F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That statement would certainly seem to undercut the validity of any effort to simulate JSF-versus-anything-Russian-or-Chinese, would it not? One side of these sims is always open-source intel + common sense analysis. Why should such techniques not work in both directions?
EM - Always a good question as to what one actually means by "legacy" or "4gen" or "advanced 4gen". Let's not forget the 2008 paper which compared the F-35 to the Su-30MKI and Gripen C... which pre-date the F-35, in IOC terms, by almost 20 years. If the threat is an even earlier Su standard, or a MiG-29, you can probably score pretty well.
Originally Posted by JSFfan
who said red air was russian or chinese in the 4 vs 8 ..6:1 LER
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Great Midwest
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, Saudi Arabia's 84 F-15SAs on order will have its two outer wing weapons stations activated, making it necessary to implement a fly-by-wire flight control system.
"The main benefit for the fly-by-wire system is to compensate for the stability differences induced by carrying weapons in the one and nine stations - not used to date on any F-15 platform," the USAF says.
"The main benefit for the fly-by-wire system is to compensate for the stability differences induced by carrying weapons in the one and nine stations - not used to date on any F-15 platform," the USAF says.
Last edited by Bevo; 16th Apr 2013 at 20:41.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only advantage I can think off for fbw on f15 at this stage is envelope protection and stoping the pilots from breaking the jet due to over eagerness.
On the two seat v one if we ever decided to fly a uav from a jet maybe the second crewman would be off benefit.
On the two seat v one if we ever decided to fly a uav from a jet maybe the second crewman would be off benefit.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Great Midwest
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dutch government opts to store F-35 test aircraft
I don’t believe I had seen this on this thread. Seems a shame to waste the assets by storing them.
http://www.flightglobal.com
The Netherlands is to place its Lockheed Martin F-35A Joint Strike Fighter test aircraft into temporary storage, pending a final decision on how to replace its air force's Lockheed F-16 fighters.
Newly appointed defence minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert announced the decision to park the test assets in a letter to the Dutch parliament on 4 April. A first example - delivered in late 2012 - and a second, expected to be handed over in mid-2013, will be stored at Edwards AFB, California, where they will be kept in airworthy condition and flown occasionally by US Air Force pilots. The effects of the decision will be discussed with the F-35 Joint Program Office.
Newly appointed defence minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert announced the decision to park the test assets in a letter to the Dutch parliament on 4 April. A first example - delivered in late 2012 - and a second, expected to be handed over in mid-2013, will be stored at Edwards AFB, California, where they will be kept in airworthy condition and flown occasionally by US Air Force pilots. The effects of the decision will be discussed with the F-35 Joint Program Office.
Bevo - and adding insult to injury, they have to pay parking fees to LockMart!
So the FBW is about re-activating stations one and nine, then. It may also help with flight characteristics generally, and it's also possible that it is a better idea, as the people who understand how to fix analog and electro-mechanical stuff fade away. Plus this description of the current system sounds scary.
Previous incarnations of the jet were equipped with a dual-channel, high-authority, three-axis control augmentation system superimposed on top of a hydro-mechanical system.
So the FBW is about re-activating stations one and nine, then. It may also help with flight characteristics generally, and it's also possible that it is a better idea, as the people who understand how to fix analog and electro-mechanical stuff fade away. Plus this description of the current system sounds scary.
Previous incarnations of the jet were equipped with a dual-channel, high-authority, three-axis control augmentation system superimposed on top of a hydro-mechanical system.
Last edited by LowObservable; 16th Apr 2013 at 21:44.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 52
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bevo,
That's been in the stars for a long time already.
Next week thursday all other alternatives will be presented in the parliament but it seems unlikely (but not at all impossible) that they are going for anything other than the F35, numbers will be much lower than originally planned, the ruling party today stated that even a number as low as 33 is acceptable and workeable.
The problem is that the ruling party VVD (right wing liberal democrats) is very much in bed with LM and Dutch companies involved in the JSF.
The upper echelon of the military (particulary the Air force) is very US oriented, they have wet dream about having another longterm overseas training base in the US which means many visits and longterm stays in the US, which is much prefered over France, cold Sweden or some boring base in the UK; Spain or Germany.
The other services, Army and Navy however have nightmares about the havoc the F35 is going to inflict on the rest of the defense budget, also (and I know this very first hand) the rest of the Air Force is having sleepless nights about future opportunities, 33-38 (of which 6 in the US on a permanent base) aircraft that are substantially more expensive to operate on a per hour base and much of the maintenance (let alone upgrades) which can only be done by LM related private externa companies (contractors)
is going to cut deeply on all available positions in the Dutch Air Force.
Also supporting aircraft like their Trainers or refuellers can be used much less, even further degrading the available positions.
This thing is going to handicap their entire Military, they are now betting heavily on a deeper partnership with other NATO allies (preferably neighbouring nations) to alleviate some of their biggest concerns regarding quantity issues.
With a little bit of bad luck ,and history says that it is completely within the realms of possibilities, there is going to be a steep learning curve in the beginning of its (F35) operational life.
This will inevitably lead to a hightened accident rate for the first 10-15 years.
Every lost F35 will be nothing less than a substantial loss of available power.
Flying the F35 around the good weather bases like they do now in the US is nothing like operating in a highly used airspace, with sometimes very challenging weather conditions in the hands of pilots with widely varying levels of experience.
Besides the introduction of this new platform, they are also going to have to rewrite a lot of the tactics syllabus to compensate for the new feature of stealth, I'm really wondering how they will make this workeable with the limited anount of flying time they will have.
The US , UK and countries like Israel Norway and Singapore, who all have money and resources to burn can maybe make full use of the full capabilities the F35 promises to achieve.
But countries that are more financially challenged will have some real problems achieving the same level of capacity.
Besides all this the question remains, what is the justification for the JSF, the few advantages it offers over its competitiors is completely negated by the fact that countries like the Netherlands have no need for these capabilities.
Also I still remember the beginning of the MLU program for our F16's and how much we added to that upgrade coupled with the fact that many of the F16's subsystems could be developped by our own industries, all that is lost with the F35, for every bolt, codeline or weapon that needs changing we'll be forced to call and pay what LM dictates (no contract can foresee the future that well and predict all the costs long ahead).
This is a historic blunder of epic proportions an it will bring many airforces/militaries down to their knees or severely cripple their longterm prospects.
Today we still have a big edge on most of our most likely future adversaries, most of that edge comes from the fact that the balance between technological capabilities, training doctrine and quantity of material and personnel is still fairly good, the F35 will effectively change that and destabelize it for the worse.
Also as a final thought exercise on what the future can bring for us European nations;
Lately their have been many developments in the world that indicate that the future will most likely hold many challenges for us , on many accounts more than for our US allies.
Contrary to the vast resources the US uncovered in the last decade (OIL and GAS reserves more than anybody else in the world), we in Europe have very little of such reserves.
This means that the Us can (and will) stop fixating on the Middle East and Russia and relay their interests on where they deem them to be served the best, namely the Far East.
We , on the other hand, will be forced to protect our interests and also will need to protect ourselves just because we are located so close to these troubled areas in the world.
We just cannot afford to be fully dependant on the US when it comes to stuff as important as a frontline fighter, certainly not with the terms attached with the JSF (F18, F15 could be acceptable).
We absolutely need to retain the ability to design, build and operate high end fighters like we did before.
Luckily we have all that we need for now and still posses the ability the stay at the edge(forefront) of weaponsystem development.
The Gripen NG, RAFALE and TYPHOON can serve all our needs well into the next couple of decades provided we keep developping upgrades and expand upon their existing capabilities.
In 15-20 years we might want to start thinking about making our own replacment for our DELTA-CANARDS.
Also many people might not like the idea but the defense industry is also a good exporting industry, no need to leave that entirely to our US friends when we can make and sell a valid product ourselves.
That's been in the stars for a long time already.
Next week thursday all other alternatives will be presented in the parliament but it seems unlikely (but not at all impossible) that they are going for anything other than the F35, numbers will be much lower than originally planned, the ruling party today stated that even a number as low as 33 is acceptable and workeable.
The problem is that the ruling party VVD (right wing liberal democrats) is very much in bed with LM and Dutch companies involved in the JSF.
The upper echelon of the military (particulary the Air force) is very US oriented, they have wet dream about having another longterm overseas training base in the US which means many visits and longterm stays in the US, which is much prefered over France, cold Sweden or some boring base in the UK; Spain or Germany.
The other services, Army and Navy however have nightmares about the havoc the F35 is going to inflict on the rest of the defense budget, also (and I know this very first hand) the rest of the Air Force is having sleepless nights about future opportunities, 33-38 (of which 6 in the US on a permanent base) aircraft that are substantially more expensive to operate on a per hour base and much of the maintenance (let alone upgrades) which can only be done by LM related private externa companies (contractors)
is going to cut deeply on all available positions in the Dutch Air Force.
Also supporting aircraft like their Trainers or refuellers can be used much less, even further degrading the available positions.
This thing is going to handicap their entire Military, they are now betting heavily on a deeper partnership with other NATO allies (preferably neighbouring nations) to alleviate some of their biggest concerns regarding quantity issues.
With a little bit of bad luck ,and history says that it is completely within the realms of possibilities, there is going to be a steep learning curve in the beginning of its (F35) operational life.
This will inevitably lead to a hightened accident rate for the first 10-15 years.
Every lost F35 will be nothing less than a substantial loss of available power.
Flying the F35 around the good weather bases like they do now in the US is nothing like operating in a highly used airspace, with sometimes very challenging weather conditions in the hands of pilots with widely varying levels of experience.
Besides the introduction of this new platform, they are also going to have to rewrite a lot of the tactics syllabus to compensate for the new feature of stealth, I'm really wondering how they will make this workeable with the limited anount of flying time they will have.
The US , UK and countries like Israel Norway and Singapore, who all have money and resources to burn can maybe make full use of the full capabilities the F35 promises to achieve.
But countries that are more financially challenged will have some real problems achieving the same level of capacity.
Besides all this the question remains, what is the justification for the JSF, the few advantages it offers over its competitiors is completely negated by the fact that countries like the Netherlands have no need for these capabilities.
Also I still remember the beginning of the MLU program for our F16's and how much we added to that upgrade coupled with the fact that many of the F16's subsystems could be developped by our own industries, all that is lost with the F35, for every bolt, codeline or weapon that needs changing we'll be forced to call and pay what LM dictates (no contract can foresee the future that well and predict all the costs long ahead).
This is a historic blunder of epic proportions an it will bring many airforces/militaries down to their knees or severely cripple their longterm prospects.
Today we still have a big edge on most of our most likely future adversaries, most of that edge comes from the fact that the balance between technological capabilities, training doctrine and quantity of material and personnel is still fairly good, the F35 will effectively change that and destabelize it for the worse.
Also as a final thought exercise on what the future can bring for us European nations;
Lately their have been many developments in the world that indicate that the future will most likely hold many challenges for us , on many accounts more than for our US allies.
Contrary to the vast resources the US uncovered in the last decade (OIL and GAS reserves more than anybody else in the world), we in Europe have very little of such reserves.
This means that the Us can (and will) stop fixating on the Middle East and Russia and relay their interests on where they deem them to be served the best, namely the Far East.
We , on the other hand, will be forced to protect our interests and also will need to protect ourselves just because we are located so close to these troubled areas in the world.
We just cannot afford to be fully dependant on the US when it comes to stuff as important as a frontline fighter, certainly not with the terms attached with the JSF (F18, F15 could be acceptable).
We absolutely need to retain the ability to design, build and operate high end fighters like we did before.
Luckily we have all that we need for now and still posses the ability the stay at the edge(forefront) of weaponsystem development.
The Gripen NG, RAFALE and TYPHOON can serve all our needs well into the next couple of decades provided we keep developping upgrades and expand upon their existing capabilities.
In 15-20 years we might want to start thinking about making our own replacment for our DELTA-CANARDS.
Also many people might not like the idea but the defense industry is also a good exporting industry, no need to leave that entirely to our US friends when we can make and sell a valid product ourselves.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It may also help with flight characteristics generally
-RP
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CM...well it seems you need to be part of the RAF F-35 team to know.
As well as Foreign threats, would anyone be surprised if the air forces would also sim their aircraft, including the Typhoon for the RAF and Super Hornet for the RAAF against the F-35?
As well as Foreign threats, would anyone be surprised if the air forces would also sim their aircraft, including the Typhoon for the RAF and Super Hornet for the RAAF against the F-35?
Mr Liberson : Our current assessment that we speak of is: greater than 6 to 1 relative loss exchange ratio against in 4 versus 8 engagement scenarios—four blue at 35s versus eight advanced red threats in the 2015 to 2020 time frame.
Air Cdre Bentley : ... We have provided that analysis to all the participating nations and to all their officials. They have all of the details of those threats and all of the details of those analyses. Each of those nations, each of those experts in those nations, have taken that analysis and have done analysis of their own and have come up with an agreed position, that the F35 is the best aeroplane for them.
Mr Burbage : ...We do not give one side an advantage or a disadvantage; we put the real data from the airplanes in the simulation and they run up many, many runs to get the numbers we are talking about.
Mr Liberson : And it is very important to note that our constructive simulations that Mr Burbage talks about [is] without the pilot in the loop [and] are the lowest number that we talk about—the greater than six to one. When we include the pilot in the loop activities, they even do better when we include all of that in our partner manned tactical simulation facility.
Mr Burbage : We actually have a fifth-gen airplane flying today. The F22 has been in many exercises. We have one of the pilots here who flew it and they can tell you that in any real-world event it is much better than the simulations forecast. We have F35 flying today; it has not been put into that scenario yet, but we have very high quality information on the capability of the sensors and the capability of the airplane, and we have represented the airplane fairly and appropriately in these large-scale campaign models that we are using.
But it is not just us—it is our air force; it is your air force; it is all the other participating nations that do this; it is our navy and our marine corps that do these exercises. It is not Lockheed in a closet genning up some sort of result.
Air Cdre Bentley : ... We have provided that analysis to all the participating nations and to all their officials. They have all of the details of those threats and all of the details of those analyses. Each of those nations, each of those experts in those nations, have taken that analysis and have done analysis of their own and have come up with an agreed position, that the F35 is the best aeroplane for them.
Mr Burbage : ...We do not give one side an advantage or a disadvantage; we put the real data from the airplanes in the simulation and they run up many, many runs to get the numbers we are talking about.
Mr Liberson : And it is very important to note that our constructive simulations that Mr Burbage talks about [is] without the pilot in the loop [and] are the lowest number that we talk about—the greater than six to one. When we include the pilot in the loop activities, they even do better when we include all of that in our partner manned tactical simulation facility.
Mr Burbage : We actually have a fifth-gen airplane flying today. The F22 has been in many exercises. We have one of the pilots here who flew it and they can tell you that in any real-world event it is much better than the simulations forecast. We have F35 flying today; it has not been put into that scenario yet, but we have very high quality information on the capability of the sensors and the capability of the airplane, and we have represented the airplane fairly and appropriately in these large-scale campaign models that we are using.
But it is not just us—it is our air force; it is your air force; it is all the other participating nations that do this; it is our navy and our marine corps that do these exercises. It is not Lockheed in a closet genning up some sort of result.
Last edited by JSFfan; 17th Apr 2013 at 01:15.
Halloween Jack,
I have asked the question and been ignored. Moomin recently asked for credentials at Post#1856:
and you have asked the question. As Biggus rightly said at Post#1869,
And he was absolutely right. All we got was another, irrelavent quote.
Given the lack of substance of his posts and his obvious lack of understanding of anything to do with military aviation and technology, one should probably assume that he is a young, amature enthusiast with more zeal than insight - I'm sure there's a term for that. Unfortunately, the random nature of his posts are not helping the debate here as he has a tendency to pass off assumption and incorrect analysis as fact - not deliberately, I don't think. To be honest, I think at the moment he is doing more harm to the pro-JSF lobby's case because of the number of discredited claims he makes.
I'm not trying to have a go here, I just think it's important to make it clear which posters are reliable and which are not.
I have asked the question and been ignored. Moomin recently asked for credentials at Post#1856:
Can I ask if you are either a pilot or an engineer involved in military aerospace activities? Otherwise it seems like a statement designed to get scorn and ridicule poured on you.
The answer's no, as I expect you already know, but you won't get that response - just more internet quotes!
Given the lack of substance of his posts and his obvious lack of understanding of anything to do with military aviation and technology, one should probably assume that he is a young, amature enthusiast with more zeal than insight - I'm sure there's a term for that. Unfortunately, the random nature of his posts are not helping the debate here as he has a tendency to pass off assumption and incorrect analysis as fact - not deliberately, I don't think. To be honest, I think at the moment he is doing more harm to the pro-JSF lobby's case because of the number of discredited claims he makes.
I'm not trying to have a go here, I just think it's important to make it clear which posters are reliable and which are not.
Last edited by Courtney Mil; 17th Apr 2013 at 09:01.
kbrockman,
Thank you for your excellent post. A very interesting piece of analysis. Not sure about your confidence in the UK economy, though. I think what you've said there probably applies to some degree to all potential customers.
Thank you for your excellent post. A very interesting piece of analysis. Not sure about your confidence in the UK economy, though. I think what you've said there probably applies to some degree to all potential customers.
Mr Liberson : Our current assessment that we speak of is: greater than 6 to 1 relative loss exchange ratio against in 4 versus 8 engagement scenarios—four blue at 35s versus eight advanced red threats in the 2015 to 2020 time frame.
So why did we give LockMart all that money to develop the F-22? Should we not be retiring it, and spending the giga$ programmed for its upgrade on a new AAM for the F-35?
I try not to do math in public, but this sounds like 4x F-35s with a total of 16 AIM-120s versus 8x Su-35s with 48-64 AAMs (R-77 + R-73, both in advanced versions).
On the basis of claimed and demonstrated performance, T/W, wing loading &c, aircraft performance = advantage Sukhoi.
In this scenario (and people who fly these things, jump in and correct me) I presumably want to use my datalinks &c to target each bogey with two AIM-120s, because if I fire everything and do not win decisively, any one of the surviving (and
ed-off) Sukhois can kill all of us like a fox in the chicken run - the "run" in this case being fenced in by kinematics.
That means an average Pk around 0.5 for AMRAAM (very rough - some of my AMRAAM pairs will both kill the same target and some will fail) which is quite reasonable as long as the targets don't do anything effective - but the more the targets anticipate, evade and jam, the closer you have to get to achieve that kind of Pk.
So the key factors in getting that 6:1 are how close the JSFs can get without being detected, and whether/when/how the targets respond to the attack. That's when you have to start guessing about the capability of the Su's radar, IRST and EW suite.
Conclusion 1: The results of such sims are highly dependent on assumptions based on guesswork and analysis, regardless of classification level.
Conclusion 2: The CLER will be extremely sensitive to detection range. For instance, if improved IRST detects and tracks reliably beyond the missile's high-Pk launch range, the JSF may be entering a world of pain.
Conclusion 3: The aforementioned gigabucks being spent to keep the F-22 alive and up-to-date says that the USAF doesn't believe this 6:1 malarkey.
So why did we give LockMart all that money to develop the F-22? Should we not be retiring it, and spending the giga$ programmed for its upgrade on a new AAM for the F-35?
I try not to do math in public, but this sounds like 4x F-35s with a total of 16 AIM-120s versus 8x Su-35s with 48-64 AAMs (R-77 + R-73, both in advanced versions).
On the basis of claimed and demonstrated performance, T/W, wing loading &c, aircraft performance = advantage Sukhoi.
In this scenario (and people who fly these things, jump in and correct me) I presumably want to use my datalinks &c to target each bogey with two AIM-120s, because if I fire everything and do not win decisively, any one of the surviving (and
ed-off) Sukhois can kill all of us like a fox in the chicken run - the "run" in this case being fenced in by kinematics. That means an average Pk around 0.5 for AMRAAM (very rough - some of my AMRAAM pairs will both kill the same target and some will fail) which is quite reasonable as long as the targets don't do anything effective - but the more the targets anticipate, evade and jam, the closer you have to get to achieve that kind of Pk.
So the key factors in getting that 6:1 are how close the JSFs can get without being detected, and whether/when/how the targets respond to the attack. That's when you have to start guessing about the capability of the Su's radar, IRST and EW suite.
Conclusion 1: The results of such sims are highly dependent on assumptions based on guesswork and analysis, regardless of classification level.
Conclusion 2: The CLER will be extremely sensitive to detection range. For instance, if improved IRST detects and tracks reliably beyond the missile's high-Pk launch range, the JSF may be entering a world of pain.
Conclusion 3: The aforementioned gigabucks being spent to keep the F-22 alive and up-to-date says that the USAF doesn't believe this 6:1 malarkey.
Last edited by LowObservable; 17th Apr 2013 at 12:38.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CM, engines is the only poster here I listen to, everyone else is shear speculation and LO's above post is a very good example of it
Last edited by JSFfan; 17th Apr 2013 at 12:44.
Actually, LO's post is rather good. If you would like to specify anything you know to be incorrect in his post, perhaps we can both help you out with some explanation. Bear in mind his conclusions are his own, whcich parts of the analysis do you not like?
Also remember we went through all the simulation stuff a couple of weeks ago and you admitted to not understanding it then, so let's not go there again.
Also remember we went through all the simulation stuff a couple of weeks ago and you admitted to not understanding it then, so let's not go there again.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London
Age: 64
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting thread about the Dutch F35 cancellation:-
Dutch Cancel Order for F-35 JSF|F-35|Forum :: F-16.net
Dutch Cancel Order for F-35 JSF|F-35|Forum :: F-16.net
If the Dutch do withdraw could this be the encouragement other wavering European participants need to pull the plug too?
Last edited by Courtney Mil; 17th Apr 2013 at 16:01.
CM - Nobody wants to incur the wrath that will come down upon the first rat to leap over the side. And the problem with the Dutch situation is that while there's a majority coalition that agrees that the idea that JSF is a bad thing, they agree on the cube root of -all else.
-all else.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting thread about the Dutch F35 cancellation:-
Dutch Cancel Order for F-35 JSF|F-35|Forum :: F-16.net
Dutch Cancel Order for F-35 JSF|F-35|Forum :: F-16.net
The reality is that it's far more likely that the Dutch will either just buy less of them or procure later in smaller drips and drops or hang on until the aircraft goes into full rate production and then purchase, and I'm sure there will be varying levels of economic impact for local industries if the Dutch go that route and a corresponding increase in everyone elses purchase hence immense political presure. So you have the double hit of displeasing your political allies, your local aerospace industry and the worker/unions involved.
The problem with any re-tendering process at this point is that it will take years and then you'll have a different set of industrial/political wrangling (Boeing don't have any existing workshare agreements for the F18, and SAAB have a plane in development that carries halfish the armament that the F35 does and has less range than the F35B) to go through with no firm date on your aircraft because your armed forces will inevitably want specific requirements embodying in the purchase all of their asssumptions and planning will have been for this other aircraft and will thus have to change adding yet more delay and cost.
Last edited by eaglemmoomin; 17th Apr 2013 at 17:02.