F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

[Loachman]

Armaments come and go. The "truck" is around for a lot longer. Some improvements can be made to it, but it still becomes limited by its base technology.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I wonder if he is referencing the sensor pods that were fitted to some of our CF-18's, apparently they are quite good. although I suspect modifying the SH to carry the same pod would not be to difficult.

 

[WingsofFury]

WingsofFury,

You've stated that our current legacy Hornets are a better platform than the Super Hornet.  How so?

Other than being an enthusiast, I have no real experience or technical knowledge beyond what one can read online.  I'm curious about your take on it (And Supersonicmax too) - and whoever else can speak of it from an experienced perspective. 

How are the legacy Hornets we have now, better platforms than the SH?

Our current legacy Hornets are more maneuverable, costs less to maintain, has a greater ferry range, greater climb rate, can carry all the munitions needed to perform in NORAD and NATO operations, has a kick ass mission computer, stores management system, and the sniper pod it uses is the best available.

And the cost is a lot lower too…really, the only reason the Super Hornet exists was to provide a cheaper alternative to the Tomcat.  There’s a reason the Marines decided to stick with C and D model Hornets instead of getting SH’s. 

About the only place SH’s are better equipped would be with the AESA radar.

 

[WingsofFury]

Rather than focusing on the truck perhaps some time should be spent on the cargo.  What will the aircraft carry inside and under its wings.

Air launched ordnance is nothing more than single use UAVs with varying levels of intelligence.  The power pack (rocket, jet, prop or gravity) determines its speed and range.  Various sensors and comms and loads of HE can be attached.  They don't need to worry about manoeuvring within the physiological limits of a pilot. 

So how come we spend so much angst on the platform and virtually no effort is spent on the armaments?

If you want to maximize payload, the best option (IMO) would be the SLAM Eagle or even the F-15SG variant; with the radar upgrades and the ability to carry an enormous payload with a huge loiter time compared to other aircraft, there is nothing that comes remotely close to it.  Along with the fact that the airframe itself is rated to have a service life almost twice as long as other aircraft, it will ensure that the platform can be around for a long time to come.

Ultimately the weaponry you speak of is reflected in the technology of the small diameter bomb, or SDB; on an F-22 or F-35 you can put in 8 SDB's alongn with 2 AMRAAM's while still retaining stealth.  On a Strike Eagle, the payload is 28 of these little dynamos.

Everything else, such as a JDAM, is able to be carried by any existing platform; the major difference are the weapons systems employed to operate them.

 

[trampbike]

Just once I'd like to see something cutting edge bought...

I'd say that the new Chinooks fit this description

 

[PuckChaser]

We got one thing nice, now we can shut'er down and continue with procuring crap?

 

[George Wallace]

We got one thing nice, now we can shut'er down and continue with procuring crap?

Hey!  Every decade we are permitted one mistake where we purchase a good piece of kit.  Even PET made a mistake and we got the Leopard 1 C1. 

 

[WingsofFury]

I'd say that the new Chinooks fit this description

I don't disagree, and the C-17's are good too....just wish the fighter crowd would get something that isn't already 20 years old.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Loachman: B-52? Always remembering that NORAD (to stop the Yanquis for doing it for us) is the primordial RCAF fighter rationale:
http://aviationweek.com/defense/usaf-keep-existing-bombers-beyond-2040
http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/newsboeing-to-upgrade-usafs-b-52-bomber-fleet-with-conect-technology-4685214

But naturally no direct comparison.  All depends on what Canadian politicians think is necessary and are willing to pay for.  Should they have any clue about what factors are involved in the choices they make (civilian bureaucrats?).

Mark
Ottawa

 

[PuckChaser]

I think its a little bit different with bombers. They're so expensive, the USAF wants to milk everything they can get out of them, until LRSB gets off the ground. There's really only so many improvements you can make to something designed to fly in straight lines and carry really heavy things.

 

[Quirky]

Our current legacy Hornets are more maneuverable, costs less to maintain, has a greater ferry range, greater climb rate, can carry all the munitions needed to perform in NORAD and NATO operations, has a kick *** mission computer, stores management system, and the sniper pod it uses is the best available.

Our current hornets are maintenance disasters with an ever growing part shortage that isn't being addressed.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I am not sure we have the 'best pod' available either.

 

[WingsofFury]

Our current hornets are maintenance disasters with an ever growing part shortage that isn't being addressed.

Compared to the Super Hornet they are not disasters at all.  The concern about an ever growing part shortage is one budgeting issues which sees less money put aside for spare parts; that's a political issue.

 

[WingsofFury]

I am not sure we have the 'best pod' available either.

And what would be a better option?  The current pod and the technology are in use on various strike and multirole platforms around the world with no negative feedback...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

If you want to maximize payload, the best option (IMO) would be the SLAM Eagle or even the F-15SG variant; with the radar upgrades and the ability to carry an enormous payload with a huge loiter time compared to other aircraft, there is nothing that comes remotely close to it.  Along with the fact that the airframe itself is rated to have a service life almost twice as long as other aircraft, it will ensure that the platform can be around for a long time to come.

Ultimately the weaponry you speak of is reflected in the technology of the small diameter bomb, or SDB; on an F-22 or F-35 you can put in 8 SDB's alongn with 2 AMRAAM's while still retaining stealth.  On a Strike Eagle, the payload is 28 of these little dynamos.

Everything else, such as a JDAM, is able to be carried by any existing platform; the major difference are the weapons systems employed to operate them.

Is the production line open and how does unit cost compare to the F-35 and SH?

 

[Good2Golf]

F-15SE is definitely a very nice airplane, and in a league that is well above Super Hornet.  It is the Gen4+ version of the "pre-" Gen 5 F-22 Raptor.

Unit cost, as I and others have noted is not always the best metric of value...what cost against fleet size? Acquisition only? Acqusition and in-service support? Acquisition, in-service support, and pers, ops and (non-ISS) maint?

Within total program cost "error bars" I'd 30% off single game price
25% off parking
Pre-order access and discounts on 2015-16 playoff tickets
20% off Sens Store merchandise
VIP points benefits program (for Sens experiences, free game tickets etc.)
Access to exclusive player meet-and-greets and other special events
Ticket exchange for 2 games
Flexible payment plan optionssay that F-15SE would be more than Grippen NG by a lot, more than Super Horney an Rafale by 'a bit', similar to F-35 and less than the Typhoon.

If I was a fighter pilot and someone offered to buy me lunch and gave me a Boeing menu to order from, it would be Silent Eagle.

:2c:

 

[WingsofFury]

F-15SE is definitely a very nice airplane, and in a league that is well above Super Hornet.  It is the Gen4+ version of the "pre-" Gen 5 F-22 Raptor.

Unit cost, as I and others have noted is not always the best metric of value...what cost against fleet size? Acquisition only? Acqusition and in-service support? Acquisition, in-service support, and pers, ops and (non-ISS) maint?

Within total program cost "error bars" I'd 30% off single game price
25% off parking
Pre-order access and discounts on 2015-16 playoff tickets
20% off Sens Store merchandise
VIP points benefits program (for Sens experiences, free game tickets etc.)
Access to exclusive player meet-and-greets and other special events
Ticket exchange for 2 games
Flexible payment plan optionssay that F-15SE would be more than Grippen NG by a lot, more than Super Horney an Rafale by 'a bit', similar to F-35 and less than the Typhoon.

If I was a fighter pilot and someone offered to buy me lunch and gave me a Boeing menu to order from, it would be Silent Eagle.

:2c:

I said the F-15SG...not the F-15SE which hasn't even been developed yet.  The cost for that would be astronomical. The cost of the F-15K (SLAM Eagle) in 2006 was approximately $100M; this plane is similar to the SG variant.

 

[PuckChaser]

Your accidental copy and paste inside that post could have been significantly more embarrassing... [emoji1]

 

[MarkOttawa]

Software challenges for foreign buyers:

F-35 Customers Funding U.S.-Based Software Update Labs
Bill Sweetman

Foreign air forces using the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter are being compelled to build and fund $150 million software laboratories, based in the U.S. and almost 50% staffed by U.S. personnel, that generate data crucial to the fighter’s ability to identify new radio-frequency threats.

This regime is more stringent and far-reaching than earlier U.S. fighter export deals. Those usually withheld key software — known as source code — from the customer, but in most cases allowed local users to manage their own “threat libraries,” data that allowed the electronic warfare (EW) system to identify radio-frequency threats, with in-country, locally staffed facilities.

For the U.K. in particular, the reliance on U.S.-located laboratories looks like a pullback from its earlier position. In 2006, concern over access to JSF technology reached the national leadership level, and prompted a declaration, by U.S. President George W. Bush and U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair, that “both governments agree that the U.K. will have the ability to successfully operate, upgrade, employ, and maintain the JSF such that the U.K. retains operational sovereignty over the aircraft.”

That promise seemingly contrasts with the severe limits now being imposed on non-U.S. access to the system.

Concerns about the lack of sovereignty and access to the core system — since customer laboratory personnel will not be co-located with operating units — are being voiced...
http://aviationweek.com/defense/f-35-customers-funding-us-based-software-update-labs

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Kirkhill]

Your accidental copy and paste inside that post could have been significantly more embarrassing... [emoji1]

Bad enough that he is a Sens fan......