It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A pilot's point of view on F-35 in the CAS role

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Interesting video today taken talking to a pilot comparing the F-35 to the A-10. He raises many good points about the comparison and the aircraft. He states, correctly, that the A-10 will always be better at CAS because it was purpose built for that, but at the same time, over the last 13 years, most of the bombs dropped have been from Predators, F-16s, F-15s, F-18s, bombers, etc and not the A-10 as people would have you believe.

He also raises that while the aircraft is prohibitively expensive right now, it's far better to be able to buy one airplane than to have to buy four or five to do the same missions that one can do. His comment at the end is priceless.





posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
But do we have superiority with the F-35 at any one mission?

I heard a lot of 'yes, that plane is better at that mission, but any other mission the F-35 will beat that plane'.

So we have a replacement that is not great at anything but good at all things?



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: stosh64

Pretty sure it's filling it's role nicely, seems like it's more of a strike plane than an air superiority fighter like the F18. Which seems to be what people aren't understanding that is what it's going for, want air superiority? Then get a F22.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I seem to remember that Germany tried the multi-purpose route with the starfighter when they rebuilt the Luftwaffe after WWII. I realize technology has come a long way, but will the same problems and pitfalls become apparent over time. The German starfighters were referred to as "the widowmaker."

Cheers - Dave



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: stosh64

Show me a multirole that is great at anything. It's normal to have multirole aircraft that are good at what they do, but aren't great at any of them. The F-35 isn't going to be operating alone on any mission, just as our aircraft now aren't operating alone on the missions they perform.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: misterhistory

The F-18 isn't an air superiority fighter, it's a bomb truck that carries missiles, like the F-35. It's better at the WVR fight than the F-35 currently is, but that will change as the software is developed and installed.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

The F-104 wasn't designed to be a multirole aircraft, which is why it sucked at it. It was designed as an interceptor, which is why it had that tiny little supercritical wing and huge engine. It was built to go fast, in a straight line, not fly low on a bomb profile.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 11:49 AM
link   
F-18s take down MiGs en route to target during bombing mission.



17 January 1991
USN F/A-18s vs. IRAF MiG-21s

Two F/A-18s from VFA-81 shot down two Iraqi MiG-21s, one with an AIM-7 Sparrow missile and one with an AIM-9 Sidewinder missile, in a brief dogfight with their bombs still latched on



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Sorry didn't mean to imply the F18 is an air superiority fighter, but is just better at A2A than the F35 currently is. But even then, it's not always about maneuverability, remember the P38 vs the Zero? As you've said, it's unlikely to fly alone.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

Just because they can dogfight doesn't make them great at it. They're good at it, but put it up against an F-15, or F-16, with equal pilots, and more often than not, the Eagle or Viper win, hands down.
edit on 4/24/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4/24/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


kind of off topic but not really,


I have seen pics of A-10's return in less then perfect shape. bullet holes, missing parts etc.

The A-10 was made to be a tank killer at close range so it is obviously heavily armored. I have not seen the inside of a F-35 but I bet $ to doughnuts its not a Ti bathtub.


at the risk of sounding ignorant why would you send in a unarmored anything for CAS, I know the C-130's are high up and getting some guided munitions but I don't know how I would feel sitting on the ground having JDAMS or SDB's dropped from 30K+ feet, let alone the glide time.


I would think that any peer level enemy would shred a F-35 in a CAS role regardless of ECM, if you can see it you can shoot it.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: misterhistory

Right now, my truck is probably better than the F-35 is.


But that's just because the software is limited in what it can currently do.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

Because that gives you exponentially more platforms you can use for the mission, and better survivability. The A-10 gets shredded because it's down in the weeds, at extreme short range to defensive systems. If the threat is a ring of ZSU-23-4s protecting a radar site or something, then you can fly a B-52 over at 40,000 feet which is well outside their range, and thus completely safe from any defensive fire.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58


I suppose we could not expect to see an active Air Force pilot say much different.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun

So every single person saying how good the F-35 is, is, what, only saying it to protect their jobs? And yet the Lockheed pilot that wrote a scathing article about it, and basically lied in it, doesn't get fired? How does that work?



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 01:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: roadgravel

Just because they can dogfight doesn't make them great at it. They're good at it, but put it up against an F-15, or F-16, with equal pilots, and more often than not, the Eagle or Viper win, hands down.


I didn't mean it that way.

Just pointing out that it has actually accomplished it at least once. Kept the mission on track.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: roadgravel

Sorry, all the idiotic reports about the F-35, with very little foundation in reality makes me twitch.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

The F-104 wasn't designed to be a multirole aircraft, which is why it sucked at it. It was designed as an interceptor, which is why it had that tiny little supercritical wing and huge engine. It was built to go fast, in a straight line, not fly low on a bomb profile.


Yes, I realize it was not built from the ground up for a multipurpose role and rather it was added onto and modified. Owner, often it is better to be the best at one thing than spread thin into many things. Time will tell how well this platform works out.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

The F-104 wasn't even particularly good at anything but going straight ahead, really fast. Even in the US which only used it as a fighter it had the highest loss rate of the Century series, at somewhere around 30%. Of all the nations that used it, only Spain could claim no losses. The average loss rate was over 16%.

We're beyond the "one mission, one platform" mentality and have moved into the multirole age. No one can afford to have one platform to do one mission anymore, because as we get more advanced, we get more expensive.



posted on Apr, 24 2016 @ 02:27 PM
link   
About 15 years ago, all the jigs and assorted stuff was in Tennessee for the A-10, great airplane see in action. I've heard its Gatling gun many times where they sighted them. I worked at a place close enough to hear them.

Awesome airplane.







 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join