F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Neverland
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HH,
Just be quite and don't challenge or ask any awkward questions or point out the utter failure of the project to date.
That's not allowed.
As long as it is in service one day it doesn't matter how much it cost or how long it took to be operationally useful, anybody who understands the truth knows that.
If you don't know that then you are not part of the need to know so how dare you have the bare faced cheek to point out little unimportant things like the soaring (out of control?) costs for a completely non-operational platform. (Still non-operational several years after it's intended in service date. Of course the opposition will have been doing nothing in that time, they are all good sports.)
Just be quite and don't challenge or ask any awkward questions or point out the utter failure of the project to date.
That's not allowed.
As long as it is in service one day it doesn't matter how much it cost or how long it took to be operationally useful, anybody who understands the truth knows that.
If you don't know that then you are not part of the need to know so how dare you have the bare faced cheek to point out little unimportant things like the soaring (out of control?) costs for a completely non-operational platform. (Still non-operational several years after it's intended in service date. Of course the opposition will have been doing nothing in that time, they are all good sports.)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know this "sensor fusion" thing, so that a number of F35 can combine their sensor data for the unrivalled "big picture",
How does that work when they are meant to be stealthy and non emitting??????
Almost as laughable as rear reference signals for AAM's.
Well actually not.
How does that work when they are meant to be stealthy and non emitting??????
Almost as laughable as rear reference signals for AAM's.
Well actually not.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year 2019 and beyond should be big for the F-35…
New U.S. Stealth Jet Can?t Fire Its Gun Until 2019 - The Daily Beast
Relative to the $1.5 Trillion number: Excerpts from a WSJ article written by USN Vice-Admiral, Norbert R. Ryan, Jr.
New U.S. Stealth Jet Can?t Fire Its Gun Until 2019 - The Daily Beast
Relative to the $1.5 Trillion number: Excerpts from a WSJ article written by USN Vice-Admiral, Norbert R. Ryan, Jr.
In 2013 alone, the Government Accountability Office reported that the Pentagon’s top 85 major defense-acquisition programs experienced overruns of nearly $411 billion. Reporter Andrew Tilghman of the Military Times observed that this amount in itself is almost enough to cover the entire cost of sequestration for the Defense Department.
The Ford-class aircraft carrier has seen cost overruns of $2 billion. The price tag of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has topped out at $1.5 trillion and is now $160 billion over budget. Raiding military health-care plans for $2.6 billion in savings over six years suggests that Congress is looking in the wrong places to rein in spending.
Insisting, as some observers in and out of the military do, that weapons systems must be immune to cutbacks inevitably means that the money must be taken out of personnel. That’s akin to forcing soldiers to pay for their own bullets.
The new congressional leadership should remember that nothing is more important to America’s national security than protecting the one weapon system that has never failed—the men and women of the uniformed services.
Mr. Ryan, a retired U.S. Navy vice admiral, is president of the Military Officers Association of America.
The Ford-class aircraft carrier has seen cost overruns of $2 billion. The price tag of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has topped out at $1.5 trillion and is now $160 billion over budget. Raiding military health-care plans for $2.6 billion in savings over six years suggests that Congress is looking in the wrong places to rein in spending.
Insisting, as some observers in and out of the military do, that weapons systems must be immune to cutbacks inevitably means that the money must be taken out of personnel. That’s akin to forcing soldiers to pay for their own bullets.
The new congressional leadership should remember that nothing is more important to America’s national security than protecting the one weapon system that has never failed—the men and women of the uniformed services.
Mr. Ryan, a retired U.S. Navy vice admiral, is president of the Military Officers Association of America.
(Real life) Kill ratios are grossly misrepresentative of the quality of a jet as a real adversary has never been found. A well-trained, numerically equal, adversary. Not to say they are bad jets.
What is the Top Gun school / Red Flag etc. kill ratio of the F-15 for example? Probably classified and a lot lower.
What is the Top Gun school / Red Flag etc. kill ratio of the F-15 for example? Probably classified and a lot lower.
The real world scores of the F-15, F-16 and Sea Harrier are impressive by ANY measure and are important to the debate. They might not be peer on peer data, but are the best we have for real data. Yes exercises data helps too, but we can not miss the data we have from real conflicts.
We have learned tons of lessons from ground, sea and air conflict since 1945. By your reasoning they should not count because they were not against a peer foe?
These posts tend to focus to focus on weapon vs. weapon (F-35 vs PAK etc), but a better focus is on doctrine, support and the whole picture. We may (hopefully) never know how gen 5 planes fight each other in a real peer war. My money is still that the best "system" will have the edge. If that is the F-35 supported by tankers, AWACS, jammers, and the best training and support you can buy, it will be pretty good. US doctrine is not based on a "fair" knife fight.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glad,
Perhaps I can help here a little on F-35 systems operation. The following information uses open sources, by the way.
The F-35 'data fusion' (or 'sensor fusion' if you prefer) across platforms is supported by the MADL system (Multifunction Advanced Data Link), which is installed on the platform in a number of locations so as to provide full spherical coverage.
This is a steered beam system, which uses differential GPS to allow pairs of aircraft to establish a beam link. Yes, the jets are transmitting, but the system is designed for Low Probability of Intercept (LPI), like modern radar altimeters and other RF systems.
There's some information out there, understandably restricted at this stage.
Hope this helps,
Best regards
Engines
Perhaps I can help here a little on F-35 systems operation. The following information uses open sources, by the way.
The F-35 'data fusion' (or 'sensor fusion' if you prefer) across platforms is supported by the MADL system (Multifunction Advanced Data Link), which is installed on the platform in a number of locations so as to provide full spherical coverage.
This is a steered beam system, which uses differential GPS to allow pairs of aircraft to establish a beam link. Yes, the jets are transmitting, but the system is designed for Low Probability of Intercept (LPI), like modern radar altimeters and other RF systems.
There's some information out there, understandably restricted at this stage.
Hope this helps,
Best regards
Engines
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Engines, I think I can safely say we all appreciate your continuing inputs to this discussion. 
From your description I would imagine ## some low powered microwave link ## perhaps ? laser atmospherics could hinder even more unless power was ramped right up....
Anyway, I'm quite into SAT TV, No not ***, I have a steerable dish [from 50 ish east to 40 west] and I once calculated, in a moment of total nerd-ism I admit, the distance [at the sat end] moving my dish 0.1 degree, it worked out at about 135 miles give or take [quite] a bit depending on sat elevation as from my location.
Even so I was able to have only a slight loss of signal quality at the receiver. Now, obviously, the scale of distances are magnitudes less, yes, but I remain unconvinced that these signals are intercept proof, not least the fact that the GPS differential calculation signal must start and end "somewhere" for the receiver/transmitter aircraft subsystem to point the datalink in the correct 4 dimensional position in the first place. YES?
Or perhaps not.
From your description I would imagine ## some low powered microwave link ## perhaps ? laser
atmospherics could hinder even more unless power was ramped right up.... Anyway, I'm quite into SAT TV, No not ***, I have a steerable dish [from 50 ish east to 40 west] and I once calculated, in a moment of total nerd-ism I admit, the distance [at the sat end] moving my dish 0.1 degree, it worked out at about 135 miles give or take [quite] a bit depending on sat elevation as from my location.
Even so I was able to have only a slight loss of signal quality at the receiver. Now, obviously, the scale of distances are magnitudes less, yes, but I remain unconvinced that these signals are intercept proof, not least the fact that the GPS differential calculation signal must start and end "somewhere" for the receiver/transmitter aircraft subsystem to point the datalink in the correct 4 dimensional position in the first place. YES?
Or perhaps not.
Last edited by glad rag; 31st Dec 2014 at 17:41.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I get what you are saying, but IMO real life kill ratios matter quite a bit. Those reflect the wars that have been fought in the last 40+ years. Do they reflect true peer on peer conflict with the best from the first world? No, but they reflect reality. The days of the king sending out his best knight to deul the other kings best knight have passed some time ago.
The real world scores of the F-15, F-16 and Sea Harrier are impressive by ANY measure and are important to the debate. They might not be peer on peer data, but are the best we have for real data. Yes exercises data helps too, but we can not miss the data we have from real conflicts.
We have learned tons of lessons from ground, sea and air conflict since 1945. By your reasoning they should not count because they were not against a peer foe?
These posts tend to focus to focus on weapon vs. weapon (F-35 vs PAK etc), but a better focus is on doctrine, support and the whole picture. We may (hopefully) never know how gen 5 planes fight each other in a real peer war. My money is still that the best "system" will have the edge. If that is the F-35 supported by tankers, AWACS, jammers, and the best training and support you can buy, it will be pretty good. US doctrine is not based on a "fair" knife fight.
The real world scores of the F-15, F-16 and Sea Harrier are impressive by ANY measure and are important to the debate. They might not be peer on peer data, but are the best we have for real data. Yes exercises data helps too, but we can not miss the data we have from real conflicts.
We have learned tons of lessons from ground, sea and air conflict since 1945. By your reasoning they should not count because they were not against a peer foe?
These posts tend to focus to focus on weapon vs. weapon (F-35 vs PAK etc), but a better focus is on doctrine, support and the whole picture. We may (hopefully) never know how gen 5 planes fight each other in a real peer war. My money is still that the best "system" will have the edge. If that is the F-35 supported by tankers, AWACS, jammers, and the best training and support you can buy, it will be pretty good. US doctrine is not based on a "fair" knife fight.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remain unconvinced that these signals are intercept proof,
MADL appears to work more or less. The first problem is that it can't talk to anything else. I've also heard a concern that its operating waveband has been assigned to satellite HDTV. This may be rumor, but after the B-2 radar fiasco (its bandwidth also got assigned to commercial satellites, with the result that a B-2 in the wrong place at the wrong time could zap an on-orbit transponder) it is not entirely unbelievable.
Also - nothing new about the gun being unavailable until Block 3F. However, if the stealth and sensor fusion are anything like as good as they claim, any pilot is going to need a lot more luck and prowess getting out of a guns duel with a Su-35 than he demonstrated getting into it.
Also - nothing new about the gun being unavailable until Block 3F. However, if the stealth and sensor fusion are anything like as good as they claim, any pilot is going to need a lot more luck and prowess getting out of a guns duel with a Su-35 than he demonstrated getting into it.
Last edited by LowObservable; 31st Dec 2014 at 19:01.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to Wiki it's in the Ku band. I imagine F-35 will be running Link-16 in passive most of the time, so at least they'll be able to receive info from the supporting heavies. Barring jamming, burn through, LOS, body masking and all that; same goes for GPS/INS.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glad,
Thanks for the thanks. To pick up on your follow on questions...
The MADL antennae are hexagonal arrays that use electronic beam steering. There are at least five located on the airframe (two are easily visible on the aft ends of the fairings at the base of each fin). The MADL systems establish the link using the GPS co-ordinates that are shared between the aircraft, and you are correct - the differential calculation using the two (moving) end points is then used to keep the beams lined up. It's certainly an RF system.
The system is designed to support F-35 operations at relatively close ranges (less than 20km) with high data rates. I can't say much more because I don't know much more. I do know that the system works, and is an important element of F-35 operational assumptions.
Yes, F-35 also uses Link 16.
Hope this helps,
Best Regards
Engines
Thanks for the thanks. To pick up on your follow on questions...
The MADL antennae are hexagonal arrays that use electronic beam steering. There are at least five located on the airframe (two are easily visible on the aft ends of the fairings at the base of each fin). The MADL systems establish the link using the GPS co-ordinates that are shared between the aircraft, and you are correct - the differential calculation using the two (moving) end points is then used to keep the beams lined up. It's certainly an RF system.
The system is designed to support F-35 operations at relatively close ranges (less than 20km) with high data rates. I can't say much more because I don't know much more. I do know that the system works, and is an important element of F-35 operational assumptions.
Yes, F-35 also uses Link 16.
Hope this helps,
Best Regards
Engines
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snafu -
Your servant, kneeling, cringingly craves your forgiveness - I realise you are correct and that a mere mortal such as I, am totally unfit to understand the metaphysics of f-35 pricing
A "price" in this case is a tautological construct meaning "a vast number that cannot be computed" ie similar to infinity +1.
I understand that that some of those "in the know" have stated that to NAME a price is to immediatley remove the possibilty that that number will ever occur in reality as naming it brings it into the current Universe.
In fact we should be thinking of "Hawking Pricing" where an infinity of prices, all very large, exist outside our space-time-dollar continuim
I have taken out my brain and put in ice box to cool down
Your servant, kneeling, cringingly craves your forgiveness - I realise you are correct and that a mere mortal such as I, am totally unfit to understand the metaphysics of f-35 pricing
A "price" in this case is a tautological construct meaning "a vast number that cannot be computed" ie similar to infinity +1.
I understand that that some of those "in the know" have stated that to NAME a price is to immediatley remove the possibilty that that number will ever occur in reality as naming it brings it into the current Universe.
In fact we should be thinking of "Hawking Pricing" where an infinity of prices, all very large, exist outside our space-time-dollar continuim
I have taken out my brain and put in ice box to cool down
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I think the F35, like the Typhoon before it are perfect projects.
We didn't need the Typhoon 15 years ago and we don't need the F35 now.
What we do need is the latest jet just before we have a real need. Properly you need a crystal ball, but while the existing kit works and can beat the existing as threat then nothing is lost through system slippage.
We didn't need the Typhoon 15 years ago and we don't need the F35 now.
What we do need is the latest jet just before we have a real need. Properly you need a crystal ball, but while the existing kit works and can beat the existing as threat then nothing is lost through system slippage.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
unfortunatltey the logical end to that argument is a point I've made before - when did the RAF last shoot down an enemy fighter???
I suspect it 1945 - the other kills were on attachment to the US, Australia, the Fleet Air Arm (shudder!!) etc etc
Sooo in theory we really never needed any of that kit in retrospect
Even in my most painful posts I find that just a leetle too far...............
I suspect it 1945 - the other kills were on attachment to the US, Australia, the Fleet Air Arm (shudder!!) etc etc
Sooo in theory we really never needed any of that kit in retrospect
Even in my most painful posts I find that just a leetle too far...............
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
HH, true to a point except our aim is defence and deterrence. Provided the kit we have today offers sufficient capability to deter then we don't need better kit today.
Where we need to use the kit, provided we have sufficient numbers of the right capability today then we don't need new kit until tomorrow.
I am not advocating no F35 just don't need it until we have a requirement, like equipping a carrier or replacing the GR4.
Where we need to use the kit, provided we have sufficient numbers of the right capability today then we don't need new kit until tomorrow.
I am not advocating no F35 just don't need it until we have a requirement, like equipping a carrier or replacing the GR4.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
100% agreement
wehave to have SOMETHING, SOMETIME but this is a classic case of doing what our American friends suggest when we could well do with a few more squadrons of Typhoons
wehave to have SOMETHING, SOMETIME but this is a classic case of doing what our American friends suggest when we could well do with a few more squadrons of Typhoons
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Typhoon may well have been a solution if it had not been decided to build to VSTOL Aircraft Carriers, or indeed two aircraft carriers.
It can be argued that if the French had remained in the consortium and had agreement had been made to have a carrier capable what is now Typhoon, vis Rafale M, things would be rather different.
It can be argued that if the French had remained in the consortium and had agreement had been made to have a carrier capable what is now Typhoon, vis Rafale M, things would be rather different.