F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 71
Originally Posted by George K Lee
Third, the support for Typhoon in Belgium is really telling. That's not just planting leaks in the Torygraph in hopes of pressuring LM into a better deal (and the UK is pretty insignificant there, compared to the Pentagon). That's "we want to keep Typhoon going because we may end up needing to buy more".
to true..............
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,623
Originally Posted by George K Lee
Second, here's Boeing's shill on the KC-46: It also will be certified and equipped to fly pretty much anywhere, including into contested air space. We all know that is tosh,
('Cos, y'know, the stealth planes are invisible)
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 67
Posts: 1,954
Originally Posted by George K Lee
Second, here's Boeing's shill on the KC-46: It also will be certified and equipped to fly pretty much anywhere, including into contested air space. We all know that is tosh, but Boeing is paying to have it said. (PS Mr Mil - I wasn't talking about GBAD.)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,623
Originally Posted by KenV
Guess it depend on the definition of "contested". Here's what the shill had in mind with regard to that: "Eighth, the Air Force's future tankers must be highly survivable, even when supporting operations in so-called anti-access/area denial environments. That entails being equipped with radar and infrared countermeasures that can defeat attackers, being hardened against the electromagnetic pulse generated by nuclear bursts, and being able to operate safely at night. The flight deck is even armored. As a result, KC-46 will be able to operate in environments where few tankers have gone in the past." So apparently not into any and all contested environments, but into more contested environments than today's tankers.
Ops(O) puts down coffee cup and sighs.
"Hmm, that area was more contested than we thought it would be, general ... "
Originally Posted by ORAC
So you’re back to dropping nukes on Poland, Hungary or the Baltic states then?
Alternatively, if you want to go bunker busting in any feasible enemy - then the targets are deep inside their territory outside the range of the F-35A without AAR well inside their airspace.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,913
We are discussing the possible role for German F-35As, if they bought them. The Germans are not renowned for showing eagerness to deploy armed aircraft - at least since 1945. Hence the assumption must be they would only ever be utilised in the role against an attack against NATO by Russia.
The weapon storage locations and their handling also strongly strongly suggest that they would only ever be employed in extremist from their home bases - which implies against enemy forces advancing through the Baltic states, Hungary or Poland - and from time and other constraints probably the latter. seeing as the B61-12 is optimised for attacks against bunkers I have to question what sort of target they would conceivably be employed against.
In the unlikely event event they were targeted against a site deeper in Russian territory they would require AAR far beyond the FEBA.
In such circumstances it would also suggest a scramble in such extremis that a planned COMAO with advance fighter sweep, EW, C4I, AAR supper would not be possible. If it was possible then then tankers would be on orbits at least 150nm short of the FEBA behind protective EW and fighter CAPS with the bombers interleaved with other tanking assets so they couldn’t be spotted - and would then have to fly an indirect route clear of other formations to prevent their being accidentally engaged at the same time as other assets. So let us presume a route of at least 200nm before crossing the FEBA.
The F-35A combat radius is 590nm - allowing a penetration beyond the FEBA with a safe return of about 400nm - which wouldn’t reach the Russian border which is about 800nm. One way they couldn’t reach Moscow.
Which reminds me of the rumour that that that the range of the Tornado GR1 was designed to prevent the GAF being able to reach Moscow on a one way trip......
if you search there there has been a multi-year argument that the B61 is a bomb with no role in the modern era. The latest mods may give it a justifiable role - but not carried by a Tornado, Typhoon or F-35 - except to force their Belgian and German governments to make a nuclear commitment which will never be conceivably be employed.
I suppose they could bomb the sh*t out of Kaliningrad.....
The weapon storage locations and their handling also strongly strongly suggest that they would only ever be employed in extremist from their home bases - which implies against enemy forces advancing through the Baltic states, Hungary or Poland - and from time and other constraints probably the latter. seeing as the B61-12 is optimised for attacks against bunkers I have to question what sort of target they would conceivably be employed against.
In the unlikely event event they were targeted against a site deeper in Russian territory they would require AAR far beyond the FEBA.
In such circumstances it would also suggest a scramble in such extremis that a planned COMAO with advance fighter sweep, EW, C4I, AAR supper would not be possible. If it was possible then then tankers would be on orbits at least 150nm short of the FEBA behind protective EW and fighter CAPS with the bombers interleaved with other tanking assets so they couldn’t be spotted - and would then have to fly an indirect route clear of other formations to prevent their being accidentally engaged at the same time as other assets. So let us presume a route of at least 200nm before crossing the FEBA.
The F-35A combat radius is 590nm - allowing a penetration beyond the FEBA with a safe return of about 400nm - which wouldn’t reach the Russian border which is about 800nm. One way they couldn’t reach Moscow.
Which reminds me of the rumour that that that the range of the Tornado GR1 was designed to prevent the GAF being able to reach Moscow on a one way trip......
if you search there there has been a multi-year argument that the B61 is a bomb with no role in the modern era. The latest mods may give it a justifiable role - but not carried by a Tornado, Typhoon or F-35 - except to force their Belgian and German governments to make a nuclear commitment which will never be conceivably be employed.
I suppose they could bomb the sh*t out of Kaliningrad.....
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,631
14851872929_28069fc330_b.jpg
Which reminds me of the rumour that that that the range of the Tornado GR1 was designed to prevent the GAF being able to reach Moscow on a one way trip......
Which reminds me of the rumour that that that the range of the Tornado GR1 was designed to prevent the GAF being able to reach Moscow on a one way trip......
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 65
Posts: 3,056
Originally Posted by George K Lee
Second, here's Boeing's shill on the KC-46: It also will be certified and equipped to fly pretty much anywhere, including into contested air space. We all know that is tosh, but Boeing is paying to have it said. (PS Mr Mil - I wasn't talking about GBAD.)
".
".
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,913
Glad-rag. I am aware that the GAF subsequently procured buddy-refuelling for the Tornado, and the Eurofighter. A lot of water under the bridge since the MRCA was designed. And it was a tongue in check comment - along the lines of NATO being designed to keep the Russians out, the Americans in... and the Germans down...
The Israelis are reportedly developing stealth conformal tanks for their F-35As - reportedly. There has been no mention of a F-35 buddy pack as far as I am aware. It would, of course, total ruin the stealth profile and give away both aircraft, the price of the F-35 also makes using one for the role somewhat expensive. That does not mean that they could not be accompanied by another tactical tanker, the GAF could use a Eurofighter in the same way as the USN will continue to use the F-18 until the MQ-25 arrives in the fleet. Assuming, that is, they funded the fitting of a probe to the F-35A or bought the F-35C.....
Interesting that stealth is not a requirement for the MQ-25, the requirement being to carry the same Chobham refuelling pod as on the F-18 for commonality.
The Israelis are reportedly developing stealth conformal tanks for their F-35As - reportedly. There has been no mention of a F-35 buddy pack as far as I am aware. It would, of course, total ruin the stealth profile and give away both aircraft, the price of the F-35 also makes using one for the role somewhat expensive. That does not mean that they could not be accompanied by another tactical tanker, the GAF could use a Eurofighter in the same way as the USN will continue to use the F-18 until the MQ-25 arrives in the fleet. Assuming, that is, they funded the fitting of a probe to the F-35A or bought the F-35C.....
Interesting that stealth is not a requirement for the MQ-25, the requirement being to carry the same Chobham refuelling pod as on the F-18 for commonality.
Last edited by ORAC; 18th May 2018 at 10:58.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Back in Blighty...
Posts: 51
Last edited by emitex; 18th May 2018 at 09:56.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,913
No vote, or single choice, for aircraft nicknames - and the drivers usually prefer a nicer one than the drivers of other fleets give them - though they sometimes adopt them out of perverse pride. I doubt it was the drivers who nicknamed the B-52 the Buff, the F-15E the Mudhen or the F-18 the Plastic Bug.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Moscow region
Age: 62
Posts: 547
Originally Posted by ORAC
......
except to force their Belgian and German governments to make a nuclear commitment which will never be conceivably be employed.
I suppose they could bomb the sh*t out of Kaliningrad.....
except to force their Belgian and German governments to make a nuclear commitment which will never be conceivably be employed.
I suppose they could bomb the sh*t out of Kaliningrad.....
Fortunately those folks seem to have enough brains and do not want to start the fire understanding what would happen to them in minutes.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,913
Easy, easy .... Are you sure your last sentence was necessary?
the worlds most expensive harrier 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: South Skerry
Posts: 305
Someone just stepped on his own Woody Johnson...
Less NHS, more F-35s. Holy ****, dude.
Comments already being enthusiastically re-reported by RT and Sputnik.
Less NHS, more F-35s. Holy ****, dude.
Comments already being enthusiastically re-reported by RT and Sputnik.
Last edited by George K Lee; 19th May 2018 at 21:04.
