Who needs F-35

[FenderManDan]

Just following up on the F-35 thread and all the difficulties with the development. Why don't we buy this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bK1GChMOnrQ

http://www.aircraftcompare.com/helicopt ... M---M2/373

It seems easier just to get non NATO machine at this point. Eh, if politicians had cojones and forget about the NATO and cold war and globalize. We can probably just trade something with Russians for Migs with no money involved. Our neighbour from the South would be equally excited.

[Beefitarian]

No one. I'll take one if the rest of the tax payers chip in.

So are we trading oil soaked dirt or do they not want it as much as China?

[trampbike]

Why don't we buy this?

Because airshows are not the main objective of the NGF.

[Beefitarian]

You're mean tramp bike.

We still should be building planes like that in Canada. Maybe after we go broke like they did.

[iflyforpie]

After reading this.... I think we should distance ourselves as far as we can from the F-35. It's the F-111 revisited... with no private ventures that can come forth and save the day from this extremely costly, poor performing, and greatly compromised aircraft.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/5c95d45f86a5

[Beefitarian]

What would we fly at air shows after the last CF-188 is gone?

[FenderManDan]

Why don't we buy this?

Because airshows are not the main objective of the NGF.

I googled NGF and came up with "nerve growth factor" and "national golf foundation" so i guess you are right.

Russians went broke because deeper problem nationally, that is water cooler thread.

[frosti]

After reading this.... I think we should distance ourselves as far as we can from the F-35. It's the F-111 revisited... with no private ventures that can come forth and save the day from this extremely costly, poor performing, and greatly compromised aircraft.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/5c95d45f86a5

This is what happens when the editor takes one day off. Dave without adult-supervision on his own blog. Compares range to the F-111, Kinematics to the F-22, Stealth to the B-2, price to the early 80's F-16 and Armament to F-15 for A2A or A-10 for A2G. JSF naysayers don't really have a cohesive reasoning against the program, and they certainly can't agree on an alternative.

http://www.valuewalk.com/2013/08/f-35-air-force/

[Beefitarian]

Russians went broke because deeper problem nationally, that is water cooler thread.

We're going to go broke buying next generation fighters.

I made a water cooler forum but only expat came over.

[trampbike]

I googled NGF and came up with "nerve growth factor" and "national golf foundation" so i guess you are right.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/business-equ ... ghter.page

[Rockie]

JSF naysayers don't really have a cohesive reasoning against the program,

1. No fixed cost.
2. Cost consistently risen throughout the life of the program and was far too high to begin with.
3. Insufficient numbers due to #2.
4. It doesn't seem to work as advertised...at all.
5. Paying premium for time limited technology that cannot be upgraded.
6. The highly suspect result of an utterly incompetent acquisition process by a grossly incompetent government.
6. One engine, and therefore wholly unsuitable for northern Canadian operations.

Just off the top of my head.

[vcollazo]

Way back when I was still in the USAF we joked that if the cost of fighters kept going up at skyrocketing rates, someday the AF could only afford one and we we would all have to take turns flying it. By the way, the F111, particularly the D and F models were incredible machines particularly when used in their proper role of night/all weather long range precision interdiction. To this day there is nothing that can match them. During Dessert Storm all those videos that you saw of of bunkers and revetments seen at night from about a level perspective then an increasing angle followed by a laser guided bomb sailing right in the front door were all F111F strikes. Also the hardened facilities that were 30 or 40 feet below ground were also taken out by Fs. We used to fly from Cannon AFB in eastern New Mexico to the Red Flag ranges in Nevada with 24 500lb bombs or 4 2000 pounders, fly 150 NM of low level at 540-600KN put the bombs on target, then 100 miles of low level egress before climbing back to cruise to home base and never need a tanker. We did this at 200ft AGL day and night in all kinds of weather.

[Rockie]

I agree, the F-111 was a hell of a machine. Big monster too for how stinking fast it went.

[iflyforpie]

No argument here for how good the F-111 was in its eventual role..... but it was too big for carrier operations on the smaller carriers, too big and heavy for dogfighting, and was stuck with a drag inducing side-by-side seating with poor visibility as a result of a stringent Navy requirement that somehow disappeared on the F-14.

Ultimately, it was not the cost-cutting universal fighter that McNamara wanted. You've got to wonder how things in the Bekaa Valley or Gulf of Sidra would have turned out though if McNamara was successful at shoving the F-111 down their throats and eliminating the F-14 and F-15.

[2R]

Sounds like the Ardvark pilots would be able to deliver the pop and chips up north in the Van 24/7
Low level and loving it


If the costs keep going up on the F-35's it will create peace in the skies as nobody will risk losing such an expensive aircraft in battle. The downside is no air cover and the ground wars could be very long.

[iflyforpie]

If the costs keep going up on the F-35's it will create peace in the skies as nobody will risk losing such an expensive aircraft in battle.

The Americans certainly weren't itching to send their F-22s to Libya...

An expensive fleet-in-being perhaps... like German battleships...

[trampbike]

[quote="iflyforpie"]
The Americans certainly weren't itching to send their F-22s to Libya...
/quote]
Why would they send their top air superiority aircraft to Libya?

[frosti]

The Americans certainly weren't itching to send their F-22s to Libya...

I don't think you have a good understanding of military air power and its utilization.

[Rockie]

I don't think you have a good understanding of military air power and its utilization.

There's lots of speculation regarding why they weren't used, but the USAF official line is that they couldn't get them there in time. Although they somehow managed to get everything else there.

Why weren't they there according to your good understanding of military air power and its utilization?

[bizjets101]

http://nation.time.com/2011/04/17/the-s ... ver-libya/

[frosti]

I don't think you have a good understanding of military air power and its utilization.

There's lots of speculation regarding why they weren't used, but the USAF official line is that they couldn't get them there in time.

In time for what? Libya had an almost non-existing air force after the first few hundred Tomahawks were lobbed in. What would be the point of sending in an air superiority fighter with very limited A/G capabilities into a campaign that consisted mainly of targeting and destroying ground targets?

[AuxBatOn]

Because it was mostly an Air-to-Ground mission with some Defensive Counter Air. No Offensive Counter Air to really talk about (other than self-escort strikes). Plus, the systems used by Libyan Forces did not require stealth. Don't forget that when you conduct operations you give away some secrets as your airplane is emmitting as it should (with combat loads rather than training loads). If there are no needs for the capability, why use it and compromise it?

[Rockie]

In time for what?

According to the USAF the French had a timetable to start operations and it didn't allow enough time for the F-22's to get in theatre. Don't shoot me...I'm just repeating the official USAF line. There may have been other reasons but we will never know.

[Driving Rain]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IWJeqrvoF6 ... WJeqrvoF6M

[frosti]

We have two JSF threads because?