Trump: The USAF, F-22,F-35 Vs 6th Gen.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Tomcat 21 and A-6Fs.

a reply to: 727Sky
I'm hearing you and I agree. The cost of many aviation regulations is frankly becoming less justifiable, and in some cases is actually holding the industry back from making advances that benefit us all. A couple of years back we needed to replace some missing/damaged standard 9 pin RS 232 cables to allow calibration laptops to "talk" to first class seat control boxes. We were going to use some cheap ones that you can buy anywhere in the world for about $10 bucks. That is until somebody pointed out they weren't "approved" for aviation use. The end result? We bought 10 approved cables, exactly the same as the $10 ones at wait for it..... $1500 each!

This kind of stupidity is frankly hard to justify and is what is actually holding the industry back. We need smart regulation, testing and accountability but not at prices like that. And the entire industry is littered with these kind of insane costings.

LEE.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: nwtrucker

They haven't put them against each other in ACM yet, but the radar and electronic systems are far ahead of where the F-22 is.

Of course they haven't faced each other In ACM. We know which would win. As far as radar and electronic systems go, 1 v 1 and BVR, their respective EW suits would cancel any missile capability against each other. So much for radar and 'systems'. WVR? Now we're back to physical, mechanical ability. TV and T/W ratio vs a high by-pass fan engine. I'm sure the F-35 driver will appreciate 'seeing' the Raptor as it moves into it's six before using guns....

a reply to: nwtrucker

I get it, you think the Raptor is the most amazing plane to ever exist and would be perfectly happy with an Air Force that flies nothing but F-22s. But once again, you're wrong. The Raptor excels at the mission it was designed for, but it's not the perfect aircraft you seem to think it is.

You underestimate the F-35 so badly it's not funny. The F-22 is not unbeatable, no matter how hard you want it to be. The Lightning pulls in so much information, even compared to the F-22 that it can't transmit it all. And it's not all capable of being jammed.

a reply to: Zaphod58


No, I don't think any platform is unbeatable. There's been sufficient comments on F-16 net in comparing the two that the most common quote, BVR, is "it depends".

You, on the other hand seem to think the F-35 is the last word in platforms even stating it can beat the F-22 and then comment the two haven't been in any ACM against each other. I made the EW comment that BVR is likely negated, weapon-wise. I v 1 the systems are restricted in use to radar/passive and missiles. EW cancels the missiles out.

Apparently, you think the F-35 is a match or better in air supremacy than the Raptor? Even LM people don't say or imply that.

You have family building the suckers?....LOL

Put the damn F-35 systems into the Raptor and you'll have your sixth Gen. Or close enough that we won't have to worry about it for a good while.

So unless you have links stating the 35 is better than the 22, which counters just about every site worth mentioning, I will go with their views, with all due respect. By the way one 'could' use one flight of 22s as air supremacy and have a flight behind with full externals acting in a full attack role with more capacity with it's wing size than a F-35. Especially upgraded.

Yes, better radar and better systems, yet the AF deemed the raptor didn't need the HMCS and gave the AIM-9X lo the Raptor last as they felt the 22 'didn't need it'.

Yes the Raptor can be beat. So can the F-35.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Where did I say any of that? Quote me, I'll wait. Instead of getting huffy and claiming I said things I didn't, try actually comprehending what was said for a change.

The F-35 is better than people think, and will be damn good at its mission you somehow think means that I'm saying the F-35 is the last word in platforms. No. It means the F-35 is better than people, namely you, think it is and it will be damn good at its mission. There will certainly be better, and there is room for improvement. There is CURRENTLY nothing, not even your precious Raptor that will be better at the mission the F-35 was designed for.

The F-35 outperforms everything out there, including the F-22, you have translated as being more maneuverable. Contrary to your opinion there is far more to combat than maneuverability and speed. The F-22 excels at air to air, but when you look at the big picture of what goes into combat, the F-35 is better at information gathering, long range detection, and the ability to network. Does that mean it's more maneuverable, no. Does that mean it would win every time, no. Does that mean it's performing better at the mission, yes. That means it's outperforming, not that it's necessarily better for the role. The Raptor was designed for one mission, air to air. That doesn't make it a better platform, only that it does some things better. The F-15E is based on the fighter with the greatest air to air combat record ever built, but that doesn't mean that it's great at air to air. It can DO air to air, but that doesn't mean it would excel at it. Just as the F-15C completely sucks at the air to ground mission. They're designed to compliment each other, as the F-22 and F-35 are. The F-35 is capable of defending itself, but for a straight air to air mission, pairing them with F-22s is the best option. Let the F-35 gather the information and the F-22 go after the target.

Yes, let's put systems into the F-22 that it can't power or cool or run properly. That'll work wonders. Hell, why not just slap them into an F-15 and call it done. You seem to think that just slapping systems into an aircraft they weren't originally designed for will work just fine.

a reply to: nwtrucker

By your logic the F-15C should never be beaten by any other 4th gen aircraft in an A2A engagement.. but they do get beaten. Zaphod never said that the F-35 was a better fighter than the F-22. Luckily they're on the same team so the argument is mostly moot. The F-35 has two crucial advantages.. Numbers and information. Like Zaphod has stated, the F-35 is a flying information center. They'll see the battlefield with little to no fog of war. The minute an enemy fighter moves on one 35 all of the 35s will know. Eventually every asset in the theater will be gathering and pruning useful information from the F-35's network. They'll more than likely be more F-35s in service by the end of the next decade than their are air superiority fighters.

There are reasons to think the F-35 could win in a dog fight vs an F-22. The F-35 was designed to be agile. In it's A variant in an air to air configuration there is no reason to think it wouldn't handle as well or better than an F-16 with a similar load out.. The F-35 has the most powerful engine ever put into a single engine fighter. It's a ridiculously powerful engine even compared to the F-16's engine. The F-35 also carries it's fuel internally and is not handicapped by fuel tanks like most western fighters are. Fighters like the F-22 can fly higher and faster, giving their missile shots an advantage. The F-35; however, will have better firing solutions provided by telemetry from not only it's own AESA radar but other F-35's radar along with a host of other sensors that could potentially offer information for targeting. BVR I don't think it would be a stretch to say that it would be a draw/slight advantage raptor. WVR is a knife fight. The 22 pilot may have greater margin for error but against an F-35 up close who might be carrying an AIM-9x... Would any aircraft really want to get so close? People say Vietnam proves that the WVR will never die.. I say Vietnam was 50 years ago and their missiles find targets to the square meter. The last thing any 5th gen pilot is going to bother doing is fight up close, especially against another 5th gen. Either way I'd rather have the F-35s EW suite than the F-22. F-22 is more of debacle than the F-35. It's been operational for years and still doesn't have all of it's bullets.

a reply to: Zaphod58


Here's your Quote:

"Have you read the latest reports? It's already out performing everything else flying, including the F-22.'

No qualifiers whatsoever. Hyperbole. Your last post I agree with. (Not that my agreeing means much...)

What I have gleaned is in a package strike the F-35 has the advantage. 1 v 1? It reverts to the F-22. IF one is measuring them against each other which is an unlikely scenario.

I am NOT demeaning the F-35. Seeing Israel increased it's purchase by 50% AFTER receiving their first two platforms speaks volumes, IMO. You speak of F-16/F-15 and other teaming of platforms over the years. All I'm saying is that 'balance' is gone with less than 200 F-22s. You can get an F-16 to do the job of an F-15 and visa versa. Better with both. Same holds true with the 35/22.

That's was my point.

a reply to: Caughtlurking


Actually he did say it. I quoted it in my last post.


The reason, at least the AF's official view, is the F-22 needed 'all it's bullets' less than other platforms needed them, money-wise. Otherwise, I agree completely with your post. Better EW in the F-35, but still good enough to get the job done against anyone out there.


I will disagree that the F-22 is more of a debacle due to the plane, itself. Issues, yes, the B.S. has been political and money. Not the damn platform. The F-35, on the other hand has had unlimited money thrown at it, compared to the 22 and it has had far more issues-and should with three variants- than the Raptor.


Besides, there ARE some "dog-life" issues with the Raptor and they need to be fixed. Combined with the upgrades it should have had before now and the 'toys' Zaphod has hinted at that are available, I can't buy into a sixth Gen. long before either fifth Gens has anywhere near approached their potentials.

a reply to: nwtrucker

And where in that quote did I say it's more maneuverable, or the be all, end all platform? There is far more to combat than maneuvering. The F-15E with AESA outperforms the F-15C, but I still wouldn't want one in an air superiority role unless it was absolutely necessary.

So, you prefer to wait until our fifth generation aircraft are 20+ years old before we start replacing them, so we end up right where we are now, with 40 year old aircraft flying front line missions when they're finally replaced. Some of us prefer to be more realistic and try to avoid being where we are now again.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: nwtrucker

And where in that quote did I say it's more maneuverable, or the be all, end all platform? There is far more to combat than maneuvering. The F-15E with AESA outperforms the F-15C, but I still wouldn't want one in an air superiority role unless it was absolutely necessary.

So, you prefer to wait until our fifth generation aircraft are 20+ years old before we start replacing them, so we end up right where we are now, with 40 year old aircraft flying front line missions when they're finally replaced. Some of us prefer to be more realistic and try to avoid being where we are now again.

Replace the 40 years olds with Raptors. Upgraded, far shorter a wait and far cheaper than a brand new sixth gen..

It IS an option.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Which delays their replacement 15 years minimum, which puts us exactly where we are today, with 40 year old F-22s flying while waiting for FOC on their replacements.

a reply to: nwtrucker

The F-35 is laying the framework of where the 6th gen will go. Millions of lines of code wouldn't be wasted on just one weapon system. The 6th gen will probably be less fighter and more battle-space commander role. Whether you like it or not the generals don't want these aircraft dog fighting, they're too valuable. The real problem is we need more aircraft like the A-10 to do the low end work. Luckily we see trends going that way in the think tanks. The 6th gen needs to happen and with the fact that our peers are only starting to sip from the cup of the fifth gen means we should just jump on the next generation and get the head start we already have there.

Correct me if I'm wrong but all the big defense contractors admittedly have someone working on sixth gen platforms in some way somewhere? Did Boeing, NG, and LM not all say that they were transferring talent to those areas towards the end of the LRSB competition? The F-22 isn't coming back because it hinders progress for no clear advantage. There are still no other operational 5g planes out there. The Russians and Chinese are getting close but neither of their aircraft are truly fifth generation other than the basic stealth eye test.

a reply to: Caughtlurking


Judging by your post, and my suspicions for years is the tail is wagging the dog. The MIC. So the big boys are/have moved people to the sixth gen. R&D. Yet they're the ones who are supposed to produce what the gov't asks for. (and generally do)

So who's asking for the sixth Gen.? Surely not Obama with his cuts across the board. Who then? We 're getting a new President with commitments oft repeated that will fix our AF. Upgrade it and expand it. Yet the MIC is acting like the decision is already made. They may be in for a rude surprise. Trump has a history of 'surprising'.

Yes, the competition is behind us in fifth gen. Yet how far? Especially in 'system' technology. If we can mess up their targeting, shut down whole systems, it stands to reason, sooner or later, likely sooner that they will have similar abilities in their EW. Unless there's a whole new gen. of missiles sitting waiting in the wings, BVR becomes to some degree cancelling on each side. In that scenario, we are back to pure physical ability, speed, agility and ACM. That won't go away any more that 'boots on the ground' despite all the technological advances.

I'm just a fan, also a fan-newly-of Trump. Don't be surprised if next month the A-10 suffers a 'rebirth'. Don't be surprised once the foreign purchases of the F-35 have been delivered, that the F-35 line is 'slowed down'...and eventually shortened on the back end. Be it due to a sixth gen. or an upgraded Raptor.

The F-22 may 'hinder progress' in the MIC view of things. The F-22 IS the best scrapper we've ever had and the new crowd running the military may have a different view of things. LockMart and Co. WILL comply, like it or not.

Perhaps Trump is just trying for a more cost effective alternative to how business as usual is conducted in the cost of our military procurement process.

a reply to: TDawg61

That's exactly what he's doing. He met with Boeing and Lockheed the other day about the F-35 and Air Force One replacement costs. Boeing told him they will keep the cost below $4B.

originally posted by: TDawg61
Perhaps Trump is just trying for a more cost effective alternative to how business as usual is conducted in the cost of our military procurement process.

Those meeting were just the opening moves. The Boeing deal with Iran, the building aa assembly plant in China and announcing a 10% cut in jobs in Washington St. . The cost of the F-35 program. Stay tuned, much more to follow...

a reply to: nwtrucker

This is actually pretty amusing. Back in 2008 there was much speculation and claims by Obama supporters (one was named Obamanite) that Obama was going to cancel the F-35 and instead ramp up production of the F-22.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Boeing has no choice but to cut jobs. Their sales figures are ridiculously below what they aimed for in 2016. They're having to cut production lower than they planned starting mid-2017.

a reply to: nwtrucker

You think the Air Force and Navy aren't already looking at 6th gen? They've been talking for at least two years about what they'd like to see in a 6th gen platform, and are currently putting together a study of what they need to see in a 6th gen platform, due out next year. The RFP should be dropping in late 2018 or early 2019. The people that will be making the platform have to already be working on R&D, so that when the requirements drop, they're already ahead of the game.