3 ms·

* Stealth is not always about not being detected, it's also about reducing the distance you will start being detected. * The F35 has battle awareness, but I wo

by jokoon 12y ago

* Stealth is not always about not being detected, it's also about reducing the distance you will start being detected. * The F35 has battle awareness, but I wonder if those systems could have been integrated into existing airplanes, I'm not a aeronautics or avionics engineers though. Obviously it might increase pilot effectiveness, and decrease the amount of stuff pilots have to learn. * I also read that the f35 has been designed around many sensor systems, allowing it to see enemy aircrafts much more before they would, giving it more time to react or to avoid dog fights: that's the argument against a non maneuverable aircraft, that information is more important in a fight situation. Also stealth is not always about land radars, it's maybe also about embedded aircraft radars, which are much less capable. * The only point of VTOL is because air bases are hard to come by and build. It requires a large strip of road to take off, and flat areas are hard to defend. VTOL allows a jet to land in remote areas. Maybe the F35 is all about electronic, detection and spying and not about dog fights, maybe the military also doesn't want to talk about the functionalities that make a difference so that other countries don't pick up on it. Although it's weird to see that so many will be built, since it seems like a very specialized jet.

gaius 12y ago
It's not specialised at all. The theory was to make a generic jet that could do any mission and therefore achieve economies of scale for parts etc. But it turns out that trying to be all things to all men means compromises that make no one happy. Compare two existing jets, the F16 and the A10 for example. They have one mission each and they do it well - but you couldn't send one to do the others mission. The VTOL capability is also needed for aircraft carriers.
- neurotech1 12y ago
  F-35B is Short Takeoff / Vertical Landing STOVL. On the Amphibious Carriers (eg. USS Wasp) the Harrier and F-35B takeoff with a short roll.The Harrier or the F-35B STOVL version cannot takeoff vertically under most conditions. F-35C is the Carrier version of the jet and lands with an arresting hook onto the deck.
- greedo 12y ago
  The F-16 isn't a single role aircraft; it can dogfight/intercept, perform CAS, perform SEAD, and conduct interdiction raids.
  - smacktoward 12y ago
    True, but it was designed as a single-role aircraft: a lightweight, inexpensive air superiority fighter. The other roles only came later, when people realized what a versatile airframe that program had produced.
    - greedo 12y ago
      But that's true of most modern aircraft. The F-4 was intended as a fleet interceptor, and was put into numerous other roles. The S-3 was intended for ASW and ended up doing recon, ECM, and land attack roles. Even the F-14 ended up as the Bombcat with the addition of targeting pods.
      - gaius 12y ago
        Right - set out with a clear purpose in mind, produce a clean, elegant design, and be delighted when it can do other things too. That is the Unix philosophy too, or it was before systemd, the F35 of init systems.
mcv 12y ago
Not every F35 gets VTOL, and I suspect that's a big part of the problem: VTOL has a massive impact on what your fighter can look like. So does stealth. Having those two features puts some serious restrictions on everything else it can do. It can't be as tough as an A10 or as nimble as a F16 (both planes that the F35 is supposed to replace). And because only one of the three types of F35 will actually have VTOL, the other two types will still be stuck with those downsides despite lacking the entire reason for those downsides. The VTOL should have been a totally separate design. Replacing all your highly specialized fighters with one generic fighter that's supposed to do everything, can only hurt your capability, and at a far higher cost.

by jokoon 12y ago

gaius 12y ago

It's not specialised at all. The theory was to make a generic jet that could do any mission and therefore achieve economies of scale for parts etc. But it turns out that trying to be all things to all men means compromises that make no one happy. Compare two existing jets, the F16 and the A10 for example. They have one mission each and they do it well - but you couldn't send one to do the others mission. The VTOL capability is also needed for aircraft carriers.

neurotech1 12y ago
F-35B is Short Takeoff / Vertical Landing STOVL. On the Amphibious Carriers (eg. USS Wasp) the Harrier and F-35B takeoff with a short roll.The Harrier or the F-35B STOVL version cannot takeoff vertically under most conditions. F-35C is the Carrier version of the jet and lands with an arresting hook onto the deck.
greedo 12y ago
The F-16 isn't a single role aircraft; it can dogfight/intercept, perform CAS, perform SEAD, and conduct interdiction raids.
- smacktoward 12y ago
  True, but it was designed as a single-role aircraft: a lightweight, inexpensive air superiority fighter. The other roles only came later, when people realized what a versatile airframe that program had produced.
  - greedo 12y ago
    But that's true of most modern aircraft. The F-4 was intended as a fleet interceptor, and was put into numerous other roles. The S-3 was intended for ASW and ended up doing recon, ECM, and land attack roles. Even the F-14 ended up as the Bombcat with the addition of targeting pods.
    - gaius 12y ago
      Right - set out with a clear purpose in mind, produce a clean, elegant design, and be delighted when it can do other things too. That is the Unix philosophy too, or it was before systemd, the F35 of init systems.

mcv 12y ago

Not every F35 gets VTOL, and I suspect that's a big part of the problem: VTOL has a massive impact on what your fighter can look like. So does stealth. Having those two features puts some serious restrictions on everything else it can do. It can't be as tough as an A10 or as nimble as a F16 (both planes that the F35 is supposed to replace). And because only one of the three types of F35 will actually have VTOL, the other two types will still be stuck with those downsides despite lacking the entire reason for those downsides. The VTOL should have been a totally separate design. Replacing all your highly specialized fighters with one generic fighter that's supposed to do everything, can only hurt your capability, and at a far higher cost.