I didn't want to get pulled into this part of the F-35 debate. Quite simply it costs too much and will cost the USMC too much for it to continue as is. If Lockheed Martin Aviation showed the same sense of urgency it now has at the beginning of the program then things might have worked out differently. As things now stand the MPC, the ACV, probably the JLTV will all vanish from Marine Corps procurement rolls because of this excessively expensive airplane.
The future isn't bright either. Once retirees pull their heads up and realize that tricare costs will increase, the troops see prices rise at the Commissary etc you'll see retirees and vets go the way of the Republican party. Screw the military. They didn't keep their promises to us, so why should we support them now.
Additionally with the massive drawdown in troops (which is different this time because you're dealing with an all volunteer force, not a bunch of draftees that want out anyway) you're going to see Infantry Battalions, and Aviation Squadrons go away. Which mean that in the end we're already headed into the death spiral with this airplane. Anyway it goes fewer will be needed which means that they will cost more which means that the Pentagon will buy fewer...well you get the idea.
But back to the subject of this post. Rear aspect. I am by no means an expert but check this out....
Above you're looking at the various stealth aircraft that have been in service and the F-35. Unless something wonderful and dramatic has happened in the world of stealth then either the term all aspect has been dumbed down or we're seeing an outlier.
The future isn't bright either. Once retirees pull their heads up and realize that tricare costs will increase, the troops see prices rise at the Commissary etc you'll see retirees and vets go the way of the Republican party. Screw the military. They didn't keep their promises to us, so why should we support them now.
Additionally with the massive drawdown in troops (which is different this time because you're dealing with an all volunteer force, not a bunch of draftees that want out anyway) you're going to see Infantry Battalions, and Aviation Squadrons go away. Which mean that in the end we're already headed into the death spiral with this airplane. Anyway it goes fewer will be needed which means that they will cost more which means that the Pentagon will buy fewer...well you get the idea.
But back to the subject of this post. Rear aspect. I am by no means an expert but check this out....
Above you're looking at the various stealth aircraft that have been in service and the F-35. Unless something wonderful and dramatic has happened in the world of stealth then either the term all aspect has been dumbed down or we're seeing an outlier.
The F-35 is built to a requirement. That it was assumed that the F-22 (which when the JSF Joint Operational Requirement Document (JORD)--composed in the 1990's and signed off on at the beginning of the last decade) would be around in the several hundreds. That did not turn out so well no that we only have 120-some combat coded F-22s. The F-22 would reduce the big threats, leaving medium to small battlefield SAM and of course air-intercept-radar as the threat faced by the F-35. Narrow and nose-on the F-35 should be very good at reducing those threats. But if the big threats are not subdued enough, it is facing a lot of trouble. Also when the advanced tactical fighter ATF requirement was being drawn up (which gave us today's F-22), a red-force team looked at it and determined that stealth for stealth's sake was not enough, you had to have super-cruise/high-speed and altitude to reduce the no escape zone (NEZ) of enemy threats. Which is interesting when looking at even the F-117 design where when it was shot down, LM stated that even a simple turn, could increase your RCS by a factor of 100 or more. The B-2? Again, look at the requirement. It was originally designed for the old-days SAC SIOP mission. Tail-less, bat-wing broad-band to reduce the effects of VHF long range Soviet radars. It only had to do a one-way mission. That combined with a stand-off like the advanced low-observable nuke cruise missile would help get the nuke there (in coordination though with the TRIAD-SIOP where everything was targeted in layers). I am less worried about the F-35s alleged export-friendly stealth than I am about the program falling over due to incompetence.
ReplyDeleteGraphic showing the balanced approach of the F-22/F-35 at least how the USAF sees it.
http://goo.gl/oEmQz
Export-friendly stealth... http://goo.gl/GZ0Ixa
I'm going to have to go 100% with Eric Palmer on this. I'm unaware of any "all aspect" stealth jet/plane. The F-117 was very much designed to be extremely stealthy but only from certain angles. If you read Skunkworks by Ben Rich (former head of Skunkworks at LM) he talks about how when the designed the aircraft they designed guidance software to go with it that took into consideration all the known radar installations so that the aircraft could calculate the stealthiest route.
ReplyDelete