Joe sent me this article (thanks guy!) where the author outlines the case for the F-35 as the ultimate multi-role/air superiority fighter of its generation (to include the F-22...if he's right then that explains why the former SecDef canceled it)
He's an unashamed supporter of the program and he gives the best explanation of the F-35's capabilities that I've read. Read the whole thing but a snippet.
Interesting.The F-35 is the first aircraft in history with a 360 degree field of vision out to 800 miles, managed by an integrated combat system. Make no mistake -- the F-35 is a full combat system, not just a platform. The beauty of a combat system is the maintenance, upgrades, deployment readiness, development synergies provided by common software for upgrades and development.The F-35 will revolutionize air combat operations, especially in the Pacific. Fifth generation aircraft like the F-35 are at the heart of a potential new air combat system enterprise. The F-22s may have been the harbinger, but it lacks the essential air combat systems present on the F-35. Deployed as a force, the JSF enables distributed air operations that are crucial to the survival of our pilots in the period ahead. Distributed operations are the cultural shift that fifth generation aircraft, along with investments in new weapons, remotely piloted aircraft and the crafting of simultaneous rather than sequential operations, bring to the fight.The Japanese understand the opportunities to leverage the F-35 combat system enterprise and that is why they chose the aircraft.Before the JSF, military leaders would have to tack on additional systems to legacy aircraft to provide new capabilities. The pilot would be forced to manage each new system. The F-35's five major combat systems are already integrated and interact with each other to provide capabilities. The functional capabilities that emerge from that interaction are done by the machine and are not simply correlated with a single system. For example, jamming can be done by several systems aboard the JSF but the machine decides which one to use. And the entire system rests on a common architecture with broadband capabilities.
what i like best about this article which the 35 will provide is the connectability of the aircraft. Its a great weapons platform, and the B version will be very adaptable to many environments, but one thing our many NATO fights have shown is our military partners (with the UK usually being the exception but no longer), the 35 will allow us to fight as one, not as many doing a similar job.
ReplyDeletei don't think the EU countries are very much interested in maintaining global order.
ReplyDeletethey'll attempt to impose their will through international treaties but as the recent decision to impose a carbon tax on international travel has shown, the globe is not ready to have European standards and ideas imposed upon it.
the EU is about to become irrelevant.
The challenge is, how do you sell the capabilities of the F-35 to joe public? We who work with defense every day, we understand this, and we understand why this is and will be a revolution. But how to make this real for non-defense types, who only see the price tag and go "holy sh..."
ReplyDeletecan't blame the public for saying holy shit to any defense project now. the only thing is the capability has to match the cost.
ReplyDeletei think that the F-35 program needs to answer the critics directly. and i'm not talking about theory based discussion like will the airplane be 6 times more effective. opinions are meaningless.
what they do have to do is to address real problem...especially when they're brought up by critics. the tailhook for example. i'm not an aviation guy...but just from the explanation given and the photo to go along with it, even i understand that the tailhook is going to be an issue. that should have come from the program office not the guys from APA.
if there are other issue that are the same then put them on the table, tell us how they're going to fix it and move on.
but we don't need spin from the office. just a dogged determination to get the plane into service.
However good the F-35 turns out to be air to air it's still a strike fighter. It's designed to operate within a specific envelope. Some of the advantages of the F-22 can not be put into the F-35. Consider the additional range and speed given to a missile launched at high altitude and high speed.
ReplyDeleteThe systems in the F-35 are not magic and can be put in other airframes and eventually will. Such an aircraft with similar systems designed for air superiority by definition brings advantages air to air vis a vis the F-35.
Even if one assumes that the new fighters being designed in Russia and China will not be superior to the F-35 air to air in almost every respect they still look to have some advantages and without question someone eventually will bring out an aircraft designed for air superiority that brings problems for the F-35 strike fighter.
To a large degree if you've got AWACS, AEGIS, etc., the exact platform you vector in behind the enemy is almost besides the point. What the world has not yet seen is when both sides have significant integrated detection networks and the first fight is over those systems to achieve information dominance. Almost everything we've seen is over match.
There's a tendency to assume near perfect situational awareness across a broad spectrum that is really a construct that often doesn't survive the real world. The enemy is not always just a target. All this aside the way the F-35 operates is in many ways a game changer but it's not actually there yet. The helmet displaying much of the information, to cite one example, doesn't actually work and the replacement doesn't do what's required.
Energy still matters air to air. The F-35 having perfect situational awareness of what's behind it to fire over the shoulder missile shots is still at a disadvantage over the other guy imparting more energy to his missiles which will engage more quickly. Now consider that enemy fighter is flying significantly higher and faster than the F-35 it's attempting to engage.
The USN plans to replace it's F/A-18E/F's with NGAD (used to be F/A-XX) an aircraft optimized for air to air. Some of the systems for NGAD are supposed to be used for the F-22 follow on, which is a later program than NGAD. There is no question that the US will eventually have aircraft superior to the F-35 air to air. Assuming nobody else will over the next 20 years might very well be dangerous. In my view the F-35 is a game changing strike fighter but some analysts get wrapped up a bit too tight with it's many advantages and forget everything exists within a specific time frame.
How many times does it need to be said. The F-22 and F-35 HAVE DIFFERENT MISSIONSs. It'd be like criticizing the Abrams tank because it can't carry as many dudes as a Bradley.
ReplyDeleteWhile I am an avid supporter of the F-35, I have to wonder how it can be more advanced than the F-22 when the JSF program was designed for the world market while we refused to export the Raptor to anyone.
ReplyDeletei kind of have to disagree with the argument to Joe public, maybe here in the US where no conventional military threats are around and economically things are not good it may be a hard sell, but i have a feeling people in Japan, S. Korea and others near China's sphere of influence are getting nervous as their leaders are and selling of the F35 shows our renewed commitment to offsetting the quantitative capability china has to ensure our allies are protected but we are also helping them protect themselves. Its hard for us to know the cultural challenges over there, as the differences between those nations go far, deep and alot longer the US has even existed.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with you Sol, my point was its best for our allies in the pacific to have equipment that is ours rather than another nations which allows interoperability more, as opposed to the problems we had trying to tie together all the euro systems through NATO.
just my 1.5 cents worth.