By: SpudmanWP
- 3rd February 2017 at 22:22Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Lockheed credits Trump's involvement in deal for 90 F-35 jets
“President Trump’s personal involvement in the F-35 program accelerated the negotiations and sharpened our focus on driving down the price,” the company {Lockheed} said in a statement. “The agreement was reached in a matter of weeks and represents significant savings over previous contracts.”
...
The latest “contract is a good and fair deal for the taxpayers, the U.S. government, allies and industry," Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, F-35 program executive officer, said in a statement. “We continue to work with Industry to drive costs out of the program.”
By: ActionJackson
- 4th February 2017 at 03:51Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
13 aircraft for 2 weeks and 110 sorties... Is it usual number or fairly low?
It's hard to say. One of the pilots in the interview session mentioned that the F-35's were used initially in the scenario for SEAD, then 4th gens (typhoons and F-15's) took over after the advanced threats were all removed. 3/4 of the Typhoons were available for 2 sorties a day each.
Couple take-aways from the interview.
- Against the most advanced SAM systems they were training against, 4th generation fighters had no way to attack them outside of using cruise missiles (assume S-400 or advanced S-300), but F-35s did with internal weapons.
- Against SAM systems where 4th generation fighters would have had to use HARMs (~90 miles range), the F-35 was able to drop 2000lb MK-84 bombs on the targets
- In an environment where 3 Advanced SAM systems existed (assumed S-400), and the force of Typhoons, F-22's, F-15's, F-35s were flying against much higher numbers of enemy aircraft (assume 108 (4.5 x 24) Su-35, Su-30), the F-35 flying with SEAD loadout achieved a 15:1 air to air ratio and lost 2 aircraft total to air and land threats over the course of the scenario.
By: haavarla
- 4th February 2017 at 05:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Guess we'll find out the next time the French send the Rafale to Red Flag.
Well guess again.
Why would we learn anything that happen at RF's?
Its a need to know thing. Pretty clear. We didn't hear squat about the last time IAF was at RF.
Guess the air staff over at Nellis learned it the hard way back in 2008 ;)
By: haavarla
- 4th February 2017 at 05:24Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It's hard to say. One of the pilots in the interview session mentioned that the F-35's were used initially in the scenario for SEAD, then 4th gens (typhoons and F-15's) took over after the advanced threats were all removed. 3/4 of the Typhoons were available for 2 sorties a day each.
Couple take-aways from the interview.
- Against the most advanced SAM systems they were training against, 4th generation fighters had no way to attack them outside of using cruise missiles (assume S-400 or advanced S-300), but F-35s did with internal weapons.
- Against SAM systems where 4th generation fighters would have had to use HARMs (~90 miles range), the F-35 was able to drop 2000lb MK-84 bombs on the targets
- In an environment where 3 Advanced SAM systems existed (assumed S-400), and the force of Typhoons, F-22's, F-15's, F-35s were flying against much higher numbers of enemy aircraft (assume 72 (3 x 24) Su-35, Su-30), the F-35 flying with SEAD loadout achieved a 15:1 air to air ratio and lost 2 aircraft total to air and land threats over the course of the scenario.
By: bring_it_on
- 4th February 2017 at 17:15Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think what's more important is the integrated threat i.e. what surface to air threats they are simulating coupled with the red-air threat. Red-Flag isn't an evaluation of one platform in a vacuum but an integrated fight and fitting a new capability into that integrated joint forces.
By: jag636
- 4th February 2017 at 17:47Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Still think the unit cost is far to high, bring back the harriers I say instead of wasting good money on an aircraft that can't even carry an external war load, not mention the fact that it carries dead weight in the S/TOVL version. What a mess its totally been the wrong aircraft for the time. This is why political people should not be allowed to make decisions on our behalf.
By: Marcellogo
- 4th February 2017 at 18:00Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think what's more important is the integrated threat i.e. what surface to air threats they are simulating coupled with the red-air threat. Red-Flag isn't an evaluation of one platform in a vacuum but an integrated fight and fitting a new capability into that integrated joint forces.
You right on this, Red Flag is a good test just for this as it allow all the components to acquire more competence, for the rest time will tell.
And given the numbers and the delivery dates involved, we are talking about a long, long time there.
So, I'll say that with the 2017 we can begin talking about a real plane operational path, not just about about the development of a project.
However it is noticeable that agressors were F15C and F16C. Dunno which radar they have.
More important is the difference of their own radar cross section: are the ones of aggressors the same of when they entered service i.e. ages ago or some improvements were applied?
By: Hotshot
- 5th February 2017 at 07:42Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Given that block 3F is going to be delayed, I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to try to do a release now with what's available. 4 AMRAAMs and internal SDBs would be the most important if possible.
By: Ozair
- 5th February 2017 at 08:21Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Given that block 3F is going to be delayed
That is yet to be determined. Gilmore claimed it would be but he has so far been wrong on most of the date claims he has made.
I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to try to do a release now with what's available. 4 AMRAAMs and internal SDBs would be the most important if possible.
The jet is capable of 4 AIM-120 now. SDB would be nice but not necessary, the JDAM is more than capable for missions the F-35 will conduct, such as SEAD conducted at Red Flag.
By: Hotshot
- 5th February 2017 at 08:39Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That is yet to be determined. Gilmore claimed it would be but he has so far been wrong on most of the date claims he has made.
It's getting more and more sure that there will be a delay of 6 months or so.
The jet is capable of 4 AIM-120 now. SDB would be nice but not necessary, the JDAM is more than capable for missions the F-35 will conduct, such as SEAD conducted at Red Flag.
Block 3I is limited to 2 AMRAAMs. SDB would give 8 shots intead of 2 in stealth mode, very useful for SEAD and other penetration missions.
I think to be able to launch the AMRAAM from the a2g station they need a different adapter with an ejector. Not sure if they have started to work on that. But 4 AMRAAMs with an ability to maintain mach 1.2 with minimum afterburner would be a nice capability for the next 2 years if it's possible. Mach 1.6/9Gs is not needed as much now, since the F-35 can dominate in BVR thanks to its stealth.
New
Posts: 6,983
By: obligatory
- 5th February 2017 at 09:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
By: ActionJackson
- 5th February 2017 at 12:01Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
JDAM for SEAD ? what a lousy SAM battery
With the recently mentioned 0.000028m RCS, even the s-400's gravestone radar only has a 30km range against the f-35's frontal aspect. Coulda been anything else within the Russian inventory.
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 3rd February 2017 at 21:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Guess we'll find out the next time the French send the Rafale to Red Flag.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 3rd February 2017 at 21:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
13 aircraft for 2 weeks and 110 sorties... Is it usual number or fairly low?
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 3rd February 2017 at 22:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/317792-lockheed-pentagon-reach-deal-on-next-90-f-35s
Posts: 276
By: ActionJackson - 4th February 2017 at 03:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It's hard to say. One of the pilots in the interview session mentioned that the F-35's were used initially in the scenario for SEAD, then 4th gens (typhoons and F-15's) took over after the advanced threats were all removed. 3/4 of the Typhoons were available for 2 sorties a day each.
Couple take-aways from the interview.
- Against the most advanced SAM systems they were training against, 4th generation fighters had no way to attack them outside of using cruise missiles (assume S-400 or advanced S-300), but F-35s did with internal weapons.
- Against SAM systems where 4th generation fighters would have had to use HARMs (~90 miles range), the F-35 was able to drop 2000lb MK-84 bombs on the targets
- In an environment where 3 Advanced SAM systems existed (assumed S-400), and the force of Typhoons, F-22's, F-15's, F-35s were flying against much higher numbers of enemy aircraft (assume 108 (4.5 x 24) Su-35, Su-30), the F-35 flying with SEAD loadout achieved a 15:1 air to air ratio and lost 2 aircraft total to air and land threats over the course of the scenario.
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 4th February 2017 at 05:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well guess again.
Why would we learn anything that happen at RF's?
Its a need to know thing. Pretty clear. We didn't hear squat about the last time IAF was at RF.
Guess the air staff over at Nellis learned it the hard way back in 2008 ;)
Posts: 6,441
By: haavarla - 4th February 2017 at 05:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Which interview??
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 4th February 2017 at 07:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I meant "we" as in the guys running the place, not "we" Joe Q. Public.
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon - 4th February 2017 at 12:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
you guys happy about Trump now?
Posts: 3,765
By: Sintra - 4th February 2017 at 13:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Clap, clap, clap.
At long last its delivering, good, very good.
Posts: 4,168
By: halloweene - 4th February 2017 at 15:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
On Nellis AFB site http://www.nellis.af.mil/News/tabid/6431/Article/1071259/f-35a-proving-its-worth-at-red-flag-combat-exercise.aspx
However it is noticeable that agressors were F15C and F16C. Dunno which radar they have.
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 4th February 2017 at 17:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think what's more important is the integrated threat i.e. what surface to air threats they are simulating coupled with the red-air threat. Red-Flag isn't an evaluation of one platform in a vacuum but an integrated fight and fitting a new capability into that integrated joint forces.
Posts: 48
By: jag636 - 4th February 2017 at 17:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Still think the unit cost is far to high, bring back the harriers I say instead of wasting good money on an aircraft that can't even carry an external war load, not mention the fact that it carries dead weight in the S/TOVL version. What a mess its totally been the wrong aircraft for the time. This is why political people should not be allowed to make decisions on our behalf.
Posts: 1,765
By: Marcellogo - 4th February 2017 at 18:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You right on this, Red Flag is a good test just for this as it allow all the components to acquire more competence, for the rest time will tell.
And given the numbers and the delivery dates involved, we are talking about a long, long time there.
So, I'll say that with the 2017 we can begin talking about a real plane operational path, not just about about the development of a project.
Posts: 1,765
By: Marcellogo - 4th February 2017 at 18:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
More important is the difference of their own radar cross section: are the ones of aggressors the same of when they entered service i.e. ages ago or some improvements were applied?
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 4th February 2017 at 23:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It did very well considering that they were carrying dummy warloads and are still limited by the Block 3i CLAWS & Software.
Red Flags starting in 2019 should see the appearance of Block 3F jets.
Posts: 1,123
By: Hotshot - 5th February 2017 at 07:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Given that block 3F is going to be delayed, I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to try to do a release now with what's available. 4 AMRAAMs and internal SDBs would be the most important if possible.
Posts: 815
By: Ozair - 5th February 2017 at 08:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That is yet to be determined. Gilmore claimed it would be but he has so far been wrong on most of the date claims he has made.
The jet is capable of 4 AIM-120 now. SDB would be nice but not necessary, the JDAM is more than capable for missions the F-35 will conduct, such as SEAD conducted at Red Flag.
Posts: 1,123
By: Hotshot - 5th February 2017 at 08:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It's getting more and more sure that there will be a delay of 6 months or so.
Block 3I is limited to 2 AMRAAMs. SDB would give 8 shots intead of 2 in stealth mode, very useful for SEAD and other penetration missions.
I think to be able to launch the AMRAAM from the a2g station they need a different adapter with an ejector. Not sure if they have started to work on that. But 4 AMRAAMs with an ability to maintain mach 1.2 with minimum afterburner would be a nice capability for the next 2 years if it's possible. Mach 1.6/9Gs is not needed as much now, since the F-35 can dominate in BVR thanks to its stealth.
Posts: 6,983
By: obligatory - 5th February 2017 at 09:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
JDAM for SEAD ? what a lousy SAM battery
Posts: 276
By: ActionJackson - 5th February 2017 at 12:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
With the recently mentioned 0.000028m RCS, even the s-400's gravestone radar only has a 30km range against the f-35's frontal aspect. Coulda been anything else within the Russian inventory.