• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is a decade behind the jets it's supposed to replace

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

neorej

ERMYGERD!
When the Pentagon’s nearly $400 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter finally enters service next year after nearly two decades in development, it won’t be able to support troops on the ground the way older planes can today. Its sensors won’t be able to see the battlefield as well; and what video the F-35 does capture, it won’t be able to transmit to infantrymen in real time.
Click to expand...

“The F-35 will, in my opinion, be 10 years behind legacy fighters when it achieves [initial operational capability],” said one Air Force official affiliated with the F-35 program. “When the F-35 achieves [initial operational capability], it will not have the weapons or sensor capability, with respect to the CAS [close air support] mission set, that legacy multi-role fighters had by the mid-2000s.”
Click to expand...

Ironically, older jets currently in service with the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps can carry the latest generation of sensor pods, which are far more advanced than the EOTS sensor carried by the F-35. The latest generation pods—the Lockheed Martin Sniper ATP-SE and Northrop Grumman LITENING-SE—display far clearer high-definition video imagery in both in the infrared and optical spectrum—and from greater distances. Further, both pods have the ability to beam those full-motion video feeds to ground troops, which provides those forces with vital intelligence information.

Both pods also incorporate the ability to mark targets with an infrared laser beam—which the EOTS lacks—that helps pilots and ground controllers coordinate their attacks. Some pilots consider the infrared marker to be crucial to the close air-support mission to support ground troops.
Click to expand...

More damningly, the F-35 won’t be able to send even its already lower-quality live video down to those soldiers on the ground because its specifications were set before the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan started. Back then, no one ever imagined needing to beam live video to ground troops from a fighter jet. Nor are there any current plans to add that capability to the F-35.
Click to expand...

More hilariously sad tidbits in the source.

This thing is a disaster. Using ancient tech, no room to upgrade, how is this still going on. I feel sad for the troops depending on airsupport to carry out their duty safely, they'll be left in the cold if all fighters will be replaced by this.
 
A

acheron_xl

Member
Imagine if we used that $400B on infrastructure! When bridges start collapsing left and right in 30 years, I hope the government still feels good about how it used it's money.
 
G

gogogow

Member
Why is it not possible to upgrade some of those outdated equipments, but those other older jets can? That's terrible engineering. What a waste of money.
 
S

Spineker

Banned
The Strike Fighter is a euphemism for everything wrong with defense contracting at this point. The Politicians know it's a train wreck but to write off that bill is to incite rage from the public, or worse, inquiries.
 
N

neorej

ERMYGERD!
gogogow said:
Why is it not possible to upgrade some of those outdated equipments, but those other older jets can? That's terrible engineering. What a waste of money.
Click to expand...

Every component is fitted snug inside the hull. Upgrading the components would compromise the stealth-capabilities of the F-35, something older jets don't have to worry about.

In the words of Darth Stewie; it's a major design flaw.
 
Oppo

Oppo

Member
i don't quite get why they can't just change out the pods.

I guess it's space? still. make a new version.
 
F

Funky Papa

FUNK-Y-PPA-4
neorej said:
Every component is fitted snug inside the hull. Upgrading the components would compromise the stealth-capabilities of the F-35, something older jets don't have to worry about.

In the words of Darth Stewie; it's a major design flaw.
Click to expand...

That only means future contracts to develop new stealth-compatible modules at outrageous prices.

Given that war planes tend to remain operative for a very long time, the F-35 is bound to be a veritable money sink.
 
X

xbhaskarx

Member
Just a day after this story...

New U.S. Stealth Jet Can’t Fire Its Gun Until 2019


The Pentagon’s newest stealth jet, the nearly $400 billion Joint Strike Fighter, won’t be able to fire its gun during operational missions until 2019, three to four years after it becomes operational.

Even though the Joint Strike Fighter, or F-35, is supposed to join frontline U.S. Marine Corps fighter squadrons next year and Air Force units in 2016, the jet’s software does not yet have the ability to shoot its 25mm cannon. But even when the jet will be able to shoot its gun, the F-35 barely carries enough ammunition to make the weapon useful.

The JSF won’t be completely unarmed. It will still carry a pair of Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAM long-range air-to-air missiles and a pair of bombs. Initially, it will be able to carry 1,000-pound satellite-guided bombs or 500-pound laser-guided weapons. But those weapons are of limited utility, especially during close-in fights.

“There will be no gun until [the Joint Strike Fighter’s Block] 3F [software], there is no software to support it now or for the next four-ish years,” said one Air Force official affiliated with the F-35 program. “Block 3F is slated for release in 2019, but who knows how much that will slip?”
Click to expand...
 
obin_gam

obin_gam

Member
hqdefault.jpg
 
F

Funky Papa

FUNK-Y-PPA-4
Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:
This is what I find amazing.

Obamajet.
Click to expand...
Suddenly, the Spanish sub that couldn't float doesn't seem that unique.

strafer said:
perfect time to bring back the F-14 Tomcat
Click to expand...

You joke, but the F-14 is dependable as fuck. They retired the old beast because some higher ups wanted shiny new toys, but it has showed to be one of the most capable jets in history. As a matter of fact, the F-14 is still Iran's main fighting jet and used it to fuck Iraq's shit during the war, with a number of poorly maintained jets manned by highly pressured crews running a train on the Iraqi air force.

Between 1982 and 1986 Iranian Tomcats were to see use in a series of slowly developing campaigns: mainly tasked with patrolling the skies over objects vital for the survival of Iranian regime and economy, like Tehran or Kharg Island. Most of these patrols were supported by Boeing 707-3J9C tankers, and some lasted as long as 10 hours with up to four in-flight refuelings. Time and again, they were involved in new air battles, and performed well but their main role was intimidating the Iraqi Air Force. Cognizant of previous heavy losses in battles against Iranian F-14s, the Iraqis avoided any engagement with them, so that the sole presence of a Tomcat over the target area was enough to force Iraqi formations to abort their attacks. Because of this, and because of the precision and effectiveness of the Tomcat's AWG-9 weapons system and AIM-54A Phoenix long-range air-to-air missiles, the F-14 maintained air control over a lengthy period of time.[citation needed]
Iranian ace Jalil Zandi is credited by Tom Cooper with shooting down 11 Iraqi aircraft during the Iran–Iraq War, making him the highest scoring F-14 pilot.[57]

By 1987, the Iraqis had suffered such heavy losses to Iranian Tomcats that they were forced to find a solution with which they could engage them under equal circumstances. In early 1988 France delivered Mirage F.1EQ-6 fighters, equipped with Super 530D and Magic Mk.2 missiles, to Iraq.[citation needed]

Overall, Tom Cooper claims that Iranian F-14s shot down at least 160 Iraqi aircraft during the Iran-Iraq War, which include 58 MiG-23s, 23 MiG-21s, nine MiG-25s, 33 Dassault Mirage F1s, 23 Su-17s, one Mil Mi-24, five Tu-22s, two MiG-27s, one Dassault Mirage 5, one B-6D, one Aérospatiale Super Frelon, and two unknown aircraft. Despite the circumstances under which the F-14s and their crews had to operate in Iran during the eight-year long war against Iraq, it is still the premier fighter in the Iranian Air Force. The aircraft continued to operate without any support from AWACS or AEW aircraft, without even a proper support from the Ground Control Intercept (GCI). It faced an enemy that was repeatedly introducing new and more capable fighters, radars, weapons and ECM systems in combat and was supported by no less than three "superpowers" (France, the USA, and the USSR). Their crews were also permanently under heavy pressure from the regime in Tehran. That it proved as successful in combat is a result of strenuous efforts of IRIAF personnel and immense investment of the Iranian economy.[56]
Click to expand...

Iran continues to fly the F-14 and apparently has reverse engineered much of the plane for spares development. They've also developed a number of native upgrades for its electronic components.
 
D

dalin80

Banned
A Fish Aficionado said:
But isn't close combat outdated anyway?
Click to expand...

As a whole thinking does keep swinging that way and one day it will probably be right, presuming it's so unimportant to put it off that long is a gamble though.

In that regard the F-35 isn't on it's own though, many nations use combat jets with blocks of concrete where the gun would normally be due to it's perceived low importance.
 
S

strafer

member
Funky Papa said:
Suddenly, the Spanish sub that couldn't float doesn't seem that unique.



You joke, but the F-14 is dependable as fuck. They retired the old beast because some higher ups wanted shiny new toys, but it has showed to be one of the most capable jets in history. As a matter of fact, the F-14 is still Iran's main fighting jet and used it to fuck Iraq's shit during the war, with a number of poorly maintained jets manned by highly pressured crews running a train on the Iraqi air force.



Iran continues to fly the F-14 and apparently has reverse engineered much of the plane for spares development. They've also developed a number of native upgrades for its electronic components.
Click to expand...

I wasnt joking
 
N

nOoblet16

Member
Phat Michael said:
Damn that really is awful. What are the most hi tech fighters around now? The euro fighter and the f22?
Click to expand...

The Sukhoi Su30MKI and the Sukhoi Su-35 are as good if not better than Eurofighter.
F22 is the most advanced so far without a doubt but it's also extremely expensive.
 
K

Kathian

Banned
Their basically making new models of a matured technology. See the same thing in consumer goods, or heck more comparable - pharmaceuticals - trying to create 'new' out of what is old. The UK has already put their order in.

End of the day research spending is not wasted if it does not create a product and the building of this type of stuff has been purely out of insecurity. America prides itself on being some sort of invincible force, but each individual weapon or soldier is far from infallible.

The airforce and navy want forces that never lose a single man or woman, that never lose a battle and that are operational globally. They really need a bit of perspective, the army can tell them all about it.

UK should have just gone with Europe.
 
A

andycapps

Member
nOoblet16 said:
The Russian-Indian Sukhoi Su- 30 and the Russian Sukhoi su 35 are as good if not better than Eurofighter.
F22 is the most advanced so far without a doubt but it's also extremely expensive.
Click to expand...

More expensive than a $400 billion jet that when it releases will be less capable than the F22? Seems like they just need to cancel this thing and stick with the F22, start development of a new stealth fighter that will provide capabilities to upgrade in the future.
 
C

Currygan

at last, for christ's sake
nOoblet16 said:
The Russian-Indian Sukhoi Su- 30 and the Russian Sukhoi su 35 are as good if not better than Eurofighter.
F22 is the most advanced so far without a doubt but it's also extremely expensive.
Click to expand...


woah man I searched for these Sukhoi and damn they're beautiful
 
W

Woorloog

Banned
andycapps said:
More expensive than a $400 billion jet that when it releases will be less capable than the F22? Seems like they just need to cancel this thing and stick with the F22, start development of a new stealth fighter that will provide capabilities to upgrade in the future.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the F35 is better than the F22 for most things (though not a big leap), not to mention having more advanced avionics and stuff F22 doesn't have. On some things, the F22 likely wins... but then it is more of a dedicated air superiority fighter, not really a multi-role strike fighter.
 
T

thesoapster

Member
WTF?!

2x AMRAAM
2x Guided bomb
(in 2019) 180 rounds of 25mm ammo, fired at 3,300RPM

Jesus Christ. How is this supposed to replace a bunch of the jets we fly now?
 
D

dalin80

Banned
Kathian said:
Their basically making new models of a matured technology. See the same thing in consumer goods, or heck more comparable - pharmaceuticals - trying to create 'new' out of what is old. The UK has already put their order in.

UK should have just gone with Europe.
Click to expand...

And be left with another eurofghter situation, a jet that was 20 years behind target and is *still* waiting for upgrades, the RAF has had to pull cold war Tornados out of retirement for ground ops as the amount of Typhoons upgraded to drop bombs can be counted on one hand.

The eurofighter project was a complete and total clusterfuck, hell they are still running original spec engines as the member nations have been arguing for over a decade about who is paying for the upgrades and where those engines should be assembled.

The UK has put it's order in as it is probably the only nation that is going to make a profit on the F-35, our production share is far above what is being purchased that even when the cost of those aircraft is removed the country stands to make £20 billion out of it.

andycapps said:
More expensive than a $400 billion jet that when it releases will be less capable than the F22? Seems like they just need to cancel this thing and stick with the F22, start development of a new stealth fighter that will provide capabilities to upgrade in the future.
Click to expand...

They can't stick with the F-22, the facilities to make the F-22 no longer exist, they were dismantled and destroyed years ago.

thesoapster said:
WTF?!

2x AMRAAM
2x Guided bomb
(in 2019) 180 rounds of 25mm ammo, fired at 3,300RPM

Jesus Christ. How is this supposed to replace a bunch of the jets we fly now?
Click to expand...

The principal thought is that modern radars will be able to detect current jets long before combat range and have an interception missile on them while the F-35 being 'stealth' can get in, precision strike and get out again. Time will tell how that works out.
 
F

fizzelopeguss

Banned
lacinius said:
Why even have a gun on a jet that can only carry 180 rounds... and fire those 180 rounds out of a gun that is designed to fire 3300 rounds per minute?
Click to expand...


Some legacy clause horseshit from the mig alley days where every fighter needs a gun. The f35 will never use its gun, if it ever finds itself in such close distance the pilot would have long ejected anyway.

The yanks will have so many of these beyond visual range fighters that everyone else will have to pack up, go home and bust out the drones.
 
A

andycapps

Member
Woorloog said:
Pretty sure the F35 is better than the F22 for most things (though not a big leap), not to mention having more advanced avionics and stuff F22 doesn't have. On some things, the F22 likely wins... but then it is more of a dedicated air superiority fighter, not really a multi-role strike fighter.
Click to expand...

Hasn't the F22 expanded beyond the initial aims of being primarily air superiority into more of a multi-role strike fighter? I'm not saying the F35 isn't more advanced in some senses, but the F22 is combat proven, can do close air support, and like the OP mentions, it can send back high definition footage to ground troops.

itsgreen said:
Yes.

Per unit it is about 2.5x more expensive.

http://www.wired.com/2011/12/f-22-r...ex+%28Wired%3A+Index+3+%28Top+Stories+2%29%29
Click to expand...

My main point is that even with the per unit cost as being much higher, the development cost was over $300 billion less than the F35. Hindsight and all I suppose since the F22 can't be produced anymore.
 
F

Fuchsdh

Member
Spineker said:
The Strike Fighter is a euphemism for everything wrong with defense contracting at this point. The Politicians know it's a train wreck but to write off that bill is to incite rage from the public, or worse, inquiries.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's an issue of inquiries, it's an issue that a lot of politicians have seen jobs come out of this project, so killing it means hurting their districts and their chances for re-election. The F35 is an amazing piece of engineering and assembly; and, perhaps by design, the wide sourcing of its parts means there's a lot of districts who are heavily indebted to the program.
 
W

Woorloog

Banned
neorej said:
Yeah, board canon to fire 3300 rounds per minute.

Can't fire a single shot untill 2019.


And from 2019 onwards, it can fire for a full 4 seconds before running out of ammo. Even Jesse Ventura lasted longer.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the gun is used only for very short bursts (say, half a second at most). If you hit, it will destroy or damage your target badly enough the fight's over. It doesn't need terribly much ammo really.
And it is better to have the gun and never to use, than not to have it and end up needing it, like the old Phantoms during the Vietnam War...

andycapps said:
Hasn't the F22 expanded beyond the initial aims of being primarily air superiority into more of a multi-role strike fighter? I'm not saying the F35 isn't more advanced in some senses, but the F22 is combat proven, can do close air support, and like the OP mentions, it can send back high definition footage to ground troops.
Click to expand...
I guess. But no military ever stops "upgrading" their stuff for a reason or another. There will be missteps like the F35 seems to be in a way.
(BTW, i'm pretty sure neither plane is really good for CAS missions, unlike a dedicated plane like the A-10.)
 
P

PdotMichael

Banned
fizzelopeguss said:
Some legacy clause horseshit from the mig alley days where every fighter needs a gun. The f35 will never use its gun, if it ever finds itself in such close distance the pilot would have long ejected anyway.
Click to expand...

Well, guns were commonly used in Iraq and Afghanistan for CAS. But I guess real war and conflict experience don't count in the heads of lobbyists and politicans.
 
D

David Incorporated Esq.

Member
fizzelopeguss said:
Some legacy clause horseshit from the mig alley days where every fighter needs a gun. The f35 will never use its gun, if it ever finds itself in such close distance the pilot would have long ejected anyway.

The yanks will have so many of these beyond visual range fighters that everyone else will have to pack up, go home and bust out the drones.
Click to expand...

Nah, nothing beats a big gun for close air support. Just look at the A-10, the air force is constantly trying to mothball the thing but is forced to keep bringing it back every time America gets tangentially involved in ground combat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GTA III: behind the scenes of the game that propelled Rockstar to the top of the world
Analysis Retro Game Dev
47
9K
Uhtred replied
  • Locked
USAF officially declares IOC for the F-35A
42
6K
Joezie replied
Into The Nicheverse (Of Retro Gaming): Program 1 (Cyber Troopers Virtual-On) PART 1
Analysis Retro
25
4K
Starlight Lotice replied
Star Citizen 3.3.5 patch is now live + Free Flight Event start 11/23/2018
2
1K
IbizaPocholo replied
  • Locked
Northrop Grumman Ad Teases 6th-Generation Fighter
2 3
132
18K
golem replied
Top Bottom