F-35C Cat Shots and Traps

[DangerGirl]

I heard that, in a bid to keep the production line perpetually open, Lockheed is going to arm the F-35 with x-ray lasers. I hope the pilot training pipeline can keep up.

[kham]

I certainly hope so

One of the little things the retards running the propaganda ministries NOT generally reporting, is the teeny detail that with all the other fuckups courtesy of widdle Baaaaawwwy , is that the AF is cutting training for F-16s, insomuch as they will be prohibited from engaging anything newer than MiG-23 -type aircraft. So all those -29s, and Su-27 clones , etc will just have to not shoot.....

So, when the first Viper gets splashed by a Flanker or Fulcrum, do we send Baaaawwwy the bill?? Or does the fuckhead just blame Mr Bush again??

[Mynock]

It's a 40 year old design. Time for that particular horse to head off to the glue factory. Maybe all the extra glue can be used to reattach the parts that fall off the F35.

[kham]

It also just happens to be the most numerous US fighter. Now I know the west in general and the US in particular haven't faced serious opposition in over a generation. But that sort of thinking is planning for retards. It's just not smart. Viper drivers historically have been among the most fangs-out ACM types around. To make them act like A-7 drivers? Won't end well

[nachtjaeger]

The F-16 isn't a bad aircraft. However, we never got a chance to find out what its cheaper rival, the Northrop F-20 Tigershark was capable of, because of (insert expletive) politics, stupidity, and corruption in the Air Force. The F-20's predecessor, the highly successful F-5 "Freedom Fighter", arguably provided much more "bang for the buck" than the F-4 Phantom II. Likewise the F-20 should have been an affordable alternative to the F-16. Now, we have the Textron Scorpion. Not sure how it will fare in either the marketplace or in combat, since it's slower (with current engines) than the similarly priced Yak-130, and not in the same class with the similarly priced supersonic JF-17 Thunder. (No clue what the Scorpion could do with uprated engines.)

Which begs the question: Can we afford the F-35 at an estimated $100 million a pop? For that price, you can buy five Scorpions. Would love to game that out- one F-35 against five Scorpions. Okay, to make it a little more interesting, make it four F-20 Tigersharks instead (guesstimate $25 mil/copy) with the AN/APG-67 radar and a top speed of Mach 2. Their twin 20mm cannons would even things up if even one of them could close to dogfight range with the F-35. From what I've read, the F-35A (the AF model) might hold its own (assuming no external stores to increase its RCS) but the B and C models would be at a disadvantage due to their reduced performance. Apparently they still have to handle the B model as if it was made of wood and canvas, or it breaks.

And to put the cost of the F-35 more in perspective, Mikoyan will sell you the MIG-33 for just under $30 mil a copy if you buy them in bulk. The export variant of the SU-30 can be had for somewhere around $50 mil a copy also. Like Uncle Joe Stalin said, "Quantity has a quality all its own."

It's a 40 year old design. Time for that particular horse to head off to the glue factory. Maybe all the extra glue can be used to reattach the parts that fall off the F35.

[kham]

The -20 died simply because no US ally wanted 2nd-rate kit; General Dynamics was marketing the Viper worldwide, extremely successfully for not much more cost-wise. Plus, it was -and is -a far more complex aircraft, with the consequent higher growth potential. Which , with more advanced engines, computers, and later missiles, gave operators much greater flexibility. The -20 was a nice hair-on-fire dogfighter, and maybe 5 years earlier you could have made the case. It missed it's chance. Uncle Joe's theory died a gruesome death on the sands of Iraq in 1991, where numbers just meant a target-rich environment and wholesale slaughter. If you had ammo, the enemy was just paper targets to exterminate.

Politics is always the unknown, since back in the day, we blew more money on F-18s than a greater number of Vipers, for mostly bullshit, and the 2-engined 'safety' horseshit of the Hornet.
Today, 2014, the RCAF is onboard for the -35 program, to eventually replace the Hornets. Remember, the -35 is a single-engine bird..... Yeah

[nachtjaeger]

I presume you refer to the Battle of 73 Easting and the Battle of Objective Norfolk. Agreed, one of the worst military routs in history. Half a dozen bulldozers or engineer vehicles and a competent commander, and the Coalition would have had their hands full. That sandstorm could have worked to the Iraqi's advantage by grounding or suppressing Coalition air power. The Iraqis had so much going against them- obsolete tanks, knock-off Chinese tank ammo, incompetent leadership, the loss of their C&C network, no air support, enemy in control of the skies over the battlefield, you name it. And they did NOT expect a large, cohesive enemy force to come screaming out of the western desert in the middle of a sandstorm.

The Iraqis put up more of a fight at Medina Ridge, although ultimately with the same result. Better prepared positions, artillery and AA support, etc. Even with worse tanks than the Republican Guard's T-72s (some were Chinese Type 69s) they still put up a fight.