4 ms·

Good. The whole thing should be shut down.

ardit33 6y ago
It is not good. Like it or not, this is the only alternative NATO has for the forceable future. The British Tempest and the French/German stealth fighter won’t be operational until 2035-2040 The only alternative are modernizes 4gen fighters which are very vulnerable to modern air defenses. A ‘buggy’ F-35 might still be a better alternative. Also the British are counting for the F-35 to equip its carriers.
- bfieidhbrjr 6y ago
  Buggy? It barely works. Short flight time. Crap wing loading. Not good at any of it's multi-roles. We could build 5-10 F-16s for each F-35, and many more A-10s, and they'd be better despite being ancient designs. They're so expensive we can't even do proper flight training in them, it'd cost too much if we break one.
  - dogma1138 6y ago
    The Israeli's seem to be happy with it, use it in combat and are buying more.
    - bfieidhbrjr 6y ago
      They don't pay for them. It's where all the "aid" money goes.
      - dogma1138 6y ago
        They do, even if it's partially done via aid money. And again they could buy multiple F-16's for the price of a single F-35 through the same aid program.
  - mhh__ 6y ago
    > 5-10 F-16s The new F-16V costs as near as makes no difference the cost of an F-35
  - strictnein 6y ago
    > "Crap wing loading" Yes, why does this super stealthy plane not have support for lots of reflecting metal things hanging from its wings?
    - NickNameNick 6y ago
      'Wing loading' is the ratio of overall weight to lifting area, which directly affects the aircrafts ability to turn. It has nothing to do with hanging stuff from the wings.
- lsllc 6y ago
  I was going to correct you and say maybe you meant the Typhoon, not Tempest, but indeed there is a proposed UK aircraft program called Tempest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Tempest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Tempest
  - mhh__ 6y ago
    £2Bn seems like a hilariously British amount of money to develop a modern fighter for.
- SpaceRaccoon 6y ago
  There's speculation that the cutting edge radars fielded by China and Russia can detect stealth aircraft, so the advantage may be moot now.
- lumost 6y ago
  I keep hearing concerns that modern radars may be able to defeat the F-35's stealth, or will be able to defeat it in the near future. I can't help but think that it will be hard to keep a plane flying at mach 1 hidden in the face of fast scanning and networked phased array radars with modern deep learning based detection algorithms. My understanding is that if you take away the stealth aspect the F-35 is a sluggish fighter bomber that would be outperformed by most 4th gens. Considering an F-35 is nearly the price of 10 4th gen fighters the choice to "upgrade" becomes pretty suspect for a lot of Nato partners.
  - onepointsixC 6y ago
    >I can't help but think that it will be hard to keep a plane flying at mach 1 hidden in the face of fast scanning and networked phased array radars with modern deep learning based detection algorithms. Yes a sophisticated network of radars, sensors, and computers could potentially detect lower RCS aircraft from further away. But that problem would exist for larger RCS aircraft as well. Such a system is a prime target for first hour strike by cruise missiles as the radars required are very large and power intensive. It's not just about detection, but also being able to acquire a firing solution. A lower RCS plane is harder to track, easier to hide with jamming, and ultimately much more of a headache than a higher RCS plane. >My understanding is that if you take away the stealth aspect the F-35 is a sluggish fighter bomber that would be outperformed by most 4th gens. F35's performance is superior to the planes it replaces while providing both greater range and payload. It's got very high AoA capabilities which only the F-22 can surpass. Even more impressively it is able to do maneuvers which other plans cannot do without thrust vectoring.[0] >Considering an F-35 is nearly the price of 10 4th gen fighters the choice to "upgrade" becomes pretty suspect for a lot of Nato partners. Wrong. Lot 14 F-35A's cost $78M.[1] That's less than new Eurofighters and Dassault Rafale. The F35 is the best thing currently in production. That's not to say it's perfect. The F-35's biggest flaws are not that of maneuverability or insufficient stealth. But of range. Despite improving on the airframes which it is replacing in range, it is not enough given the realities of Chinese A2/AD capabilities. The USAF needs a new fighter which is capable of significantly greater ranges as to not over stretch it's tanker network. The NGAD program hopes to address this. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-APFmIGo1k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-APFmIGo1k [1]: https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/10/29/in-newly-inked-deal-f-35-prices-fall-to-78-million-a-copy/ https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/10/29/in-newly-inked-de...
AndyMcConachie 6y ago
You're exactly right. Not sure why you're downvoted. Not only is the F-35 a giant lemon, but US defense spending should be cut considerably. The world is changing, air combat is changing, and the F-35 addresses none of those changes. The F-35 is nothing more than an expensive boondoggle. It's purpose, like most DoD spending, is to transfer money from public coffers into the hands of well connected private companies.
- chipsa 6y ago
  Not only is the King Edward VII a giant lemon, but UK defense spending should be cut considerably. The world is changing, naval combat is changing, and the King Edward VII addresses none of those changes. The King Edward VII is nothing more than an expensive boondoggle. It's purpose, like most Royal Navy spending, is to transfer money from public coffers into the hands of well connected private companies. </1904 naval commentator> The Jeune Ecole never lasts. Combat changes, but it never changes as much as the detractors of the old school believe. It never stays as constant as the proponents of the old school believe either.

It is not good. Like it or not, this is the only alternative NATO has for the forceable future. The British Tempest and the French/German stealth fighter won’t be operational until 2035-2040 The only alternative are modernizes 4gen fighters which are very vulnerable to modern air defenses. A ‘buggy’ F-35 might still be a better alternative. Also the British are counting for the F-35 to equip its carriers.

bfieidhbrjr 6y ago
Buggy? It barely works. Short flight time. Crap wing loading. Not good at any of it's multi-roles. We could build 5-10 F-16s for each F-35, and many more A-10s, and they'd be better despite being ancient designs. They're so expensive we can't even do proper flight training in them, it'd cost too much if we break one.
- dogma1138 6y ago
  The Israeli's seem to be happy with it, use it in combat and are buying more.
  - bfieidhbrjr 6y ago
    They don't pay for them. It's where all the "aid" money goes.
    - dogma1138 6y ago
      They do, even if it's partially done via aid money. And again they could buy multiple F-16's for the price of a single F-35 through the same aid program.
- mhh__ 6y ago
  > 5-10 F-16s The new F-16V costs as near as makes no difference the cost of an F-35
- strictnein 6y ago
  > "Crap wing loading" Yes, why does this super stealthy plane not have support for lots of reflecting metal things hanging from its wings?
  - NickNameNick 6y ago
    'Wing loading' is the ratio of overall weight to lifting area, which directly affects the aircrafts ability to turn. It has nothing to do with hanging stuff from the wings.
lsllc 6y ago
I was going to correct you and say maybe you meant the Typhoon, not Tempest, but indeed there is a proposed UK aircraft program called Tempest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Tempest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Systems_Tempest
- mhh__ 6y ago
  £2Bn seems like a hilariously British amount of money to develop a modern fighter for.
SpaceRaccoon 6y ago
There's speculation that the cutting edge radars fielded by China and Russia can detect stealth aircraft, so the advantage may be moot now.
lumost 6y ago
I keep hearing concerns that modern radars may be able to defeat the F-35's stealth, or will be able to defeat it in the near future. I can't help but think that it will be hard to keep a plane flying at mach 1 hidden in the face of fast scanning and networked phased array radars with modern deep learning based detection algorithms. My understanding is that if you take away the stealth aspect the F-35 is a sluggish fighter bomber that would be outperformed by most 4th gens. Considering an F-35 is nearly the price of 10 4th gen fighters the choice to "upgrade" becomes pretty suspect for a lot of Nato partners.
- onepointsixC 6y ago
  >I can't help but think that it will be hard to keep a plane flying at mach 1 hidden in the face of fast scanning and networked phased array radars with modern deep learning based detection algorithms. Yes a sophisticated network of radars, sensors, and computers could potentially detect lower RCS aircraft from further away. But that problem would exist for larger RCS aircraft as well. Such a system is a prime target for first hour strike by cruise missiles as the radars required are very large and power intensive. It's not just about detection, but also being able to acquire a firing solution. A lower RCS plane is harder to track, easier to hide with jamming, and ultimately much more of a headache than a higher RCS plane. >My understanding is that if you take away the stealth aspect the F-35 is a sluggish fighter bomber that would be outperformed by most 4th gens. F35's performance is superior to the planes it replaces while providing both greater range and payload. It's got very high AoA capabilities which only the F-22 can surpass. Even more impressively it is able to do maneuvers which other plans cannot do without thrust vectoring.[0] >Considering an F-35 is nearly the price of 10 4th gen fighters the choice to "upgrade" becomes pretty suspect for a lot of Nato partners. Wrong. Lot 14 F-35A's cost $78M.[1] That's less than new Eurofighters and Dassault Rafale. The F35 is the best thing currently in production. That's not to say it's perfect. The F-35's biggest flaws are not that of maneuverability or insufficient stealth. But of range. Despite improving on the airframes which it is replacing in range, it is not enough given the realities of Chinese A2/AD capabilities. The USAF needs a new fighter which is capable of significantly greater ranges as to not over stretch it's tanker network. The NGAD program hopes to address this. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-APFmIGo1k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-APFmIGo1k [1]: https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/10/29/in-newly-inked-deal-f-35-prices-fall-to-78-million-a-copy/ https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/10/29/in-newly-inked-de...

AndyMcConachie 6y ago

You're exactly right. Not sure why you're downvoted. Not only is the F-35 a giant lemon, but US defense spending should be cut considerably. The world is changing, air combat is changing, and the F-35 addresses none of those changes. The F-35 is nothing more than an expensive boondoggle. It's purpose, like most DoD spending, is to transfer money from public coffers into the hands of well connected private companies.

chipsa 6y ago
Not only is the King Edward VII a giant lemon, but UK defense spending should be cut considerably. The world is changing, naval combat is changing, and the King Edward VII addresses none of those changes. The King Edward VII is nothing more than an expensive boondoggle. It's purpose, like most Royal Navy spending, is to transfer money from public coffers into the hands of well connected private companies. </1904 naval commentator> The Jeune Ecole never lasts. Combat changes, but it never changes as much as the detractors of the old school believe. It never stays as constant as the proponents of the old school believe either.