Posted on 03/14/2012 8:29:39 PM PDT by U-238
The Australian Parliament’s Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade has just released a transcript of a Feb. 7, 2012 hearing during which it took evidence on the F-35 program by noted opponents of the program, representing the Air Power Australia think-tank and a private computer simulation firm, RepSim Pty Ltd.
Part of the hearing describes the outcome of a famous – but disputed – simulation of F-18E and F-35 fighters engaging in combat against Chinese air force fighters carried out by the Rand Corporation. The outcome is even more disastrous for the Western fighters than previously reported.
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/verbatim/4/133273/f_35-fares-worse-in-rand-wargame.html
(Excerpt) Read more at defense-aerospace.com ...
Here is the entire transcript of the meeting:
THE take-home line: “The Joint Strike Fighter is now more expensive than the larger and over three times more capable F22A Raptor.”
Buy lotsa Raptors to clear the skies, then use cheap BFUBS and Warthogs to own the ground.
But that makes too much sense...
I thought this simulation was believable until the comments on 130 F22’s coming back against 240 chinese aircraft. If and ONLY IF the Chinese have the their special sauce RADAR running could I see a maximum of 5 F22 units coming down.
Given though, I think the F35 is a major dud. I can’t believe we chose this thing over the F22. Cut a few social programs, build more F22s. And invest in improving it’s RADAR stealthiness.
I have never understood the desire to have the F35. It just seems like a major lemon from what is normally a very advanced US-MIC. Maybe the US-MIC is suffering from same problem most of America is suffering from: it’s good enough, and we can employ more workers than the F22 program.
National defense should be about national defense, not keeping the machinist unions supplied with high paying jobs. If that means just developing a single plane that can take down 1000 chinese fighters per day and it only employs 8 machinists to build it, so be it.
You nuts? I couldn't do without my weekly grocery shopping trip where I stand in line with a fat hag wearing long fingernails, hair extensions and clown clothes buying every processed food in colorful large boxes, using a snap card, surrounded by screaming whelps, and getting into a super sized and detailed SUV in the parking lot. A guy's gotta have a chuckle.
There is a REAL mis-conception with this simulation. Over-the-Horizon HF radar is NOT going to be useful as a targeting radar system. It may be able to see the F-22 - which is still debatable in my mind, but HF being HF - you can’t get very high resolution as to the location. IF they see the F22 - they’ll likely have a very approximate idea of it’s location from the Radar return. From what I’ve read - this stuff is mostly good for seeing capital ships, and the like.
What I’ve heard that MIGHT see our stealth aircraft is what’s known as “Bi-static” radars. This takes two (or more) emitters that are linked together - and are used together to discriminate/correlate the lower returns from the aircraft. I’m calling BS on this study.
Thanks U-238.
I once told the F35 Lockheed guy that they were trying to put too many missions into one airframe and that having two airframes specialized in respective works was a better than thing that one aircraft that does everything more mediocre.
I was booed by the audience and told the F16 is a fighter that works fine if not better as a bomber.
Now their chief test pilot swears by the F35 and he makes pretty good arguments.
The thing is, a large high altitude bird can fall on a prey below, smaller. But once that try of energy is lost, the large bird is liable to be attacked in a fur ball by the smaller bird which will harass it to death.
It’s a complext task forcing.
Now, with electronics an aircraft can be somewhat reprogrammed but not the airframe.
Wihtout a F22-F35 parity of sorts, we do not have a complete system.
The F35’s main problem is having the right size bomb bays but too little fuel and too little maneuverability to carry the mission the F22 can support it for bombing or get support from for interception protection.
It’s a real good thing that we don’t have any long range, air or ship launched, anti radar weaponry, eh?
Otherwise, we might accidentally win a battle against our supreme overlords.
For the cost of the one single, first “bail out”.
Which got us exactly, what?
America could have built 5,000 F-22’s.
Built. Paid for. And flying.
Almost makes one wonder...
Was the point of “bail outs” bailing out (anything?)
Or was the intention: eliminating funding for an important American fighter.
In other words: Sabotage.
Just asking the question. See also: Cloward-Piven.
I really wish that people wouldn’t think that APA has any creditability.
Kopp, Goon, Criss, and Jensen are to military aviation as Al Gore is to climate science.
The BOGUS take-home line. It is disingenuous to compare the unit flyaway costs of the last Raptor in full-rate production with the unit flyaway costs of low rate development F-35s.
We shall see if L-M can get the unit flyaway costs down to the $80 million range once full rate production is reached.
I suspect we actually don’t have anything that targets HF radar systems since they hadn’t seen war use since WWII!
Also - from my understanding it might be possible to implement Bi-static radar systems by using commercial radio transmitters! It takes some pretty hairy computer processing to see the doppler perturbations that occur on the echos of these signals, but this might be another way to defeat stealth. So Bi-static systems are going to be a lot less obvious.
Ah, so this is Karlo’s group.
This is enough said. Kopp is a crank. Kopp and his cohorts believe that the F-111 was the last bastion of Australian sovereignty and that the F-22 is the only thing to prevent the continent from being overrun by the south Asian hordes.
Rubbish.
The F-35 is and will be the most advanced manned Western platform available to them. Period.
Still aint nuthin a batch of EMP drops wont cure.
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.