Posted on 07/07/2015 8:02:37 AM PDT by C19fan
Supposedly, testing with computer simulated aircraft missions and engagements thoroughly validated the idea that with its planned capabilities, the F-35 would not need to be a dogfighter. At the time, it was also thought that there would be enough F-22s to handle any dogfighting that might nevertheless be required.
Of course, due to drastic curtailment of the F-22 purchase, it is not at all clear that in a pinch, there will be adequate F-22s available. The F-35's new capabilities will thus have to make it sufficiently lethal to win most all aerial engagements even without its F-22 big brother clearing the way of any risk of having to dogfight.
My guess is that when the F-35 is finally operational and deployed, it will be well-suited to helping mount decisive air campaigns against Iran or North Korea and their dense anti-aircraft defenses and hardened underground targets. The fielding of the F-35 in the coming years will substantially enhance the potency of our existing F-22s, land attack missiles, and heavy bombers.
The often projected scenario of a full-scale engagement with China in the South China Sea would be another matter entirely. Due to the immense distances involved, in such a contest, we would likely rely on missiles pummelling China's bases into ruins and US Navy subs clearing the seas of the Chinese Navy before we attempted an Air Force campaign against China's island bases in the South China Sea.
If their claims that stealth, and data management of missile trucks carrying all aspect missiles dominating over top speed, acceleration and maneuverability were true,,,, then a B-2 Spirit should easily be the most capable fighter plane on earth.
“How many dog fights have we had since 911”
We have not engaged any nation states with Air Forces of the slightest consequence since 911. You may not have noticed but we are entertaining war with China, Russia, and god only knows what could pop up with Greece, Turkey, Iran, the Saudis, etc.
Sukhois and Eurofighters are being sold as fast as they can be built. Dogfights aren’t really that unimaginable.
In 1977 as Eglin was fielding its F-15s replacing the older F-4s there were many impromptu dissimilar air combat missions.
The F-4s consistently ate the F-15s’ lunch. How? The F-4s played to their strengths and the F-15’s weaknesses. Isn’t that what happened in Korea and Vietnam?
When the AF brags about a new fighter’s capabilities it is talking about test results, not real unscripted combat. And that’s the best outcome; frequently the bragging is based on what the General wants not what the gun camera film shows.
But then, reality, has never been the Air Force’s strongest suit - se the repeated push to boneyard the A-10 with no replacement on hand.
“Supposedly, testing with computer simulated aircraft missions and engagements thoroughly validated the idea that with its planned capabilities, the F-35 would not need to be a dogfighter”
Then a B-2 bomber carrying 100 air to air missiles should be just as good,,, shouldn’t it?
Only if payload alone is your measure. The B-2 is a bomber and is not equipped to act as a flying arsenal of air to air missiles.
Indeed.
CC
Active Duty ping.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.