Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

F-35 inferior to T-50 & J-20 in head to head combat - Carlo Kopp

Discussion in 'The Americas' started by Optimist, Sep 22, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Optimist

    Optimist Lieutenant SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    740
    Likes Received:
    127
    Can the F-35 ensure Western air superiority in the Asia-Pacific? This question inevitably leads to passionate debate among military experts and scholars alike.

    Vocal critics of Australia’s $16 billion plus F-35 commitments, such as Carlo Kopp, Research Fellow at Monash University and Co-Founder of Air Power Australia, believe that the F-35 is little more than “a specialised battlefield interdictor lacking the performance, stealth and sensor suite for air superiority.â€

    In the frankest terms, Kopp reasons “the F-35 is not a viable design and could never meet Australia’s national security needs. Claims otherwise have been repeatedly shown to be incorrect, and mostly based upon naive, incorrect or absent assessments of the capabilities of contemporary Russian and Chinese built weapon systems deployed in Asia.â€

    He backs up his argument by asserting that the F-35’s aerodynamic deficiencies make it unlikely to be employed effectively as an air defence interceptor “while its stealth performance is provably insufficient for defensive/offensive counter-air and anti-surface warfare strike operations against contemporary regional capabilities.†This is despite the Pentagon’s promises that its allies will receive comparable stealth capabilities to American versions of the platform.

    He therefore contends that the “F-35 is incapable of making any useful contribution to the defence of Australia’s northern sea-air gap,†which most analysts believe is the top national defense priority for the nation.

    This begs the question: Why then would Australia continue to pursue such a flawed program?

    In Kopp’s assessment, it is because the Australian Department of Defence (ADoD) lacks the internal capacity to properly assess and define Australian air superiority requirements; suggesting that the ADoD has based their next generation platform requirements on “briefings provided by foreign contractors supplying replacement equipment.â€

    Kopp therefore is not surprised that Canberra is now considering the F/A-18 Super Hornetas a possible gap alternative to the F-35 despite the fact that “the F/A-18F has similar performance and capability deficiencies to the F-35, and is equally incapable of credibly performing against modern regional threats.†In his view, ADoD is just repeating a long-established pattern of behavior in choosing products without aligning them with air superiority requirements.

    While his conclusions may seem extreme to American defence strategists, Kopp’s perspectives are not surprising to Australian defence policy analysts, who see him as a part of an outspoken but accepted minority that remains variably influential in Australian policy circles. This faction argues that Australian air superiority must be designed to unilaterally counter the most advanced capabilities in the region, including the capabilities of China and India; a position that clearly derives from a larger debate in Australian foreign policy – What represents a probable set of adversary capabilities that must be unilaterally countered in order to ensure Australian national security?

    While he does not argue China represents a threat, Kopp contends China does present Australians with a very high strategic risk due to its size and the sophistication of its new generation of weapons. For his camp, Australian air superiority requirements therefore must be based upon the assessed capabilities of squadrons of Indian Sukhoi T-50 PAK-FA and Chinese Chengdu J-20 series fighters rather than the few fourth generation platforms being fielded by ASEAN members. (He assumes that the latter will be progressively replaced in time by the T-50 PAK-FA and export models of the J-20 as smaller nations now buying Flankers switch to buying these platforms in 5-10 years time.)

    If the T-50 PAK-FA and J-20 were the benchmark, he concludes the F-35 would be insufficient for head-to-head combat. Furthermore, he posits that “recent advances in Russian and Chinese Surface to Air Missile and counter-stealth radar technology … nullify designs like the F/A-18E/F and F-35†as well.

    Instead, Kopp opines that the F22A is the only viable existing platform capable of ensuring Australian air superiority and enabling optimal support for regional and global peace and stability operations: “The only aircraft type which can credibly compete (with the T-50 PAK-FA and J-20) is the U.S. built F-22A Raptor. If Australia came to the aid of the U.S. with a fleet of 50+ F-22s, it could make a major contribution of high strategic value to the U.S., in any Asia-Pacific conflict. More importantly the F-22 balances strategically any future ASEAN or other Asian buys of the T-50 PAK-FA and J-20 and permits Australia participation in any global interventions where a modern threat exists.â€


    Unfortunately, as Sam Roggeveen, Fellow at Lowy Institute for International Policy, points out: “Former U.S. Defense Secretary Gates doubled down on the F-35 by ending production of the F-22. For countries like Australia looking for a fifth-generation fighter, the F-35 (currently) is the only game in town.â€

    While agreeing with Kopp that the F-35 may be insufficient against fifth generation fighters, Roggeveen maintains a polar opposite view on why the debate on Australian air superiority is flawed. For him, it is not merely just a question of adversary capabilities but also of intent.

    Roggeveen therefore questions why Australia would need anything more than the F-35 to begin with. Even with squadrons of Chinese J-20s in play, he believes that the only probable scenarios for confrontation with China would involve regional conflicts in far away places such as the Taiwan Strait.

    In response, Roggeveen raises an interesting counter-point: “Australia would only ever go to war with China by America’s side. So, even if Australia did have air power that could match the PLAAF and PLANAF one-for-one, could Australia bring decisive strategic weight to any military engagement? At most, we are going to buy 100 (F-35s), and only a fraction of those would be committed to, say, a war over Taiwan. Would that even make a difference to the larger strategic picture?â€

    From his perspective, the answer is not the F22A (if it were available) or a more advanced next generation platform. Instead, it is at most the F-35 or perhaps even “a cheaper, less capable aerial platform.â€

    As he observes, the latter would afford Australia the luxury of investing in “a potentially decisive capability such as diesel powered submarine killers (SSKs),†which could be of greater value to the U.S. if a strategic conflict with China ever materializes.

    While this might be an interesting strategic option for Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding or General Dynamics Electric Boat, it certainly is not the one preferred by Lockheed Martin, who must ensure that their Australian commitments remain firm. If the company fails to do so, it risks losing future revenue for shareholders and bringing further harm to the F-35 program’s already tarnished image.

    The Ones Who Walk Away From Bethesda: RAAF F-35 Deal, Up in the Air? | Foreword Report
     
  2. Mr Hit Smith

    Mr Hit Smith 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2011
    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    114
    BS Article! by a Hypothetical Paranoid.

    _____________________________________
    That Inferior F-35 beat 2 F-22's in training. Located and jammed thier radars from range. :rolleyes2:
     
    1 person likes this.
  3. Manmohan Yadav

    Manmohan Yadav Brigadier STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    21,213
    Likes Received:
    5,716
    Country Flag:
    India
    When did that happen, can you get me a link for it, wanna check it out
     
  4. Jungibaaz

    Jungibaaz Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Messages:
    5,744
    Likes Received:
    2,114
    not sure about T-50....
    but as for J-20, far too early to be pitting up against anything really.

    @all

    don't make the mistake on underestimating the F-35, the project itself is in the pits but IMHO it will be good especially in terms of avionics.
     
    2 people like this.
  5. Mr Hit Smith

    Mr Hit Smith 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2011
    Messages:
    368
    Likes Received:
    114
    Sorry! Mate
    A Friend Of Mine(professional) Sent me that jsf Report link!
    Id is blocked now! dunno why
     
  6. Manmohan Yadav

    Manmohan Yadav Brigadier STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    21,213
    Likes Received:
    5,716
    Country Flag:
    India
    T-50 is superior to F-35, after all its a Fighter designed to match F-22s ,
    is without a doubt superior to the F-35,

    J-20 no one knows about the Chinese advancement,
    cant really give a unbiased opinion about it.

    Test by western analysts have already proved Su-35 is superior to the F-35s
    So certainly T-50 will be more than a match for the f-35S
     
  7. Manmohan Yadav

    Manmohan Yadav Brigadier STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    21,213
    Likes Received:
    5,716
    Country Flag:
    India
    NVM then :happy:
     
  8. Rehan123

    Rehan123 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    60
    Hi everybody. Been around for a while following the posts. Joined just now as I finally found something where any contribution of mine is an addition to the site rather than meaningless blather.

    Back to the topic, that first review is sourced from the Air Power Australia website. I am unable to directly link to the page as the links end up dead for some reason but the index page is located here

    ausairpower . net / index . html

    The site belongs to a highly respected Australian think-tank. The website has comparisons between the F-35 JSF and the newer Flankers and they have concluded that latest generation Flankers, let alone the PAK-FA, are a total over-match for the f-35. They also have a good assessment of the Su-PAK FA. I personally find the website amazing and the contributors learned and erudite. It is uncanny that they predicted all the issues with the JSF 3-4 years ago when the initial design came out and now each and every thing is coming true as has been accepted by the JSF Program Director Navy Vice Adm. Dave Venlet. An example would be that they predicted significant buffet issues in 2007 and a QLR conducted on behalf of the US Senate in OCT 2011 found the same to be true amongst a host of other things. The QLR also reported that the JSF failed to even equal CAS capabilities of legacy aircrafts like the F-16 and the F/A 18.


    Anyways what I am saying is that there are analyses done by learned gentlemen & women available on the web that shows the JSF as a poor plane outmatched by latest Russian technology. In fact the US came close to shutting the whole thing down when Senator McCain put forth a proposal for the same in a Senate Security Committee meeting. The proposal came close to getting through with the votes tied for and against (that counts as failure). Here is a part link (I don't have enough points to post a link - sorry) to a recent article giving us a view of what is happening in the JSF programme

    pogo . org/resources/national-security/f-35-jsf-concurrency-quick-look-review-20111129 . html
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2012
  9. Manmohan Yadav

    Manmohan Yadav Brigadier STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    21,213
    Likes Received:
    5,716
    Country Flag:
    India
    yes, we know about that site,
    one of my personal favorites,
    very nice assessments on it.

    In fact i wont be surprised if it turns out that it is funded by the Sukhoi Corporation :toast_sign:
     
  10. Rehan123

    Rehan123 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    60
    Unlikely. If it were so then the people on that site wouldn't be campaigning stridently to junk the inferior F-35 and start production of the F-22 Raptor again, while adding tech developed for the F-35 to the next gen Raptor. I mean why would a Sukhoi sponsored site propose that USA build more of the only plane in the world capable of matching, and even besting in some respects like stealth, the most advanced Sukhoi the PAK-FA?

    Their admiration of the newer gen Flanker's is quite open to see though. :cheers:
     
    1 person likes this.
  11. Manmohan Yadav

    Manmohan Yadav Brigadier STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    21,213
    Likes Received:
    5,716
    Country Flag:
    India
    Simply because they have a better fighter in Su-35s and PAK FA, all they have to do is compare with with F-35s
    TO PROVE THEIR SUKHOI IS BETTER

    As for F-22s, everyone know it won't be restarted again at 300 Million $ a piece, US can't afford it.
     
  12. Averageamerican

    Averageamerican Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    15,359
    Likes Received:
    2,378
    Country Flag:
    United States
    Copp seems to favor the F22 over the F35, I would estimate that Russia is about a half generation behind the US on the design of aircraft, at the end of the cold war they were I expect a much as two generations behind. The US does not need nearly as many F22 and F35s for many many reasons then they planned when the project was first started. One smart bomb can take out what it used to take 500 gravity bombs to take out. Assessing Russian Fighter Technology

    One example is in Russian design they are making massive investments in technology to take out AWAC planes, but the US is alllready changeing to a technology where they will not be using AWACs or if they do it will be a dual use with drones and a central control of the air battlefield.
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2012
    1 person likes this.
  13. Nick 779

    Nick 779 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2011
    Messages:
    1,101
    Likes Received:
    183

    Yes i agree with you and hey welcome to IDF bro.
     
  14. SpArK

    SpArK SorCeroR Staff Member ADMINISTRATOR

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    4,159
    Likes Received:
    2,111
    BAE Systems Taps Australia for Titanium Component of F-35 Jet


    [​IMG]

    Aircraft manufacturer BAE Systems will taps its Australian unit to put in place an aerospace component manufacturing operation in Adelaide which would produce titanium parts for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).

    The fighter jet, which is being developed in the U.S., will have titanium parts for its vertical tail fin.

    The JSF programme is expected to manufacture over 3,000 aircraft in the next five years for the U.S. and other countries. The South Australian (SA) government is supporting BAE Systems Australia's new manufacturing operations expected to be worth $177 million.

    As part of the SA support, Premier Jay Weatherill is in Fort Worth, Texas to visit the JSF production plant. He said with the facility to rise in the state, SA will have defence as the foundation of its manufacturing sector which would also generate jobs for highly skilled residents.

    The premier added that the new capabilities open more opportunities in aerospace, commercial and defence projects.

    To complement the BAE System Australia operations, Rosebank Engineering would put up a specialised metal finishing facility in Adelaide, said SA Defence Industries Minister Jack Snelling. The minister said that the combined capability currently does not exist in Australia.

    Mr Snelling added that the establishment of such a capability in Adelaide would provide long-term growth and job security in SA.

    The BAE plant will produce thin-wall aerospace components and the Rosebank operation will perform metal finishing processes. The two facilities would be built in Edinburgh Parks.

    Besides aircraft, BAE Systems is also a leading provider of soldier protective and load carrying equipment in the U.S. It produces a significant portion of the U.S.'s body armour, tactical vests, combat helmets and load-carrying systems.

    Last week, BAE Systems in Phoenix, Arizona received a $15.8-million award from the U.S. Army to produce side ballistic insert plates. The XSBI hard body armour is worn inside a soldier's vest as protection against different ballistic threats. It is worn on both sides of the torso.

    BAE Systems has presence in Australia, India, Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom and U.S. It has customers and partners in over 100 countries.


    BAE Systems Taps Australia for Titanium Component of F-35 Jet - International Business Times
     
  15. Marqueur

    Marqueur Peaceful Silence ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Messages:
    11,317
    Likes Received:
    6,358
    Country Flag:
    India
    foolish to think F-35 is inferior ... its expensive
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page