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.

 

F-35s at Red Flag

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:07 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66

Well then it's a good thing they're not relying on your opinion. Funny how all the people that matter are largely satisfied with how it's doing.

So showing you that your comments are flat wrong is judging now? Ok, sure. You can keep your opinion, but if you're going to come in preaching what you claim are facts, and are wrong, as you were, then you don't get to throw the "I'm entitled to my opinion" card.
edit on 2/19/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: spy66

Well then it's a good thing they're not relying on your opinion. Funny how all the people that matter are largely satisfied with how it's doing.


No they are not relaying on my opinion, but i still have a right to give one. We are going to Field the F-35 for Our protection in the near future. So i think i have a right to have an opinion. I also pay my taxes.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:11 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66

Yes you do have that right. But see the edit above. If you want to state your opinion like it's fact, as you did, then it's going to be refuted.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:14 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66

What do you suppose they'll be doing?? Training against Sopwith Camels flown by Snoopy?

Because I can...




Of course they'll train against Gen 4++ fighters, and the fifth gen Russian plane if they can get it by nefarious means, or even non-nefarious means.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Interesting article about the B-1 at Red Flag. They integrated with the F-35 for the first time at the exercise.

theaviationgeekclub.com...


Now if only they could fix the bone's hanger queen problems.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

The latest upgrade, which brought them up to Block 16 helped a lot. Mostly because they replaced damn near everything on them. The one that really made my jaw drop was the 500% improvement to the braking system.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Pyle

The latest upgrade, which brought them up to Block 16 helped a lot. Mostly because they replaced damn near everything on them. The one that really made my jaw drop was the 500% improvement to the braking system.


Were they using steel brakes still? I remember when the tankers switched to carbon brakes and we went from 2 or 3 brake changes a night to 1 or 2 a week.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

Probably. They have been concentrating on mission systems prior to now, so i wouldn't be surprised. When they hit 47% mission capable the Air Force finally decided to upgrade everything in sight on them.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Pyle

Probably. They have been concentrating on mission systems prior to now, so i wouldn't be surprised. When they hit 47% mission capable the Air Force finally decided to upgrade everything in sight on them.


47%!?

Holy hell I didn't know it got that bad. No wonder they are pushing the B-21 so hard.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Less than one out of every two were combat capable? WTF was that all about, and why the heck isn't someone in flippin' jail?

47 percent? That's so totally unacceptable as to be hard to believe.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Pyle

It was partly because they were pushing them through the Depot in as large numbers as possible, but yeah, 47.6% was their rate for FY14. They had something like 12 in the Depot at once.



posted on Feb, 19 2017 @ 12:49 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

We used to have three codes used for aircraft. FMC for nothing wrong, PMC(M)(S), for they could still fly the mission but were waiting on either maintenance or supply. NMC(M)(S), for flat broke, not flying for either maintenance or supply.

We had 5 in for an exercise, all listed as FMC. One of the crew chiefs came in for something, looked at our board and laughed. We asked what he laughed about, he pointed to the code and said, "ain't no such thing".



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 06:06 AM
link   

(snip)

Civilian contractor pilots from Draken International flying A-4 Skyhawks augmented the F-16s of the Nellis-based 64th Aggressor Squadron. Additionally, F-16Cs from the 115th Fighter Wing, Wisconsin Air National Guard and F-15Cs from the 125th Fighter Wing, Florida Air National Guard, and Block 50 F-16Cs assigned to the 77th Fighter Squadron from Shaw Air Force Base, South Carolina rotated on to the Red Air team to increase the number of aggressor aircraft needed to assure a robust threat laydown.

(snip)

Lt Col Watkins explained how this has been ramped up. “In this Red Flag we’ve seen four advanced SAMs in one scenario, and we don’t necessarily know where they are. We can’t simulate hitting them with standoff weapons before the vul time [the time period flight plans to be on station] even starts, so we’re using an integrated cross-domain approach to find them. We’re using information supplied by cyber and space assets, Rivet Joint and Wedgetail, and we’re fusing all information together to find the target location. Between the Block 50 F-16s and the F-35s we’re locating the threats and are able to use the F-22’s standoff capability and the stealth capability of the F-35 to get close enough to the target locations where we can drop on them. Even in a Block 50 F-16 it would be impossible to target the missile system, because it would be too dangerous to get that close.”

Lt Col DeAngelis echoed that sentiment: “We’re able to use our sensors to nd the location and use our synthetic aperture radar mode to map the general area and determine where the surface-to-air missile site is. We carry two internal GBU-31(V)3 JDAMs, so we’re able to put a 2,000lb bomb on the threat.
As a former F-16 pilot, we used to shoot HARMs [AGM-88 High-speed Anti-Radiation Missiles], which have much smaller warheads and are not as capable. With the F-35 we’re able to nd the site and put a 2,000lb bomb on it, which is much more effective against an integrated air defence system.”

(snip)

www.f-16.net...



New F-15 radar debuts at Florida's 125th Fighter Wing

4/13/2010 - JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (April 13, 2010) -- JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (April 13, 2010) - The Air National Guard unveiled an upgrade to the radar system for its F-15C Eagle fighter aircraft during a ceremony at Florida's 125th Fighter Wing, April 12, giving the jets greater capabilities while reducing maintenance costs.

The new Raytheon radar system -- the APG-63(v)3 Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) -- replaces the older mechanically controlled devices currently in the aircraft.

www.fl.ang.af.mil...




Also, the 125th FW is the first F-15C unit to incorporate the Sniper targeting pod for air-to-air use, allowing crews to identify targets visually at extreme ranges. To my knowledge, they remain the only unit that is fully operational with the Sniper pod at this time, a capability that will enhance their utility when it comes to intercepting foreign aircraft under various conditions.

foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com...


So it's highly likely the F-35A was flying against AESA equiped F-15's. Sniper targeting pod for air-to-air use apparently isn't full IRST and may need to be cued by the radar.

On another note, the F-15 has a very large radome. I would expect the AN/APG-63(v)3 to be extremely powerful, even for an AESA.

64th Aggressor Squadron flies block 25/32 F-16C's.

115th fighter wing flies F-16C/D block 30 (big mouth).
edit on 24/2/17 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)

edit on 24/2/17 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)

edit on 24/2/17 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)

edit on 24/2/17 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)




edit on 24/2/17 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 06:34 AM
link   
More and more details are leaking out. In addition to hitting targets using their own weapons, F-35s directed weapons launched by B-1s that remained outside contested airspace. They also performed as "AWACS light" and directed other aircraft in the strike package.

Meanwhile, the Marines racked up a 24:1 kill ratio at another exercise with their B models.



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Without knowing the ROE etc, what was the F-22's role, etc. plus given the perpetual glossing over of issues by the Pentagon, I would take the kill ratios with a grain of salt. theaviationist.com...

However, I was much more interested in the coordinated strike activities that appeared to mimic day one combat and in particular the use of the F-35's to coordinate and cue standoff weapons from B-1's inside contested space. That is an very important role IMHO



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

See, that's what cracks me up. For over 70 years, kill ratio meant the number of aircraft shot down by the specific type mentioned, ie the F4U kill ratio meant the aircraft shot down by the F4U, and only the F4U.

Even with the F-22, anything extraneous was ignored and the Raptor was unilaterally declared the greatest fighter ever built, and the ROE was only worried about when a few were shot down.

The F-35 goes out and performs at least as well as the Raptor, and far outperforms even the Air Force expectations, and suddenly kill ratio means something totally different, and the ROE is incredibly important.



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 05:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: FredT
The F-35 goes out and performs at least as well as the Raptor, and far outperforms even the Air Force expectations, and suddenly kill ratio means something totally different, and the ROE is incredibly important.


The USAF, marines, and the Navy, plus the DOD AND LOCKmart have made a habit about obfuscating any issues with this airframe. Even to the point about outright lying about the A-10 in an effort to kill off the airframe to divert funds. So you will have to excuse me If I want more information regarding these claims.

We have always talked about the ROE when claims are made. COPE India in 2004 the IAF claimed a 9:1 kill ratio. That makes the USAF look pretty bad no? But once the ROE was understood the results make sense
edit on 2/28/17 by FredT because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

Of course the ROE is important, and thank you for making my point. In that exercise, the AF looked bad, so all everyone talked about was the ROE. If the AF had done well, the ROE would have been ignored.

Time after time, the F-22 went out and kicked ass, and all we ever heard about was how great it was. They went through the exercise with the Germans, and didn't do as well, and suddenly it's all about the ROE.

Every. Single. Time. An aircraft goes out and does well, you NEVER hear about the ROE. Gets its ass handed to it, "Well what was the ROE". It never fails.



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

So are we supporting each other point? Arguing parallel points?


I have since the Cope India tried to understand what the ROE's were when any claim is made. Good OR Bad. and given that I have never flow in a fighter jet, or participated in ACM, or bore direct witness of the goings on at Red Flag etc. Its what I have chosen to evaluate claims being made for these types of exercises.

Good or bad, with anything you have to understand the situation and the conditions that the claims are being made for to evaluate the claim



posted on Feb, 28 2017 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58

Every. Single. Time. An aircraft goes out and does well, you NEVER hear about the ROE. Gets its ass handed to it, "Well what was the ROE". It never fails.



Not true, the AF just claimed an extraordinary kill ratio for the F-35. I wanted to see the ROE because when it comes to that air frame I don't trust them based on prior over / under exaggerations they have made




top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join