Hummm, doesn't that sorta defeat the purpose of a "fighter" designation?

Maybe we can label it the C-35 because it is sooo cool looking while it is sitting still. Or the S-35 for static display. Or the Z-35 because it will be the last fighter that Lockheed Martin ever builds.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...-weapon-history.html

This is a little embarrassing...

Let's contact the Klingons and get the plans for that damn cloaking device.

Well, for the money spent so far, one should hope for a cloaking device. Apparently the damn thing needs something other than what it's got. Pretty sad really when 1970's technology beats it 100% of the time and the F-16 costs $20 million to the F/C/Z-35's $160 million.

What a mess.

The F-35 is nothing more than a huge pile of political pork sausage all wrapped up in a nice aluminum tortilla.

The F-22 is truly an air superiority fighter of unmatched performance and capability. But like all things under our current POTUS, we scrapped a master piece in favor of a dog turd.

Multi service, multi roll = jack of all trades master of none

quote:

Originally posted by surestrike:

The F-35 is nothing more than a huge pile of political pork sausage all wrapped up in a nice aluminum tortilla.

The F-22 is truly an air superiority fighter of unmatched performance and capability. But like all things under our current POTUS, we scrapped a master piece in favor of a dog turd.

Yep

We should have simply upgraded the F-15 to the SE version, continued with the F-22 and moved more aggressively into unmaned swarm technology. Putting a pilot into the front seat of a fighter is so last year.

And why did we drop the F-22?

$$$$$ and the empty promises of the F-35.

Duh! Will a SUV beat a Corvette on the drag strip? Can the Corvette haul 4 passengers, or things from Home Depot? Articles like these make great headlines but are misleading.

This gets to be a complex subject. But let me offer a few top level comments.

Air superiority during WW II, the Korean War, and Vietnam War basically meant being the superior “platform” during close in air combat maneuvering, or dogfighting. More so after WW II, aircraft have been designed with a primary mission in mind, with secondary capability. In the early 1960’s, we developed the F-111. It had “F” (for Fighter) in the designation but was designed for high speed penetration (Mach 1.2+) weapons delivery on “the deck” (meaning sea level), or high altitude intercept of aircraft (Mach 2.5) . The low altitude/ high speed capability of the F-111 was used to bomb Kaddafi in Libya back in the 1984 time period (I forget exactly the exact year). The concept was to penetrate supersonically at low level, drop the bombs, and exit before the shockwave/sound hits the targeted area. It relied on the element of surprise. While it could do “dogfighting”, that was not its primary role in life. The F-15 was conceived and developed to be the USAF’s air superiority fighter. It has done well against earlier versions of Soviet MIGs, but also has proven to be a little “doggy” because of its size, and 7 “G” turn capability. In later years, it was evolved into a “bombs truck” by adding Air-to-Ground capability. Enter the F-16. It was conceived as a “Lightweight Fighter” with 9 “G” turn capability to complement the F-15. (translated… to dominate the skies in any dogfighting situation). It was designed as a “Multirole Fighter”, with unmatched capability for Air Superiority and Air-to-Ground weapons delivery. History has proven the F-16 has in fact dominated the skies, especially over the Middle East in dog fights by the Israel Air Force against Syrian MIGs where the win/loss ratio stood at over 60 to zero. Not sure what it is today, considering its continued use in Israel and by other countries like Pakistan. The F-16 also has an incredible Air-to-Ground weapons capability as well, and was used extensively this way during the initial Iraq conflict. Of course, along came the F-22 with stealth technology, and systems/capabilities to detect enemy aircraft at what is called Beyond Visual Range (BVR). Not sure what might still be classified on the F-22, but what I will say is that it transformed air superiority into a different concept. It is highly unlikely an enemy aircraft could get close enough to the F-22 to engage it in conventional dogfighting as we have known it in the 50 to 60 years since WWII. Opposing aircraft are detected, and shot down before they have any awareness that the F-22 was in “the vicinity”. The BVR capability has been added to the F-15 and F-16 over the years, but those are older airframes whose stealth technology are inferior to the F-22 and F-35.The F-35 continues the concept of dominating the skies via “stand-off” detection/shoot down capability, and as such is deigned with a lower “G” turn capability (in the 7 range) than the F-16. So, close in maneuvering like the Flight Test team was doing is interesting and necessary to establish what the F-35 can or cannot do during close in dogfighting maneuvers, but is irrelevant in today’s world where other approaches/capabilities give it air superiority if needed, while getting bombs on target with its Air-to-Ground” capability.

So, to the uneducated, articles like these make the F-35 look questionable. One has to understand what “Air Superiority” means in today’s world to keep things in perspective.

Funny, I remember folks making the same argument for the F-4. Dog fighting is over so who the hell needs a gun...

What a confidence builder for a fighter pilot - you're safe just as long as they don't see you.

Ooooops

This is the F-111 of the current regime. McNamara tried to make it into the everything aircraft for the Air Force and Navy. It failed at all except low altitude bomber. Now we have the same mentality of commonality. It infiltrates shoulder arms, sidearms, BDU's, boots and aircraft. One peg can't fit all holes.

IT's all about the desire for adding capabilities....

That leads to something I call "Swiss army knife effect" where all the additional functions interfere with basic functions as well as each other...

AD

That is one expensive M-16.

Got to handle on a few months ago. Nightmare for a Avionics Tech or Aviation Electrician.

I think it will be one of the last US Military pilot flown combatant aircraft.

They are trying to turn it into a A-10, but it isn't an A-10.

The Air Force hates the A-10, and the A-10 fleet is aging. So we end up with a very expensive aircraft that sucks a CAS and can't dogfight.

It can fly in undetected and blow stuff up and sneak out.

It is built for the first day of the war, and not much else.

The F-22 isn't so great anyway, they have no way to communicate with the F-18's or F-35. They can listen, but the communication back to the rest of the team doesn't work.