Humor Random Comments Thread

[Urwumpe]

Agreed. This is the final straw for me. Let the Marines keep theirs for now, but the USAF and Navy need to kill their orders NOW and start over with clean sheet designs.

I find it much more funny that they claimed that it could replace the A-10... but even the A-10 has better sight out of the cockpit.

 

[RisingFury]

It seems that some of those problems can be addressed through software, but not all.

 

[Fabri91]

True. The problem is that due to the obvious secrecy/classification surrounding the technical and performance aspects of the program it is very difficult to perform any impartial analysis.

Meanwhile: http://theaviationist.com/2015/07/01/f-35s-role-in-green-flag/

 

[MaverickSawyer]

I find it much more funny that they claimed that it could replace the A-10... but even the A-10 has better sight out of the cockpit.

Not to mention an on-station time measured in hours, heavy armor to protect against anti-aircraft fire of all sorts, a SIGNIFICANTLY larger warload, and the mighty GAU-8 Avenger cannon.

I'm sorry, but the A-10 can beat the F-35 in more than just combat ability. I strongly suspect that, should the F-35 get into a furball with an A-10 down low and slow, the Warthog is gonna come out on top.

 

[Urwumpe]

Not to mention an on-station time measured in hours, heavy armor to protect against anti-aircraft fire of all sorts, a SIGNIFICANTLY larger warload, and the mighty GAU-8 Avenger cannon.

I'm sorry, but the A-10 can beat the F-35 in more than just combat ability. I strongly suspect that, should the F-35 get into a furball with an A-10 down low and slow, the Warthog is gonna come out on top.

More so: CAS is way more than dropping GPS guided JDAMs on practice targets on demand.

I strongly doubt that the F-35 with its tiny weapons bay will be really useful, should push come to shove and instead of nice expensive JDAMs, old dumb iron bombs will be the primary ammunition for CAS, with the JDAM kits reserved to BAI and precision strike missions. (And Mavericks are limited resource)

What makes the A-10 an important asset is not, that it uses the most modern bombs and missiles. It can use nearly everything that is available - a very important factor for a CAS plane, that might not always be in reach of logistics.

Of course, its nothing that you should glorify. But its an important job. Most other missions can afford a day or two of delay. But CAS is a matter of minutes and 24/7 availability.

Damn, I sound like I should found the first CAS fan club in the world, if there isn't one. :rofl:

 

[Fabri91]

Don't think that the F-35 is the turd it is often depicted to be.

This is not the aircraft it is going to replace:

This is the one it is replacing:

While it does look like a fat penguin it probably does so due to having all that additional "equipment" built in, such as a targeting system, EW system, a boatload of fuel and obiously weapons.

Regarding the A-10 vs. F-35: are there any viable alternatives? From what I understand the Air Force is forcing its hand a bit with the A-10 retirement, but even if it were not to do so, once these airframes reach EOL, what are the alternatives?

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Don't think that the F-35 is the turd it is often depicted to be.

This is not the aircraft it is going to replace:

This is the one it is replacing:

While it does look like a fat penguin it probably does so due to having all that additional "equipment" built in, such as a targeting system, EW system, a boatload of fuel and obiously weapons.

Regarding the A-10 vs. F-35: are there any viable alternatives? From what I understand the Air Force is forcing its hand a bit with the A-10 retirement, but even if it were not to do so, once these airframes reach EOL, what are the alternatives?

There aren't any other aircraft in the same category as the A-10... Not in the US, or NATO countries. The closest anywhere would be the Su-25 Frogfoot.

Honest opinion? The USAF needs to do some new-build, modernized A-10s. Fully integrated datalinks, PGM capability, and possibly a second seat on some of them to provide the ability to control the inevitable UCAVs from a vantage point where the "pilot" can actually SEE what's going on, and can tell who's the friendly boots on the ground and who's the soon-to-be-deceased.

And no, the F-35 sin't going to be replacing that second F-16... the conformal fuel tanks marks it as an export bird. For some bizarre reason, the USAF REFUSES to allow F-16s use CFTs, despite the recent pivot towards the Pacific, and the extended range missions that would be required there.

Anyhow, this is getting a little heated. May I suggest we take further discussion of this to the Basement, before the flames start flying?

 

[Urwumpe]

Honest opinion? The USAF needs to do some new-build, modernized A-10s.

The future in CAS will be UAVs - I am not too romantic about it, the only good point against CAS UAVs is a fear about Skynet. Technology will advance fast and even expensive UAVs will be cheaper than training and possibly loosing CAS pilots in battle. *

But until UAVs are really capable to be entrusted with the lives of allied soldiers, the A-10 will be hard to replace. In the BAI role, the other planes might replace it, because the A-10 is not a good BAI plane and currently only performs that role in combat engagements, when other planes are more important for other missions.

Also, helicopters get better in performance and can push against the CAS bubble of the A-10 from the other end.

So, right now, in this era, the A-10 is the king of CAS. But the times will change and the niche of the A-10 will one day be gone. Multi-role aircraft will do one aspect (turning more of CAS into a short-distance BAI), UAVs and helicopters a lot more of the remaining aspects.

* But I have strong doubts a good UAV operator could ever become as effective as a good CAS pilot - humans have far better sensor fusion than any computer can do right now in his place.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Eh. I kinda foresee UCAVs as being very much a "kick down the door" tool. They're best suited for the role that the F-117 played in Desert Storm: going deep into hostile airspace to take out command and control centers, communication hubs, and critical infrastructure, allowing the more conventional manned assets to roll in and clean up the mess.

 

[Urwumpe]

Eh. I kinda foresee UCAVs as being very much a "kick down the door" tool. They're best suited for the role that the F-117 played in Desert Storm: going deep into hostile airspace to take out command and control centers, communication hubs, and critical infrastructure, allowing the more conventional manned assets to roll in and clean up the mess.

Thats what they can already do today.

But what in 15 years? Technology will not stand still. Especially sensors get cheaper and smaller very fast today. A FLIR was once a huge assembly that only special aircraft could carry. Today, much more precise FLIRs can fit into any fighter, because its just a small component, that integrates easily into the current standard computer systems.

I think, the next big evolution in UAVs will be in the inside of it, in its computers and its data processing architecture. UAVs will get much smarter themselves, a so single UAV commander can direct multiple UAVs without having to also do the micromanagement and actual piloting of them. Better sensors will allow much more pre-processing of the data to allow computers to interpret the data themselves.

Today, a UAV needs a crew of about 3 people. Maybe in the closer future, a single group of specialists handles six UAVs simultaneously, just picking targets and identifying allies or combining the sensor data of the UAVs with intelligence data from other sources.

Its thinkable. But nobody has yet found a solution to the problems that come with such technology. Yet.

And even more... it makes no sense that UAVs must look like classic aircraft. While physics did not change, everything around the needs of a human pilot can be forgotten.

 

[jedidia]

A FLIR was once a huge assembly that only special aircraft could carry.

Funny you should speak of FLIRs, we have one lying around undergoing endurance testing in the office right now

 

[Fabri91]

There aren't any other aircraft in the same category as the A-10... Not in the US, or NATO countries. The closest anywhere would be the Su-25 Frogfoot.

Honest opinion? The USAF needs to do some new-build, modernized A-10s. Fully integrated datalinks, PGM capability, and possibly a second seat on some of them to provide the ability to control the inevitable UCAVs from a vantage point where the "pilot" can actually SEE what's going on, and can tell who's the friendly boots on the ground and who's the soon-to-be-deceased.

And no, the F-35 sin't going to be replacing that second F-16... the conformal fuel tanks marks it as an export bird. For some bizarre reason, the USAF REFUSES to allow F-16s use CFTs, despite the recent pivot towards the Pacific, and the extended range missions that would be required there.

Anyhow, this is getting a little heated. May I suggest we take further discussion of this to the Basement, before the flames start flying?

Yes, the depicted F-16I is a rather new Israeli bird. I did not mean to imply that that particular variant was to be replaced by the F-35, even though the IAF has some on order to replace older F-16 variants. The point was that when comparing the operational use of both aircraft (and cost!) it should be noted that the F-35 is able to carry internally everything that the depicted aircraft is carrying externally, including those very same munitions, similar pods and a similar fuel quantity.

Regarding CFTs: AFAIK only new-build F-16s can carry them, so that includes Greek, Polish, EAU, Moroccan and some Israeli aircraft. Since noone has retrofitted that capability I'd guess that it's just too expensive and that air-to-air refueling is considered good enough. Also take into account that all American F-16s are relatively old aircraft, thoughbof course there are older variants still flying with other users.

 

[Urwumpe]

Funny you should speak of FLIRs, we have one lying around undergoing endurance testing in the office right now

Pure coincidence.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Yes, the depicted F-16I is a rather new Israeli bird. I did not mean to imply that that particular variant was to be replaced by the F-35, even though the IAF has some on order to replace older F-16 variants. The point was that when comparing the operational use of both aircraft (and cost!) it should be noted that the F-35 is able to carry internally everything that the depicted aircraft is carrying externally, including those very same munitions, similar pods and a similar fuel quantity.

Regarding CFTs: AFAIK only new-build F-16s can carry them, so that includes Greek, Polish, EAU, Moroccan and some Israeli aircraft. Since noone has retrofitted that capability I'd guess that it's just too expensive and that air-to-air refueling is considered good enough. Also take into account that all American F-16s are relatively old aircraft, thoughbof course there are older variants still flying with other users.

More than 250 USAF F-16s, most of them being the recent F-16CJ strike-optimized variant, are fitted for CFTs. So why NOT use them? It'd be cheaper than using tanker gas, and when you DO need to hit the tanker, you can go longer before needing to go back. It's a no-brainer, so why isnt the USAF doing it?

 

[Andy44]

Back when the F-111 debacle occurred, development time for new combat aircraft was still tolerably short, so implementing a Plan B was practical.

The problem today is that the whole defense contracting business is so bloated, wasteful, and time-consuming that if the F-35 turns out to be a giant dud, the US is in a bad spot. It's taken a decade and a half to get the *&%$ program just to this point; a replacement program isn't go to be much cheaper nor will it be timely.

At least the F-16 production line is still running and could serve as a fallback. The Harrier and Hornet, I'm not so sure.

In any case the F-35 has to work, and if it doesn't than documents will be pencil-whipped until it does, because there will be too much fiscal and political hell to pay if it doesn't.

Which is bad.

 

[Fabri91]

According to Wikipedia:

F-16C/D Block 50/52 Plus
Israeli Air Force Block 52+ based F-16I with CFTs and dorsal spine
This variant's main differences are the addition of support for conformal fuel tanks (CFTs), a dorsal spine compartment, the APG-68(V9) radar, an On-Board Oxygen Generation System (OBOGS),and a JHMCS helmet

This is the earliest mention of a CFT-fitted F-16 and like all the other variants fitted, it's an export version.

The same is said on the CFT page.

 

[Linguofreak]

At least the F-16 production line is still running and could serve as a fallback. The Harrier and Hornet, I'm not so sure.

The Super Hornet is still in production. I actually think it might even do well as a fallback for the USAF.

 

[mojoey]

In any case the F-35 has to work, and if it doesn't than documents will be pencil-whipped until it does, because there will be too much fiscal and political hell to pay if it doesn't.

Which is bad.

It should have never gotten that way in the first place. The AF put *far* too much effort into this one neat plane that OPFOR hates! Seriously though, give me decent Airframe upkeep for the A-10 (maybe our resident shop guru can shed some light on that) or bring back P-51s.

In tangentially related topics:

Yes, March is terrible.

 

[Anroalh12]

I have just found a page where you can create patches of Interstellar.
http://appcloud.warnerbros.com/interstellar/patch/

Some patches are locked. But the code is 1234 (So difficult :hmm

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Back when the F-111 debacle occurred, development time for new combat aircraft was still tolerably short, so implementing a Plan B was practical.

The problem today is that the whole defense contracting business is so bloated, wasteful, and time-consuming that if the F-35 turns out to be a giant dud, the US is in a bad spot. It's taken a decade and a half to get the *&%$ program just to this point; a replacement program isn't go to be much cheaper nor will it be timely.

At least the F-16 production line is still running and could serve as a fallback. The Harrier and Hornet, I'm not so sure.

In any case the F-35 has to work, and if it doesn't than documents will be pencil-whipped until it does, because there will be too much fiscal and political hell to pay if it doesn't.

Which is bad.

Hmmm... The tooling for the F-22 is still around. It'd be cheaper at this point for the USAF to restart production of the F-22 than to buy the F-35. Yeah, it won't have the cool gizmos, but it'd work well enough.