F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
No, JSFf, you're avoiding the questions. Have a stab at Posts 1744 - 1746. Some answers rather than your usual "ingore the bits that are too difficult or over your head".
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not too hard to get over my head and I haven't said otherwise.
I do take people like this seriously
ParlInfo - Parliamentary Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade : 20/03/2012 : Department of Defence annual report 2010-11
"Gary Liberson, who is on his right, has 22 years of experience as an operations analyst and research engineer with McDonnell Douglas, the RAND Corporation, and Lockheed Martin Aeronautics. He has extensive experience with combat analysis, methodologies and analysis techniques. He is considered an expert in Brawler, Thunder, Suppressor, SeaFan and PacWar constructive simulation tools. His areas of expertise include combat aircraft systems and tactics as well as advanced threat analysis. "
I do take people like this seriously
ParlInfo - Parliamentary Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade : 20/03/2012 : Department of Defence annual report 2010-11
"Gary Liberson, who is on his right, has 22 years of experience as an operations analyst and research engineer with McDonnell Douglas, the RAND Corporation, and Lockheed Martin Aeronautics. He has extensive experience with combat analysis, methodologies and analysis techniques. He is considered an expert in Brawler, Thunder, Suppressor, SeaFan and PacWar constructive simulation tools. His areas of expertise include combat aircraft systems and tactics as well as advanced threat analysis. "
Last edited by JSFfan; 6th Apr 2013 at 20:48.
That would be the same RAND corporation whose evaluation you recently rubbished, would it? The one that "dissed" the F-35, remember?
Not good enough. Let's try them one at a time. What is the "standard air-to-air engagement analysis model, also used by allied air forces to assess air-combat performance"?
Not good enough. Let's try them one at a time. What is the "standard air-to-air engagement analysis model, also used by allied air forces to assess air-combat performance"?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, that would be the same RAND that said they had nothing to do with Stillion repsim apa clown club and co's rubbish, sticking a RAND logo on something doesn't make it RAND's
Last edited by JSFfan; 6th Apr 2013 at 21:03.
OK, let's try another. Do you know what parameters were used in the trial and EXACTLY what the outcomes were? Be careful here because the science in these trials is very specific and easily misinterpreted, misunderstood or (worse) misused in the public forum for various reasons.
In that case, perhaps time to stop this incessant spouting of internet quotes that you clearly do not understand. It can still be a good debate, but please don't keep selectively quoting stuff that we can all see, but understand that it's just public domain stuff. There is way more to this than that AND people's lives will depend on the outcome. It's not just an internet hobby.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
Only F-35Bs for USN and USMC (long shot indeed)
IF this long shot idea eventuates 'only F-35Bs for USN & USMC' (notwithstanding the many objections from the USN &/or others) what will this mean for the RN/RAF? I'll take it as read that the USN would likely prefer to have F-35Cs on their CVNS (with some help from USMC F-35Cs as agreed already). And what would be the likedly modifications to the F-35B to make them suitable for CVNs? The SRVL would be used I'll imagine but what else is required? Anyhooo....
Questions Remain Over Navy’s F-35 Interest 05 Apr 2013 by Bryant Jordan
Questions Remain Over Navy
"...The focus will return to the Navy's variant on April 10 at the Sea Air Space 2013 Symposium when Vice Adm. David Dunaway, the head of Naval Air Systems Command, leads a panel discussion on the future of the Joint Strike Fighter....
...as the Navy's F-35 program officials assess the Navy's future needs, defense analyst and author John Gresham says it's critical they ponder just how much they need the JSF variant....
..."If you have to kill [one model] which one would it be? It would have to be the carrier" version, he said.
Gresham says he is an advocate of the F-35, but believes the Navy can have a completely capable version by modifying [? why?] the B-model that is now being tested by the Marine Corps....
...If the Navy [USN] were to consider adapting the B-model to its fleet, it would not only quicken the pace of getting the planes into service, but also increase the size of the Navy's carrier fleet because many more ships could accommodate them.
"I'm not trying to second guess NavAir, or the Chief of Naval Operations or the Department of the Navy, but being a naval analyst/observer since the early '80s, I've seen quite a few aircraft come and go," he said. "And let's not kid ourselves -- this is going to be the last generation of manned fighters."
Questions Remain Over Navy’s F-35 Interest 05 Apr 2013 by Bryant Jordan
Questions Remain Over Navy
"...The focus will return to the Navy's variant on April 10 at the Sea Air Space 2013 Symposium when Vice Adm. David Dunaway, the head of Naval Air Systems Command, leads a panel discussion on the future of the Joint Strike Fighter....
...as the Navy's F-35 program officials assess the Navy's future needs, defense analyst and author John Gresham says it's critical they ponder just how much they need the JSF variant....
..."If you have to kill [one model] which one would it be? It would have to be the carrier" version, he said.
Gresham says he is an advocate of the F-35, but believes the Navy can have a completely capable version by modifying [? why?] the B-model that is now being tested by the Marine Corps....
...If the Navy [USN] were to consider adapting the B-model to its fleet, it would not only quicken the pace of getting the planes into service, but also increase the size of the Navy's carrier fleet because many more ships could accommodate them.
"I'm not trying to second guess NavAir, or the Chief of Naval Operations or the Department of the Navy, but being a naval analyst/observer since the early '80s, I've seen quite a few aircraft come and go," he said. "And let's not kid ourselves -- this is going to be the last generation of manned fighters."
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 6th Apr 2013 at 22:09. Reason: 2nd question
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well those that do say from my link may have a point then
Air Cdre Bentley : If I can talk to simulations, and then Gary can—he probably talks best to simulations—I would say this. You can only truly represent what the F35 is capable of and what other fifth generation and other fourth generation aeroplanes are capable of when you have all of the classified information. Trying to simulate something that you do not fully understand is based on false assumptions and false ground rules. If you go in with false assumptions and false ground rules, you will get false answers.
"Parameters in the original evaluation" included the stipulation that all Red pilots had grocery bags over their heads. But don't pass it on because it's vewwy vewwy secret.
Spaz - Lamesauce story, sorry. CV Navy does not want STOVL on CVs because it is a huge complicating factor with no upside. And people who write stories should include who's paying the people they quote.
Spaz - Lamesauce story, sorry. CV Navy does not want STOVL on CVs because it is a huge complicating factor with no upside. And people who write stories should include who's paying the people they quote.
Last edited by LowObservable; 6th Apr 2013 at 22:15.
In other words, they’re about to buy another 12 F-15SGs as F-5 replacements and grow their fleet to 36, instead of buying 12 F-35Bs that won’t be useful until 2018 or later.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
F-35B IPP change perhaps for CVNs (why not for CVFs)?
Despite dismissive comment from 'LowObservable' my question(s) stand on this - after all - 'what if' forum thread "F-35 Cancelled, then what ?" I would gather the IPP location being changed may be an issue for CVNs if the idea is taken up however this IPP already is OK for CVFs.
Yes it will be interesting to know who is being paid and for what however this is only an idea (without legs most likely) yet I'm interested in the practicality (good or bad) of this idea 'F-35Bs only on CVNs etc.). If there are no answers then OK - there will be no problem having F- 35Bs on CVNs.
Yes it will be interesting to know who is being paid and for what however this is only an idea (without legs most likely) yet I'm interested in the practicality (good or bad) of this idea 'F-35Bs only on CVNs etc.). If there are no answers then OK - there will be no problem having F- 35Bs on CVNs.