Posted on 11/23/2018 2:36:09 PM PST by Mariner
Whoever told you that is ignorant or an idiot.
https://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-vs-f-16-15-18-lost-beaten-flatley-comeback-2017-4
I think this is the blog I read at the time:
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-pilot-admits-the-f-35-can-t-dogfight-cdb9d11a875
Here is another update. Apparently, the F-35 still loses sometimes, but that is improving. Good news. I have no desire for our side to lose.
https://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-vs-f-15-dogfights-2018-3
You thinking about renting one? Would sure beat the heck out of the other offerings at the local flying club.
I would have loved to see more F-22s as well, but I think the F-35 is going to work out just fine. The rapidly shrinking pool of critics is fixated on comparing things like turn rates in an attempt to fit the F-35 into outdated scenarios of constant close-in dogfights. That’s not what this aircraft is intended to do, nor is it likely that it would face such a scenario very often.
One thing that is often overlooked is that while the F-35 is ingressing to a target, and egressing back out again, its systems are capturing tons of data about air and ground-based threats in the area and instantly relaying that information to the rest of the force. Information dominance, I would argue, is FAR more important to a modern military’s odds of success than is air dominance (though the F-22 and upgraded 4th Generation aircraft will provide that in spades anyway).
It’s also important to remember that the F-35 will be built in huge numbers. I remember debates years ago about whether the U.S.’s smaller number of more technologically-advanced aircraft was superior to the Soviet Union’s much larger number of less-advanced aircraft, or if the horde of Soviet fighters would simply overwhelm our forces, even if the Soviets did suffer more losses per engagement. Well, with the F-35 we will have the best of both those worlds, extreme technological superiority along with large numbers. I don’t see much chance of Russia for sure, and maybe more arguably China, being able to match that combination.
Good analysis.
“Who thinks we should be buying F-15s and F-16s and F-18s now?”
Anyone with sense.
The Joint Strike Failure is still a piece of crap that doesn’t work, and it’ll never get even close to $80 million. And as a result, USAF will never get close to buying 2500 of them. They’re just too expensive.
My Navy son now in flight school just may end up flying one of these puppies....... :-)
During the first 36 months of F-16 operation (mostly at Hill as well) they had 33 crashes or major incidents....and here they are 40 years later still operational.
When I was stationed at Hill back in 79 the F16 had a price tag of 9 million each before they went combat ready, I see each helmet for the F35 is $400,000 each.
Now its $10,000 dollars for a hammer probably.
It works just fine.
F-22, yes.
I say - and have said - the F-35 is the 21st F-111.
. Exactly.
I was saying that to a friend yesterday. According to a acquaintaance the capabilities of the F-35 are awesome. Cost? Not so much.
If a squadron deployed for combat consists of four three-aircraft sections, then the photograph is showing approximately one fighter group. I say approximately one fighter group (minimum 36 aircraft in three squadrons) because there are always a couple of spare aircraft assigned to a squadron for maintenance rotation/loss replacement purposes and the group command element (CO, XO, OpsO) may have individual aircraft assigned as well.
Two fighter wings at full strength would have a minimum of 216 F-35s assigned (12 a/c x 3 squadrons x 3 groups x2 wings (not counting maintenance a/c and command element mounts)).
Has any consideration been given to the possibility this photograph might be PhotoShopped?
if so, it was done by the USAF...
Image credit: Cynthia Griggs/US Air Force
Photoshop, not.
I wish... Military high performance aircraft cost a grinch per flight hour. For instance it costs about $15,000/hr to fly a Warthog. This is one of the reasons the air force was trying to get a replacement. I believe the F22 is VERY expensive to fly on a per hour basis. Anyway that is all I ment by the comment. I had occasion to talk to a former F18 driver whose wife headed up the F35 air frame development. He told me the F35 is Very Capable. He indicated the F35 will be super righteous once the software bugs are worked out. This discussion occurred some years ago. Perhaps the software bugs are worked out?
I wish... Military high performance aircraft cost a grunch per flight hour. For instance it costs about $15,000/hr to fly a Warthog. This is one of the reasons the air force was trying to get a replacement. I believe the F22 is VERY expensive to fly on a per hour basis. Anyway that is all I meant by the comment. I had occasion to talk to a former F18 driver whose wife headed up the F35 air frame development. He told me the F35 is Very Capable. He indicated the F35 will be super righteous once the software bugs are worked out. This discussion occurred some years ago. Perhaps the software bugs are worked out?
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.