The 'Gen 4.5' Supers with AESA have the full F-35 capability minus the stealth but with actual range, speed, agility, redundancy and reliability. You have to question whether the F/A-18 may be the saviour in the short to medium term.

This is exactly what's wrong with our DoD procurement system today. You would think Frank would be the most irate at the situation, but nooooo! "We are still in development, still have work to do", will 20-25 years be enough to get it done?:eek:

TD

Given the convoluted history of several programs being merged into the JSF program, I think the stage was pretty much set for a single engine. Yes, VSTOL mas a major driver for the single engine design, but so did risk, weight and cost. A precursor to JSF was CAST, a common "affordable" platform with a single 119 derivative engine part of the mix from early on.

One requirement that seemed to carry from the CAST to the JSF program was the max weight of 24,000 lbs- the max a single 119 derivative was forcasted to lift.

DARPA / Navy Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter (CALF) 1993-1994

It would be interesting to know what the USMC is thinking of doing next.

Making an offer to Spain and Italy for their AV8s?

How long will it be before the Situational Awareness suite from the F35 is put on an F15 or F/A 18 to test it out properly, which might result it it being retrofitted to parts of the 4.5 gen fleet.

Frank displays an amazing attitude to perceived failure of a major part of the Pentagon's largest ever project.

What really is interesting and slightly worrying is the rate at which the USMC is getting a lot of their core main acquisition programs so wrong, the F35B, the LHA's which in hindsight seemed a bonkers idea (2 iso the initial 5) , and many others still view the V22 as a big clusterf#&$k that keeps on creating a lot of problems at enormous costs.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/you...k-db72a8a23ccf

So, a V-22 using 'high-tech' assistance to land in brownout is unsafe, but a helicopter doing the same is safer? Not sure I follow that...

I've spoken to AFSOC operators who love the CV-22 and the capabilities it brings them, and they've got no reason to lie.

Pentagon Explains F-35 Fire Investigation Findings Published on Jul 15, 2014

F-35 still not cancelled.
(PS, this thread is not for whinging about the V-22. There is another thread for that).

Since it is still not cancelled ...

Sweden pulls out of competition for Danish F-16 replacement, believing it was biased in favour of the F-35A...

Sweden Drops Out Of Denmark Fighter Competition | Defense content from Aviation Week

-RP

...minus the sensor data fusion, minus the MADL, minus the DAS, minus the APG-81, minus the EOTS...

So is the F-35 at the moment! :} ;)

-RP

Here: http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/490...ml#post8575600

A post on the status of the USMC transition from the CH-46 to the MV-22B:
http://www.pprune.org/8575600-post538.html

Range is dependent on external tanks, which the F-35 can also carry (I realize this reduces low observability) the Super Hornet is slow and draggy when carrying external ordnance, agility does not equal maneuverability but the weight to wing area is very similar between the two when similarly configured, if you're dead set on two engines well OK, time will tell if the F-35 turns out to be reliable.

On message i see FA18... The systems other platforms have may not have the names you mention but those systems do the exact same thing that these do...well actually they don't because in many cases the other systems are operational and useful today...and at a fraction of the cost...

You don't know what they do, do you Snafu351?

For example - DAS = distributed aperture sensor.

This is a set of 6 IR cameras placed around the aircraft, and the F-35 is the only US aircraft with a full DAS system.

The DAS provides three basic categories of functions in every direction simultaneously:

• Missile detection and tracking (including launch point detection and countermeasure cueing)
• Aircraft detection and tracking (Situational awareness, IRST, & air-to-air weapons cueing)
• Imagery for cockpit displays and pilot vision (imagery displayed onto the helmet mounted display)

While the other aircraft have one or two cameras, they don't really do more than let him see better in a narrow field of view in small areas. Most of their visibility of with their own eyes, out of the canopy.

The F-35's DAS allows the pilot to see anywhere he turns his head - ahead, up, down, and backwards. Its as if the plane isn't there - if he looks down he doesn't see the floor of the cockpit like he would on every other US fighter - he sees what is below the aircraft. And yes, DAS is working on the F-35 aircraft that the USAF/USMC/USN are flying.

But not ship - and it is available for integration on other platforms.

Mind you, not sure that " DAS is working on the F-35 aircraft that the USAF/USMC/USN are flying." adequately explains the current situation. Permit m to quote from the DOT&E FY2013 Annual Report on the F35...

.....October reports for the latest Block 2B mission systems software increment in flight test show a rate of 11.4 hours between anomalies, based on 79.5 hours of flight test. Subsystems, such as the radar, EOTS, DAS, and the navigation solution often require component resets as well, but these are not tracked in the stability metric.

...........Initial results with the new increment of Block 2B software indicate deficiencies still exist in fusion, radar, electronic warfare, navigation, EOTS, Distributed Aperture System (DAS), Helmet‑Mounted Display System (HMDS), and datalink. These deficiencies block the ability of the test team to complete baseline Block 2B test points, including weapons integration.

.............Projections for completing Block 2B fight testing using the historical rate of continued growth ... show that Block 2B developmental testing will complete about 13 months later, in November 2015, and delay the associated fleet release to July of 2016.

- The EOTS fails to meet target recognition ranges, exhibits track instability in portions of its field-of-view, and has large line-of-sight angle and azimuth errors when computing target locations. These deficiencies are being investigated and addressed by the program with software fixes.

......- Latency with the DAS projection has improved from earlier versions of software, but has not yet been tested in operationally representative scenarios.

.....- The DAS has displayed a high false alarm rate for missile detections during ownship and formation flare testing. The inability of the DAS to distinguish between flares and threat missiles makes the warning system ineffective and reduces pilot situational awareness.......

Rule 1: Never buy the A model of anything...:hmm:

I think the F-35 D/E/F models when they come will be good....

When I checked out the shipboard version of EO-DAS it was remarkably good at detecting seagulls and the sun reflecting off clouds, and studiously ignored civvy jets a kilometer or so away. Supposedly the JSF version has better software.

And as we all know, the JSF's wideangle IIR system is unique on any fighter aircraft. Wait, what?

http://rafalefan.e-monsite.com/medias/images/ddm-4.jpg

Granted, it can't look through the floor, but it also has two sensors (in one location) instead of six. And it is in service.

The Elbit PAWS-2 is also IIR, with full-spherical coverage, and will be on the JAS 39E/F.

Nice piece of kit :ok:. Does the viewing screen have the following warning label on it?
"Objects are larger than they appear." :E

Nice piece of kit . Does the viewing screen have the following warning label on it?
"Objects are larger than they appear."
Should the screen not also warn "The item you are looking at might be below or behind you, it is not necessarily in front of you..."