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 Lightning II : News & Discussions

Discussion in 'The Americas' started by Picard, Sep 4, 2012.

  1. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,864
    Likes Received:
    3,023
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    If you have a dedicated carrier with fighters to provide air protection, F-35B is OK for a strike role; Harrier should be able to provide superior sortie rate, so it would be a better choice, assuming it can be equipped with good jammers and IR sensor, or escorted by dedicated jamming platform.

    F-35B should be able to take off in ~120 meters, compared to flight deck length of almost 200 meters for Mistral, so yes.

    Probably.
     
    samsonight and Gessler like this.
  2. Averageamerican

    Averageamerican Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    15,359
    Likes Received:
    2,378
    Country Flag:
    United States
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    The dog fight is as obsolete as the battleship, its all BVR missiles now days and has been for a long time, in the Gulf War and Iraq War, they usually IDed the enemy because of the possiblity of friendly fire, but thats no longer necesssary.
     
  3. Gessler

    Gessler BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    9,745
    Likes Received:
    9,636
    Country Flag:
    India
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    Im thinking of a scenario like this -

    IAC-2 CATOBAR carrier (65k tons) launching off FGFAs in air-superiority role while Mistral/Juan Carlos LHDs
    launching F-35Bs in support role, performing basiclly bombing and SEAD/DEAD ops while FGFA concentrates
    fully on A2A combat.

    The two jets could provide ample fleet airspace defense for IN's CBGs while at the same time engaging in
    combat v/s PLAN at the Malacca Strait.
     
  4. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,864
    Likes Received:
    3,023
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    Yes, that could work...
     
  5. WMD

    WMD Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,065
    Likes Received:
    740
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    If IN gets any LHDs can a CBG be formed around it?
    that way we could have a CBG at a lower cost.
     
  6. Manmohan Yadav

    Manmohan Yadav Brigadier STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    21,213
    Likes Received:
    5,716
    Country Flag:
    India
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    F-22 is not available for Export
    as for F-35s, US cant force India for anything
    otherwise they would have won the MRCA by now instead of Rafale
     
  7. Manmohan Yadav

    Manmohan Yadav Brigadier STAR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2011
    Messages:
    21,213
    Likes Received:
    5,716
    Country Flag:
    India
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    why operate 2 types of stealth fighters
    it will be a nightmare for maintanence

    FGFA with Rafale will be good enough
    or N-LCA, IN wont be operating Mistral so why bother with it.
    IAC-1 and IAC-2 should do the trick :cheers:
     
  8. G777

    G777 Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Messages:
    6,312
    Likes Received:
    1,284
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    The stealth is crap, probably get better from China.

    F-35 isnt true VTOL like Harrier.

    So the carrier is screwed?

    Then design and build a better VTOL, why does everyone always avoid it.
     
    samsonight likes this.
  9. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,864
    Likes Received:
    3,023
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    Stealth is dead anyway. Never existed in the first place, actually.

    Neither can take off vertically with full fuel and weapons load, so true VTOL...

    Better throw F-35s into the sea and turn carrier into a floating missile silo...

    VTOL requires large performance sacrifices, Harrier was OK dogfighter but couldn't go supersonic, at least not when loaded. F-35 can go supersonic, but that is only advantage it has over Harrier.
     
    samsonight and G777 like this.
  10. Averageamerican

    Averageamerican Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2010
    Messages:
    15,359
    Likes Received:
    2,378
    Country Flag:
    United States
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    Evidently China and Russia have come to the conclusion that stealth is critical or they would not be spending so much money and effort trying to achieve stealth. In a conflict the most stealthy planes are going to win. One of the reasons stealt is so important it is completly unnerving to be in combat and to know their is an invisable enemy that can see you and that you can die any second.
     
  11. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,864
    Likes Received:
    3,023
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    Except stealth is not invisible, and PAK FA / J-20s stealth is most likely for dealing with short wavelegth SAM radars, not other aircraft.
     
    samsonight likes this.
  12. Scorpion82

    Scorpion82 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    326
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    I certainly know and understand much more about these topics than you do, that's the result of dealing with the subject since more than two decades and a decade of professional experience with hands on aircraft and studying the subject on a professional base. Whether you can reach the level where I stand yet remains to be seen, but it's nothing that you can acquire by simply reading a couple of articles. Maybe you should focus on mastering the amateur leage first, before trying to play with the big guys in the champions league.

    Active radar guided missiles work exactly in the same way first guide then autonomous as the seeker takes over. BVR hasn't been overly successful in the past as contineously illuminating targets until impact was difficult but these days are over. ECM may still work or not depending on the level of intelligence and the technologies employed. IR might be "CM resistant" today, but that is a temporary state only. Once IRCM such as lasers proliferate themselves it remains to be seen how much of this will be left and how effective IR technology will be. In many ways IR sensors still don't match the performance and capability of radars due to technology inherent limitations that I have tried to explain to people like you for ages, but you prefer to ignore all this and start over with the same beginners bullshit again and again. Range figures spread around in the public are representative for a very narrow subset of specific circumstances only. In the real world the performance figures are highly dynamic and largely dependent on a range of factors. In case of IR sensors the actual IR signature of the target is dependent on the ambient temperature, the speed, background, atmosphere and aspect angle for example. Vary any of these and the range figures will change and in most cases the shift won't be to the higher side. So a 90 km figure MAY be valid for a given sensor against a given target in very specific circumstances only. It might be much lower as well and unless you learn to understand the importance of track and targeting quality vs rough detection only all I can say is, that you are a hopeless case. But I may encourage you, at some point in time I was equally clueless and ignorant and believed what I wanted to believe in the first place. It took a while and some hard lessons to realise how utterly wrong and delusional I was, but some people manage the jump and evolve, while others are stuck at their level of ignorance. Maybe it's too early to give up hope on you, as I think that you are smart enough, but you have stagnated a while ago already and I haven't seen much progress ever since.
     
    1 person likes this.
  13. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,864
    Likes Received:
    3,023
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    Then why you don't consider actual tactical limitations and uses of technology? If aircraft radiates, it gives away its position. IRST is only passive sensor capable of detecting non-radiationg aircraft at long distances. As such, stealth aircraft with no IRST (as is case, for now, with F-22, and possibly J-20/J-21) will have to either rely on (jammable) uplink, or to radiate itself, in order to find non-radiating non-LO aircraft. Even LPI radars can be detected by comparable-technology RWRs at longer distance than they will detect your average fighter, which means that stealth aircraft using active radar is not stealth anymore. And BVR missiles require mid-flight update from launch platform to be even marginally effective.

    I know. But aircraft still has to get a bearing, and if it has no IRST, it has to turn on radar, at very least for mid-flight update.

    There is far more to BVR not being successfull than that, but yes, it was one of factors.

    That depends on how precisely will lasers be able to target IR sensors, and at what distance. Either way, it will likely be harder for ECM to achieve required performance due to passive nature of IRST.

    All the while ignoring limitations of radar.

    I am well aware of limitations of IRST, thank you. But question is not only what limitations some sensor has, but how useful it is in tactical environment despite the limitations. General rule is that simpler = harder to counter, and detection process for IRST is simpler than that of radar, as it has only "receive" part.

    That is so for anything. Radar detection range figures are also "optimum conditions", not to talk about missile Pk estimates...

    Yes, I know.

    Aside for specified circumstances (head-on, subsonic fighter-sized targets) conditions used are usually optimal ones. But that is so for any numerical figures (RCS, speed, range, etc.) and it is impossible for all variables to be accounted for in any practical amount of time and space.

    As I said, any figure assumes optimum conditions. And until we get statistics of type "IRST of model R had detection range was X against target of Y size, with Q temperature difference between target's skin temperature and background, at L altitude, with P humidity" etc., optimum situation is a useful starting point, and probably only one possible.

    Track and targeting quality are not very good for radar either, especially in ECM-heavy environment.

    I don't know what you think of as "stagnation", I do change my opinions as soon as I find good enough evidence, but due to things I have explained above, I believe that combat between qualitatively and quantitatively comparable opponents is the only evidence that can prove some technology is really working. Such proof is lacking for both BVR and stealth, and relying too much on unproven technologies has never been a wise idea, especially when technologies in question are so expensive.
     
    samsonight likes this.
  14. Scorpion82

    Scorpion82 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    326
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    In contrast to what you assert I look at the broader picture and try to consider all aspects that are relevant and I actually weigh the pros and cons of everything. You do what everyone does who has an agenda and wants to make a specific case, you pick out aspects that you believe will bolster your point and ingore everything that may threaten your ideas.

    For the rest it has been beaten to death. Suffice to say that everything has its limitations, pros and cons. You acknowledge this yet, as you have occassionally done in the past, but you won't stick to this throughout the course of a discussion let alone, when launching yet another thread covering the same subject.

    A major difference between me and you here is that you actually want to make a case against the F-22 and/or F-35 and a case for other aircraft that you like i.e. Gripen, Typhoon... I don't want to make a case for either type. The sole reason why I'm defending the F-22 and F-35 here is because the views that you spread en masse are utterly one sided and artificially rigged to your case and as there appears to be no one else here who would do this without resorting to the same silly fanboy like claims such as "F-22/F-35 are invisible/invincible and superior at everything for the sake of being 5th generation" and nonsense like that. Elsewhere I assume such a position for Russian or European aircraft dependent on whether people poses the knowledge and understanding about these types and the specifics about air warfare and technology. I encourage everyone to try to learn more about the basics of aviation and aerial warfare in the first place and gather facts about the specifics in the second place and then start to built up their own mind based on a balance of factual knowledge and actual comprehension of the subject instead of reproducing the content of some articles or reports.
     
  15. Picard

    Picard Lt. Colonel RESEARCHER

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    5,864
    Likes Received:
    3,023
    Re: On F-35 export "success"

    Such as?

    Like when? By pointing out that Gulf Wars are by no means representative of BVR missile Pk? Or that numbers and sortie rates are actually important?

    I acknowledge that everything has pros and cons, but it does not mean everything is equally useful in a war. Wooden ships-of-the-line have pros and cons when compared to modern warships, as do flying saucers when compared to fighters... but it doesn't mean they are equally useful as weapons.

    If you had ever paid attention to my posts, you would have noticed that I have used Gripen and Typhoon only as examples... I have used Su-35, MiG-21 and other aircraft in similar way, but Typhoon and Gripen are most likely to face F-35 in export market.

    Example, please. I have explained why stealth is useless, why sortie rate and low cost are important... there is nothing artificial in it.

    Think what you want, but I didn't arrive at my present positions quickly or easily.
     
    samsonight likes this.

Share This Page