Oz experts' long articles say JSF not so stealth.
-
wow?How about F15SG?
''The US Navy’s F/A-18A-D Hornets and F/A-18E/F Super Hornets are simply non viable in high intensity conflict and are only safely usable for low intensity conflict. The new EA-18G Growler cannot survive against the new Russian SA-21 missile system, and will be challenged by the SA-20 Gargoyle now being exported to Iran and China. Without new and highly stealthy combat aircraft such as proposed robotic UCAVs and the proposed navalised “F/A-22N Sea Raptor” the US Navy carrier fleet is unusable in high intensity conflicts.
The Air Force fighter fleet faces similar challenges. The Cold War F-15C and F-15E fleets are not survivable against the latest Russian missile systems, and at best offer parity against the latest variants of the Flanker fighter. The F-16C, numerically most important in the US fighter fleet, is even less viable. '' -
diam diam la. so noisy tsk
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
''From a force structure triage perspective, the F-35 falls into the same category as the US fleet of legacy fighters, including the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. Unlike the legacy fighters, the F-35 is becoming about as expensive as an F-22A Raptor in quantity, but much less survivable and lethal than the F-22A.''
I really wonder what did ur wind commander base on, to say a not yet operational plane is less survivable n lethal than a F-22 (just operational , and little to prove, yet)
One is a Multi-role Air Superiority while the other is for Multi role military strike.Furthermore, both are different fighters. Did this guy test out both planes before? If no, all he is doing is only talking on paper. But u are worse. U are just craping ... -
This is not to insult any countries connected to JSF.
We are here just to discuss openly the good and bad of JSF.
While many SG guys go for most advanced hard wares,JSF ,F 22 etc,
we have be careful not to fear by the names and over look
the reality of hard wares.
SG is just a by stander of JSF.Why?Financially,we can afford it.
Becos there is high risks in new platform.
If there is a long time gap between the confirmation of specifications
and succeful roll out from factory,the platform may not able to enjoy
latest technology.It is just under long trial period.
http://www.ausairpower.net/jsf.html
@@@@@@@@@@
A 21 st century plane is close to a Vietnam era plane,
though the former may be more stealth and carrying 4 more internal missiles?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-105_Thunderchief
F 105D payloads 6700 kg.
How much is JSF payloads?
http://www.jsf.mil/sitemap/
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Media Kit Statistics (ZIP, 98.2 KB)
Internal--eg F35C-- CV
''2 air-to-air missiles,
2 precision air-to-surface
External: ---
Variety--6804 kg,4 hard points, 2 under wings missiles''
-
I guess that the nations involved in the development of the F-35 will scrap the idea completely and will elect to open the old F1-11 production line again. Who wouldnt want the next "best" air-frame in the world ?
i'm sure the fact that carlo has a financial interest in the old aussie f1-11 fleet has nothing to do with his views and we are certainly lucky to have him down here. I'm glad his expertise isnt encumbered by the fact that he has no access to the full specs and tests of the f-35 to cloud his view
i swallowed his story when first told, but 10 minutes on an air forum that "people who do know" participate in, will show he is thought of as someone who can spin a good, believable story for an average person, but doesnt hold up to examination -
Kopp is largely discounted by any serious airpower enthusiast.
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
Kopp is largely discounted by any serious airpower enthusiast.
very true, but i see that a poster here used wiki links for credibility, so i guess Kopp would be seen as a god in comparison, no nation publicly releases the true specs of any of its weapon systems, the raaf has no plan to go 1 on 1 between even a fa-18f and a weather balloon, let alone a SU