What is up with the F-35? Part II

[jlvfr]

So Singapore, is reported to buy the B model.

What? Why? It's not like they have carriers...

[surfgun]

Singapore Poised To Announce Purchase Of 12 F-35Bs

[Jimmy]

Unless there was some kind of price break for picking that model, this makes no sense whatsoever.

And, given Singapore's geography, the F-35B makes great sense for its ability to operate closely with the US Marines -- as well as with F-35Cs operating from our aircraft carriers.

No, Colin Clark, it doesn't. You're an idiot. The F-35B is nothing special...using the F-35A or even C would make much more sense.

[jlvfr]

Afaik, the F-35 is the version with the smallest payload and the costliest maintenance. The "we need planes for small places" goes right out the window, when one remembers Singapore flies F-15s!

[Stitch]

Afaik, the F-35 is the version with the smallest payload and the costliest maintenance. The "we need planes for small places" goes right out the window, when one remembers Singapore flies F-15s!

Plus, it has the shortest range (the lift fan takes up what would otherwise be fuel tank space), AND it is mechanically more complicated (and therefore more likely to fail) because of the lift fan. As Jimmy said, the A or the C (especially the C) make WAY more sense for a country with no aircraft carriers.

[Jimmy]

Edit: :)

[jlvfr]

Plus, it has the shortest range (the lift fan takes up what would otherwise be fuel tank space), AND it is mechanically more complicated (and therefore more likely to fail) because of the lift fan. As Jimmy said, the A or the C (especially the C) make WAY more sense for a country with no aircraft carriers.

I found that article very funy, how China will be "facing 50 to 100 Australian F-35As, 42 F-35As in Japan, 75Bs in Singapore". Not only are the numbers ridiculous compared with the Chinese AF, I'd very much like to know how the australian F-35s (or even the Singaporeans!) are supposed to be a threat to China!!!

[Albany Rifles]

I learned something stunning last week about the F-35 which is just stunning...don't have time to go into it right now but there is a reason logisticians should be PMs on ALL DOD ACAT 1D programs.

[Jimmy]

Tease.

[YellowFever]

Sorry for the slight digression but this question is mostly in regards to the F-22 but does apply to the F-35 as well so I thought I'd post it here instead of creating another thread.


I was reading some stats about Desert Storm and I noticed about 1/4 of the aerial kills were with a sidewinder.

Now this tells me some of the ACMs were pretty close range.

I'm wondering what's changed since then. Some of the kills were made only after visually identified. Won't that be the case in any future wars? And if so, won't that give away the biggest advantage a stealth platform has?

So what's changed since then? Better IFF systems to negate the need for a visual identification?

I've heard the stories of how other platforms were having trouble locking onto a LO platform in exercises but there must be something more.

[Stitch]

Sorry for the slight digression but this question is mostly in regards to the F-22 but does apply to the F-35 as well so I thought I'd post it here instead of creating another thread.


I was reading some stats about Desert Storm and I noticed about 1/4 of the aerial kills were with a sidewinder.

Now this tells me some of the ACMs were pretty close range.

I'm wondering what's changed since then. Some of the kills were made only after visually identified. Won't that be the case in any future wars? And if so, won't that give away the biggest advantage a stealth platform has?

So what's changed since then? Better IFF systems to negate the need for a visual identification?

I've heard the stories of how other platforms were having trouble locking onto a LO platform in exercises but there must be something more.

I'm sure Chogy can answer this question better than I can, but your "Some of the kills were made only after visually identified" statement is probably the closest to the truth; the ROE for all wars after Vietnam stated that "definite ID of the target" had to be established before it could be fired upon. There were several long-range kills during GWI and OIF, primarily by F-15's, but that was only AFTER the bogie was determined to be a hostile. Especially after the 1994 Black Hawk shootdown incident, the ROE was tightened up, and visual ID was required before being engaged, although I'm sure there were some exceptions to the rule.

In regards to your "So what's changed since then?" question, the arena we'll (supposedly) be fighting in will be different; bogies will (supposedly) be coming in from a definitely hostile direction (west), and they won't be IFF'ing, and they'll (probably) be on an attack profile. Plus, we'll probably be talking about naval assets at risk, which will up the ante, and they will need to be protected at all costs; losing a land base is one thing, but losing a $40 billion supercarrier, along with it's air wing, is another matter entirely. Theoretically, the enemy air threat will be a little more obvious in the next war; a bunch of JF-17's and/or MiG-29's headed for a CSG would be a pretty obvious indicator.

[YellowFever]

"In regards to your "So what's changed since then?" question, the arena we'll (supposedly) be fighting in will be different; bogies will (supposedly) be coming in from a definitely hostile direction (west), and they won't be IFF'ing, and they'll (probably) be on an attack profile."

Yes, but wasn't that the case as well during Desert Storm?

The bogies were coming from a different direction and obviously they weren't IFFing as well so somebody made the decision to eyeball the targets before engaging them.

The way I understood it, it's not a matter of one side coming from one direction and the other side coming in from the opposite direction.

I'm just trying to understand if there were technology advancements which made the identifying of the other side easier for our pilots.

[jlvfr]

Looks like Singapore is still on evaluating the F-35:

Singapore and F-35

[Jimmy]

"In regards to your "So what's changed since then?" question, the arena we'll (supposedly) be fighting in will be different; bogies will (supposedly) be coming in from a definitely hostile direction (west), and they won't be IFF'ing, and they'll (probably) be on an attack profile."

Yes, but wasn't that the case as well during Desert Storm?

The bogies were coming from a different direction and obviously they weren't IFFing as well so somebody made the decision to eyeball the targets before engaging them.

The way I understood it, it's not a matter of one side coming from one direction and the other side coming in from the opposite direction.

I'm just trying to understand if there were technology advancements which made the identifying of the other side easier for our pilots.

Specific Rules of Engagement are developed for every conflict, and in some cases it change based on the political situation. The air combat ROE for OEF and OIF were actually different, for example. ROE can be as strict as requiring a visual ID, or as simple as Point of Origin + Electronic ID (ie, it's using a Russian fighter radar) = hostile.

My understanding is AIM-7s accounted for 25 kills and 9 were AIM-9. The AIM-9 kills were against aircraft that were unable to effectively fight back, ie, Mirages laden with bombs, aircraft fleeing for Iran, helicopters. In some cases BVR engagements led to a merge (27 Jan, AIM-7s scored, but didn't wipe out the Iraqis and the remaining kills were WVR). The 6 Feb engagement saw a single F-15C kill 2 MiG-21s with AIM-7s, then roll down on the Su-25s they were escorting, and use AIM-9s.

[GGTharos]

Sorry for the slight digression but this question is mostly in regards to the F-22 but does apply to the F-35 as well so I thought I'd post it here instead of creating another thread.


I was reading some stats about Desert Storm and I noticed about 1/4 of the aerial kills were with a sidewinder.

Now this tells me some of the ACMs were pretty close range.

The sidewinder can be launched from two nautical miles away against a tail-on target at sea level, so 'pretty close range' is somewhat subjective. 2nm is far greater than a turn radius for a fighter at SL.

I'm wondering what's changed since then. Some of the kills were made only after visually identified. Won't that be the case in any future wars?

F-15's were cleared to ID their own targets. They were the only fighter with this permission, but they had to run through their ID matrix anyway. F-35's are more effective at it, adding multiple off-board sources as well as NCTR and onboard sensors to not only ID a target, but also maintain the ID. Further, an F-35 can VID from quite a significant range. Golden Eagles (latest upgrade of the F-15C) also sport new datalinks and other fun toys.
The rest is dictated by circumstances.

And if so, won't that give away the biggest advantage a stealth platform has?

Not really. Stealth still allows the stealth fighter to close in for the VID undetected, thus arriving with a positional advantage. Even if you're not stealth, you can get another aircraft to distract them so you can get in there and have a look. There are various techniques for ID intercepts.

So what's changed since then? Better IFF systems to negate the need for a visual identification?

There always has been more to IFF than what most people think of it. Combat Tree would interrogate enemy IFF and get a response, and the enemy's IFF would give itself away - this was in the Vietnam era. Today, an F-35 can ID based on the 'usual suspects' start with 'which direction is he coming from and how is he flying, is he operating a radar and what type of radar is it', to asking AWACS (who knows what airfield this guy took off from, and if he so much as squeaked with some identifiable electronic device, the AWACS probably has him nailed) to his own IFF interrogator and NCTR techniques on the radar, he can receive the target position and ID from a friendly aircraft, and he can maintain this ID and target position in the visual arena thanks to DAS. You can also attempt to ask someone who they are on the radio, too.

Simply put, if you want to ID an aircraft, there are many ways to do it, and the specific methods chosen tend to reflect the technology level of the sensors and IFF and ECM equipment, the political climate, and other fun things.