Does our air power have no rival?

Just to see what the competition is, I looked up the RAF and Royal Navy strength and then estimated future strengths for both services and those of the US in around 2015. It may also be noted that lots of countries are going F-35 crazy and are snapping them up like crazy. Saudi Arabia is planning to purchase around 350!!

Also, Lockheed-Martin seem like they're going to provide training and integrations services to all their foreign F-35 customers, around a dozen so far.

I chose UK because it's your average medium-sized buyer, and individual countries will likely follow its pattern - although the RAF and Royal Navy are of world-class excellence.

United Kingdom Fixed-Wing Combat Aircraft Strength

Current:
RAF
Strike Aircraft
60 Tornado GR4

Offensive Support:
39 Harrier GR7
22 Jaguar GR3

Air Defense: (Excluding Falkland Islands)
64 Tornado F3

Airborne Early Warning:
6 Sentry AEW1

Reserves:
26 Tornado GR4
8 Jaguar GR3
20 Tornado F3
9 Harrier GR7

Total RAF Active Fixed-Wing Combat Aircraft: 248

Royal Navy
3 x Invincible�class aircraft carriers
75? Harrier FA2

Grand Total: approx. 325

Future (2015+)
RAF
137 Typhoon F1 active, 232 total
7 Squadrons: 4 Air Defense, 2 Multi-role, 1 Offensive Support
40? JSF, 75? Total
Total: 177 Active

Royal Navy
2 x 60 000 tonne aircraft carriers
48? JSF
Total: 48 Active

Grant total: 225 (250 max)

USA Armed Forces (2015+)

F/A-22
USAF: 350?

F-35 Procurements:
USAF: 1763
US Navy: 480
US Marine Corps: 480

Grand total: approx 2,950 (including trainers, evaluation, reserve etc)

FAS: F-35 Overview

Royal Navy

JSF in the Middle East

Royal Air Force

Thanks to Russian for the RAF Link!

Comments:

The most significant contribution of the JSF, beyond that of stealth, speed and payload, is that of range, some twice that of most regular aircraft. This will greatly increase force projection capabilities, and the Royal Navy will leapfrog in 2012 to becoming a very potent force projector, as opposed to having mainly a ground support role, which it does now.

Where does this leave the pattern of future conflicts? Hard to say, but rest assured the US is saving the best hardware for itself.

[Edited on 13-11-2003 by Lampyridae]

Blast these BB tags!

[Edited on 13-11-2003 by Lampyridae]

Originally posted by straterx
This whole industry is a smoke screen
The more advanced tech. is not available for you scrutiny
The weapons available to the US make most conventional aircraft a joke do you really think The US
has pulled out the Big guns in Iraq no way
An Ex relative of mine ...is a physicist in weapons development ....you aint seen nothing !
Enjoy the Bravado while it lasts ...


Reagan to Gorbachev
comrade look out your window

checkmate.

Honestly, there has to be some kind of ban on this "i have a relative" stuff

Chinese AF cant be compared to Russian or US. The best chinese mass used fighter is J-7. And J-7 is a modified Mig-21. European contries will be much more powerful when Eurofighter comes on duty.

The US has bigger numbers, thats all. RAF is highest trained AF, at least we can identify enemy targets from friendly targets.

I must say,

USA

because they have all the space stuff

and laser guided weapons

that can pinpoint stuff directly.

Sorry, this is a double post

[Edited on 26-12-2003 by Laxpla]

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

Originally posted by fingerprint
I would also estimate that no nation can rival the U.S. in airpower at the current time. I also believe that if the USSR had not fallen, that we would still be neck and neck with them to this day.

Actually, the U.S. was never neck-and-neck with them. Our superior technology made it seem so, but in reality, their training was a whole lot better, their aircraft in many respects superior, and their numbers simply greater. In a war, we would've lost. Big-time

I'll only elaborate if you want me to. Otherwise, I want to keep this a discussion on our possible rivals only.

Sorry, I have to chime in here. As someone who has had direct contact with former Soviet block countries, their aircraft and aircrews, I can say without a doubt we were and are superior in all ways except for numbers. With few exceptions, the Mig-29 for example, an amazing aircraft in many respects, and perhaps the Foxbat, perhaps the best high altitude interceptor ever built, Russian aircraft are vastly inferior to US made aircraft. They copied so many things off our aircraft, they couldn't even keep them straight. take the Mig-23, for example. Swing wings from the F-111, and intakes from the F-4. They even put in the barrier cutters that the F-4 has between the intakes and the fuselage, because they thought they must be important, but didn't know what they were for! While our aircraft have very flush rivets and fasteners, theirs have raised ones. Not very aerodynamic.

And TRAINING??? Don't get me started!

I made a good friend in Poland a few years back, Richard Gryslenski, at the time, a squadron commander and one of the top Mig-29 pilots in the country. He, as a squadron commander got barely two or three flight hours a month, and most junior pilots got less. Our fighter guys get twice that a week, on average.

Bottom line, in a war, we would still clean their clocks, not only because of superior ability and aircraft, but desire. they don't really want to fight for something they don't believe in...our guys know what they are doing is the right thing, and do the job to the best of their ability.

You're looking it totally the wrong way.

The country with the most potent air power is China.
Why?
The Yanks lose a couple of jets over a combat zone and everyone at home starts whining about how the war isn't worth it, how American lives are being lost, how much money the aircraft costs.
The Chinks don't give a # about that. They just put another one up in the air and let it fly.

Sure, US air power can bomb the crap out of an underdeveloped nation. It even has the technology that says "For everyone of ours, we can blow 10 of theirs out of the sky".

US public opinion hampers the USAF more than any enemy fighter ever could.

Theoretically, the US is by far the most superior airpower in the world.
Realistically, it's hands are tied by the very people it fights for.

Originally posted by Leveller
You're looking it totally the wrong way.

The country with the most potent air power is China.
Why?
The Yanks lose a couple of jets over a combat zone and everyone at home starts whining about how the war isn't worth it, how American lives are being lost, how much money the aircraft costs.
The Chinks don't give a # about that. They just put another one up in the air and let it fly.

Sure, US air power can bomb the crap out of an underdeveloped nation. It even has the technology that says "For everyone of ours, we can blow 10 of theirs out of the sky".

US public opinion hampers the USAF more than any enemy fighter ever could.

Theoretically, the US is by far the most superior airpower in the world.
Realistically, it's hands are tied by the very people it fights for.

I ALMOST agree with you, but the truth is, when our backs are against the wall, we get the job done, regardless of what the peacenicks have to say. We'll never let the public or congress decide how we fight a war again. We did learn a FEW lessons from Viet Nam...

Actually, air 'superiority' is irrelevant when compared to the power of nature. Despite all man's technology, all it takes is an eathquake, tsumani, tornado and it all falls apart. I don't think its wise to depend so much on something so fragile. But that's just my opinion.

G.

Originally posted by Gothique
Actually, air 'superiority' is irrelevant when compared to the power of nature. Despite all man's technology, all it takes is an eathquake, tsumani, tornado and it all falls apart. I don't think its wise to depend so much on something so fragile. But that's just my opinion.

G.

[off topic]
well as soon as we are at a level one civilization(able to manipulate nature) then nature wont be an issue as you think.

Originally posted by Gothique
Actually, air 'superiority' is irrelevant when compared to the power of nature. Despite all man's technology, all it takes is an eathquake, tsumani, tornado and it all falls apart. I don't think its wise to depend so much on something so fragile. But that's just my opinion.

G.

Well until we can use nature to fight wars for us planes will have to do.

Originally posted by Affirmative Reaction
I ALMOST agree with you, but the truth is, when our backs are against the wall, we get the job done, regardless of what the peacenicks have to say. We'll never let the public or congress decide how we fight a war again. We did learn a FEW lessons from Viet Nam...

Which was never declared to be a war - but too funny that the memorial is the "Vietnam-war veterans memorial".

Btw. isn't it stupid to use Vietnam for argumentation for whatever? There was no need for war and in the end it was the biggest disaster of all. So we can agree that the peacenicks were right of protesting against it, or?

What abou tthe great canadian Air Forces?? I hear that they're powered by Labatts.

At the present moment, the U.S. is unrivaled. But, as always, no one can predict the future events (Exception of Nostradamus )

U.S. = Unrivaled Airpower at the present point in time

-wD

Originally posted by Gothique
Actually, air 'superiority' is irrelevant when compared to the power of nature. Despite all man's technology, all it takes is an eathquake, tsumani, tornado and it all falls apart. I don't think its wise to depend so much on something so fragile. But that's just my opinion.

G.

An interesting comment and quite true. The technology at man's disposal is all too prone to failure (I have worked with computers since 1978, so am well aware of this fact). Also, most of it is dependant on electricity (although most of the important systems have battery backups). All it takes is for an earthquake to take down the electrical subsystems and the area served by these subsystems are basically dead.

If man ever learns to harness the power of nature, then I will be seriously worried.

The US has bigger numbers and better technology.They won WWII because they outnumbered the germans who had better tanks and better equipment.

Currrently no one can challange our air power. In the last to wars we fought we never faced a single enemy fighter plane.(I don;t think the tailiban had any that flew).Even our planes from the 1980's could defeat any other nations air force in the world. I don't think we even know the extent of our own air power, there are probably close to 200 models of airplanes we don;t even know we have. We = non goverment people.

The Chinese airforce is a joke, have you seen their indiginous aircraft? the Chengdu and what have you, they all still look like 760' russian aircraft. nothing spectacular there. and their avionics are worthless!

as for the russians, most of the aircraft they built were reverse engineered from western aircraft. their engines are grossly underpowered and the avionics are all still 60's and 70's era. obviously there are a couple of exceptions, but in todays world, i would put my money on a western designed jet downing any eastern jet. aircraft they "stole" ranged from the F4 and F111, to the B1 lancer. they even made a copy of the British VC10, into an IL-62 i think it was! Crazy!

i think that russian guys estimate of the size of the russian aircraft inventory is way off, and any that really are there, around 60% are not airworthy anyway. they are rusting hulks stored on the dispersals of their run down bases! russia cant even afford the fuel to fly the ones that still can!

the only Russian aircraft to make itself a success in the west is the antonov AN-124-100. but even that is being considered for re-engining with western engines. these aircraft cannot be kept on the registers of western countries however, since they are so rickety, the CAA in britain wont approve it with a certificate of airworthiness in the UK.

I would have to say no! The US has the best combination of advanced technology and quality. That does Not by any means say we're perfect or invincible. Everything that is man made has a weakness. However, history has so far shown that since the end of Vietnam, noone has been able to find and exploit that weakness in our systems. That isn't to that it will always be this way.

Tim