Jaws2002 Posted July 21, 2017 Posted July 21, 2017 (edited) NELLIS AFB, NV. --- The 33rd Fighter Wing and Marine Attack Squadron 221 are participating in the first combat exercise with Air Force F-35As and Marine Corps F-35Bs operating simultaneously during Red Flag 17-3, at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev. Red Flag is a realistic combat training exercise involving the air forces of the United States, its allies, and coalition partners. More than 100 aircraft and 3,000 personnel participate in the exercise an average four times each year. http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/185467/f_22s,-f_35a-and-f_35bs-attend-red-flag-together.html Oh boy. Can't wait for all the HUD videos, with F-35's flopping around like a fat carp out of the water, in the gunsight. Maybe there will have in place some"special rules of engagement to allow the F-35 to operate at it's full potential" .....and of course, gag orders, to never talk about it. Edited July 21, 2017 by Jaws2002
707shap_Srbin Posted July 22, 2017 Posted July 22, 2017 If they had any nads they'd invite the Russians From Russians with friendly Greetings: 6
Jaws2002 Posted July 23, 2017 Author Posted July 23, 2017 From Russians with friendly Greetings: The Sukhoi fighters are amazing, with their post stall maneuvering, but I've seen a video with the solo demo done by the Rafale C at Duxford, this year and I was left with the mouth open for the duration of the video. Most of the display was done at higher speed and the thing looks so dynamic! I don't think I've seen a demo this good. Plus it has the coolest demo paint scheme I've seen. Watch it here: There are more videos of this flight, most likely better quality, but this is the one i found quick Just look at this gorgeous thing:
ZachariasX Posted July 24, 2017 Posted July 24, 2017 (edited) In contrast to the PAK FA, the Rafale is at least an operational (and an extremely capable one) aircraft. But he PAK FA will for sure be a piece of work for an F-22, especially as long as the later remaines without IRST. Regarding the F-35, no more needs to be said other than the 2016 annual DOT&E Report says (from page 47 on). In short, it fails in being effective in CAS will cost likely more than $130 mio. (and not $80 mio.) a piece even if order numbers are reduced has a reduced envelope to launching AIM-120 missiles (lacking altitude and supersonic speed for delivery) has unacceptable handling at transsonic speeds features an electro optical targeting system that is inferior to the systems it replaces (for AG engagenmets, for AA it will probably be much worse) will require legacy fighter support, negating its intended role for deep strikes over defended territory has reliability metrics that decreased during the year 2016 and have fallen to 21% has a reability rate at 45% of the required 20 hours between failures It is fair to say that it will still require as much money and effort to turn it into the "next generation fighter" that it would require for a burned out school bus. They would do a lot of good just melting those crates back to bricks and manufacture Gripen E/F. At least then they would get capable aircraft that could be bought in numbers. The situation is especially tragic for all countries other then the USA, where the original specs are not really relevant. The USA is probably the only nation that could have use for an aircraft as the F-35, but certainly not as a replacement but an addition to current aircraft types. Similar as the F-22, it is an aircraft of the 80's that was made for conducting war against Russia. For other uses than that, it is the wrong aircraft for the mission, even if you throw another couple of billions at it. Edited July 24, 2017 by ZachariasX
Jaws2002 Posted July 24, 2017 Author Posted July 24, 2017 In contrast to the PAK FA, the Rafale is at least an operational (and an extremely capable one) aircraft. But he PAK FA will for sure be a piece of work for an F-22, especially as long as the later remaines without IRST. Regarding the F-35, no more needs to be said other than the 2016 annual DOT&E Report says (from page 47 on). In short, it fails in being effective in CAS will cost likely more than $130 mio. (and not $80 mio.) a piece even if order numbers are reduced has a reduced envelope to launching AIM-120 missiles (lacking altitude and supersonic speed for delivery) has unacceptable handling at transsonic speeds features an electro optical targeting system that is inferior to the systems it replaces (for AG engagenmets, for AA it will probably be much worse) will require legacy fighter support, negating its intended role for deep strikes over defended territory has reliability metrics that decreased during the year 2016 and have fallen to 21% has a reability rate at 45% of the required 20 hours between failures It is fair to say that it will still require as much money and effort to turn it into the "next generation fighter" that it would require for a burned out school bus. They would do a lot of good just melting those crates back to bricks and manufacture Gripen E/F. At least then they would get capable aircraft that could be bought in numbers. The situation is especially tragic for all countries other then the USA, where the original specs are not really relevant. The USA is probably the only nation that could have use for an aircraft as the F-35, but certainly not as a replacement but an addition to current aircraft types. Similar as the F-22, it is an aircraft of the 80's that was made for conducting war against Russia. For other uses than that, it is the wrong aircraft for the mission, even if you throw another couple of billions at it. Completely agree. The F-35 was marketed as upgrade and replacement to the F-16 and F-18 the smaller NATO countries had. Al those need a single plane to do everything they need, but most importantly they need a capable fighter/interceptor. F-35 Will suck at both this tasks, because of the conflicting US Navy, Marines requirements. One Australian airforce general called the F-35 as the biggest ponzi scheme pulled on the coalition. I wish Canada would just buy the Rafale. It's the sexiest of the euro bunch. In an open market I bet Pak-fa would be a better choice, but we can't have that.
MineFewer Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 Six months ago called. They want their topic back.
ZachariasX Posted July 27, 2017 Posted July 27, 2017 Six months ago called. They want their topic back. This interview has about as much substance as a presidential Tweet. I tried to look it up on the original webpage, but there "Breaking News: North Korea Says Kim Jong-il Dead" I stopped looking.
Bearcat Posted May 25, 2018 Posted May 25, 2018 I have cleaned up this topic. Please keep current politics out of these threads. If you can't focus on the Airshow aspect of it then don't post.
DetCord12B Posted May 26, 2018 Posted May 26, 2018 Pfft...the Russians. Pfft...the Americans. You want a true opponent? Fly against the Indians. They've beaten everyone in mock dogfights for the past 12 years, and that includes flying a lot of busted, aging airframes against some of the most advanced hardware in the world and all the while scoring 8-2+ kill ratios in the process. So rant and rave about the F-35 or Su-35 all you want, but the Indians are proof you don't need the latest and greatest in dick-hard tech to dominate the skies. 2
DetCord12B Posted May 26, 2018 Posted May 26, 2018 3 minutes ago, ZachariasX said: The Indians? Yes, Sitting Bull was efficient... Yes, Indians. Those that inhabit the country of India, pompous twit. That country with the worlds second largest population, the fifth largest defense budget and the one that's defeated the United States and others in countless mock air engagements. Good God you're arrogant.
ZachariasX Posted May 26, 2018 Posted May 26, 2018 31 minutes ago, DetCord12B said: Yes, Indians. Those that inhabit the country of India, pompous twit. That country with the worlds second largest population, the fifth largest defense budget and the one that's defeated the United States and others in countless mock air engagements. Good God you're arrogant. Don‘t you worry, I do like them all. Regarding flying or fighting qualities, against the Pakistanis it was more even it seems, in number losing about the double of AC at a slightly lower total attrition rate. Can you substantiate your remark about the „defeated United States“ in „countless mock air engagements“? There must be some material about that out there. Not diputing your claim here, I‘m interested in your scource.
DetCord12B Posted May 26, 2018 Posted May 26, 2018 (edited) 34 minutes ago, ZachariasX said: Don‘t you worry, I do like them all. Regarding flying or fighting qualities, against the Pakistanis it was more even it seems, in number losing about the double of AC at a slightly lower total attrition rate. Can you substantiate your remark about the „defeated United States“ in „countless mock air engagements“? There must be some material about that out there. Not diputing your claim here, I‘m interested in your scource. I honestly don't know why I should have to provide a source when their (Indian) performance has been known for the better part of a decade and have lauded praise upon (ARFdQ) by USAF General Staff. A simple Google search on your part would provide the answers you seek. No worries, I'll do the abysmally difficult typing for you. Again, arrogance. https://theaviationist.com/2014/05/02/cope-india-2004-results/ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Aging-IAF-shoots-down-USAF-top-guns/articleshow/745557.cms https://www.rbth.com/blogs/2014/03/10/dissecting_a_dogfight_sukhoi_vs_usaf_at_red_flag_2008_33623 https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/596770/RAF-planes-beaten-Russian-Sukhoi-jets-Indian-pilots-training-exercise https://medium.com/covilian-military-intelligence-group/10-years-ago-an-aging-indian-air-force-bested-us-f-15s-in-an-exercise-named-cope-india-2c779ebce916 http://www.defensionem.com/indian-air-force-flying-to-the-elite-red-flag-exercise-analysis/ http://www.defenseworld.net/news/16063/Indian_Air_Force_Su_30MKIs__Jaguars_Shine_in_Red_Flag_Alaska_Exercise#.WwkK7e4vyUk EDIT - If your AD military Zac feel free to pull the ADGS scorecards from RF this year. They're readily available via the site. Edited May 26, 2018 by DetCord12B
1CGS LukeFF Posted May 26, 2018 1CGS Posted May 26, 2018 1 hour ago, DetCord12B said: They've beaten everyone in mock dogfights for the past 12 years Mock dogfights are one thing, and real, live combat is an entirely different reality.
MineFewer Posted May 26, 2018 Posted May 26, 2018 I've beaten more pilots in mock dogfights than Hartmann.
ZachariasX Posted May 26, 2018 Posted May 26, 2018 (edited) 32 minutes ago, DetCord12B said: No worries, I'll do the abysmally difficult typing for you. Again, arrogance. Thank you. I was indeed interested in what you took as information, not google. Edited May 26, 2018 by ZachariasX
DetCord12B Posted May 26, 2018 Posted May 26, 2018 21 minutes ago, LukeFF said: Mock dogfights are one thing, and real, live combat is an entirely different reality. Nope, nitpicking. The USAF tried it two years ago and absolutely failed. They claimed post-engagement that there were structural failures, pylon issues, RAM stab issues and so on and so forth. Problem is, what might effect the USAF might not affect anyone else. The Indian AF took-off with like simulated limitations, halfed actually, and still managed to defeat the United States 6-2, and using airframes that are almost 30ys old. 2
Recommended Posts