Thanks for the link SFERRIN.
via Spudman over at F-16.net read the whole thing but check out these tidbits...
Here are the transcripts of the proceedings and a few nuggets of gold.
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus ... arings.htm
The transcripts for the LM presentation have not been put up yet, but here is some info from the Defense Department's reply to the APA/RepSIM info:
1. A lot of classified info could not be discussed.
2. 11k pages of data is shared with Partner nations PER MONTH about the JSF.
3. The "fuel leak" from the first Eglin AFG flight was rainwater that has seeped into the panels.
4. The F-35 has been tested up to 9.88G
5. Up to 650 parameters use to ID a potential threat. For comparison's sake, the F-22 has a third of that. Talk about Situational Awareness.
A few more things between the lines in that transcript:
- AIM-120 PK is significantly higher than the 50% when fired by the F-35 during simulations
- F-35 consistently wipes the floor with Su-35's in high detail simulation even with expert pilots on the red team
- The 2 missile (1xIR , 1xRadar) combo touted by APA so often does not work as well as APA "guesses" it does due to F-35's signature reduction measures (IR and Radar)
- Confirmation that even though you know F-35's are in the area (low band radar), you can't engage them which is the whole issue when fighting stealth aircraft
- F-35's MADL automatically routes the datalink between aircraft so as to not fire the beam directly at the enemy when connecting to the aircraft up front
You know they're banging their heads against walls over at Aviation Week...begging mommy to make the mean ole' airplane stop. I have never in my life seen such a concerted effort to kill a US military project in my life. We might be seeing the first signs of industrial espionage by a domestic publication, via Information Warfare to favor foreign competitors over our own domestic production base.