming nature of the F-22's hypothetical 'beyond visual range' missile armament – specialists crunched the numbers, including the fact that 90% of BVR engagements fail – plus the superior intermediate targeting range capabilities of the Eurofighter missle systems, + dogfighting capacity of the Eurofighter, concluded even greater discrepancies in the F-22's 'overwhelming dominance' promised by USAF generals and contractors.
Information regarding wargames against the Russian Sukhoi-30 Flanker was heavily censored, however one Sukhoi pilot described the engagement as 'clubbing baby seals'.
Despite this, USAF still continues to proclaim the absolute and inviolable 'Dominance' of the F-22, despite the fact reality suggests otherwise.

By: DT

DT — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 20:41:19 +0000

You keep mentioning the F-22 in the same breath as the F-35. The F-22 has proven itself time and time again in air exercises with accomplishments and kill ratios that were previously unheard of. The only Raptor kills have come under restricted rules that eliminate most of the Raptor's advantages. (It's good to train this way so you're prepared if something goes wrong.) Even in those scenarios, the worse that can be said about the Raptor is that it's on equal footing with the best 4/4.5g fighters.

When an exercise is fought with no limitations, as would be in war time? "The thing denies your ability to put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it through the canopy," said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, F-15 exchange pilot in the 65th AS. "It's the most frustrated I've ever been." "We [even] tried to overload them with numbers and failed," said Colonel Bruce. "It's humbling to fly against the F-22."

Unlike the F-35 the Raptor is fast and is highly maneuverable. It has the energy advantage in nearly any scenario against other fighters. The F-22 is lethal even when they train as if stealth was defeated.

As for the F-35…the entire program was a mistake. Trying to make one fighter to satisfy nearly all missions for three branches of the military is project suicide. As you point out the F-35 can't turn, climb, or run. It is completely reliant on stealth and long range engagement. It won't be the disaster that the F-4 was early in Vietnam because missiles really are much better, and the F-35 brings some interesting targeting technology to the table. But it's still not 100%, and it's insane to design a fighter assuming otherwise.

Quite frankly we should have built a lot more Raptors and not even one F-35. Instead of the F-35 we should have just upgraded our existing F-15/16/18's and A-10's. Let the Raptor devastate enemy air defenses. Then you can drop bombs all day long from the other planes.