From the folks who I consider gods when it comes to statistical info comes these revelations about the JSF.
www.fas.org...
Survivability: radio frequency/infrared signature reduction and on-board countermeasures to survive in the future battlefield--leveraging off F-22 air
superiority mission support
USAF-Multi-role aircraft (primarily air-to-ground) to replace F-16 and A-10 and to complement F-22. The Air Force JSF variant poses the smallest
relative engineering challenge. The aircraft has no hover criteria to satisfy, and the characteristics and handling qualities associated with carrier
operations do not come into play. As the biggest customer for the JSF, the service will not accept a multirole F-16 fighter replacement that doesn't
significantly improve on the original.
JSF’s integrated avionics and stealth are intended to allow it to penetrate surface-to-air missile defenses to destroy targets, when enabled by the
F-22’s air dominance. The JSF is designed to complement a force structure that includes other stealthy and non-stealthy fighters, bombers, and
reconnaissance / surveillance assets.
Propulsion Baseline: Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 derivative from F-22 Raptor
It would sound to me that ultimately the sucess of the JSF hinges on the use of the F22. As the facts above show.
And as shown here, the Air Force thinks this way too.
www.fas.org...
Tagged to replace an aging fighter fleet, the JSF will fulfill a future ground-attack role, with air superiority provided by the F-22 Raptor.
The Air Force needs the Joint Strike Fighter to replace its aging fleet of F-16s and A-10s, according to Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Michael E.
Ryan. "This will ensure that young Air Force men and women always will have the advantage of technologically superior weapons. We never want a fair
fight; we want the odds to be 100 to 1 in our favor."
The Air Force's Joint Strike Fighter focuses primarily on countering the ground threat while maintaining a secondary air-to-air capability, according
to Maj. Michael McGee, Air Force JSF Requirements Office, Directorate of Operational Requirements.
"Currently, we team the F-15 to counter the air threat and provide air superiority with the F-16, which counters not only the surface-to-air missile
threat but acts as the majority piece of our ground-attack force of fighter aircraft," McGee said. "Just as the F-15 and F-16 play complementary
roles today, so too will the F-22 and the JSF."
[Edited on 28-2-2004 by Agent47]
Lockheed-Martin F-35 "Lightning II" - Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), page 2
privacy
reply posted on 28-2-2004 @ 10:06 PM by Agent47
You know its not like I dont love the JSF but I realize the importance of a multi platform Air Force, and as such Ive come to represent for the
Raptor.
www.fas.org...
Myth: The Air Force doesn't really need the F-22 to maintain air superiority in the 21st century.
Fact: The F-22 is integral to the Air Force's tactical aircraft modernization program and the key to dominating the skies in 2010 and beyond. By the time the F-22 comes online, the F-15 (today's premier fighter) will be more than 25 years old. Without the F-22, the Air Force will steadily lose its edge in air superiority in the 21st century. By 2005, flying the F-15 into combat will be the equivalent of driving a 20-year-old car in the Indianapolis 500.
Myth: Other countries don't have the technology to compete with the F-15's defense and strike capability, so there is no reason to improve on it.
Fact: America's best fighter, the F-15, is on par with current Russian fighters, and behind Europe's and Russia's newest class of fighters set to roll off production lines by 2005. These include the French Rafale, Europe's Eurofighter and the Russian SU-35. The F-22's capabilities are critical to maintaining air superiority.
Myth: The F-22 doesn't bring anything to the fight the F-15 isn't already providing.
Fact: To maintain the levels of air superiority and dominance provided by the F-15 today, we will need the F-22's capabilities of speed, supercruise, maneuverability at supersonic speeds, stealth and integrated avionics to allow our pilots to identify and defeat threats. It also will give our air warriors a capability they've never before had: First look, first shot, first kill. Additionally, the F-15 does not provide any air-to-ground capability; the F-22 will provide first-day, near-precision, air-to-ground capability with the Joint Direct Attack Munition.
Myth: The F-15 will still be able to provide an adequate defense and effective strike force 15 years from now.
Fact: The F-15 is expected to provide an adequate defense and effective strike force for the next five to 10 years (when the F-22 is scheduled to become operational); but not 15. Without the F-22, we won't have the capability to counter the threat because we won't have the speed or stealth -- dramatically decreasing our chances of survival.
Myth: The Air Force's insistence on the F-22 is part of an obsolete, Cold War mentality because future conflicts will be low intensity and not require the same high-tech equipment we needed for the Cold War.
Fact: Low-intensity conflicts are not necessarily low technology. The threat includes not only advanced fighter aircraft, but also increasingly lethal surface-to-air missiles. The number of countries possessing the most advanced SAMs is expected to increase from 14 to 21 by 2005 -- an increase that will overwhelm our current fighter force's ability to gain air superiority.
Myth: The F-22 is cost-prohibitive and not worth the return on investment.
Fact: With an average aircraft "sticker price" (fly-away cost) of less that $85 million, the F-22 will cost less than 1 percent of the Department of Defense budget during its production period. In its most costly year, 2003, the F-22 will consume less than 5.6 percent of the Air Force budget; 1.7 percent of the defense budget and 0.25 percent of the total federal budget.
Myth: Air superiority is a "nice to have" that has to be weighed against budget constraints.
Fact: Owning the sky is worth the cost. For less than 1 percent of the DOD budget, the F-22 will enable all of America's air, land and sea forces to operate effectively and free from enemy air attack. Thanks to air superiority, no airman, soldier, sailor or Marine has lost his or her life to enemy aircraft in the last 40 years.
Myth: As a cost measure, rather than continue with development of the F-22, the Air Force can simply upgrade its current fighters.
Fact: The average F-15 will be 26 years old in 2005. Even with major upgrades, it will not match the capabilities of the newest foreign fighters. An improved F-15 would only provide one-third the effectiveness of the F-22 at nine-tenths the cost.
Myth: The Joint Strike Fighter is a respectable substitute for the F-22 at a much lower cost.
Fact: The Air Force's modernization strategy is to develop a mix of high-capability F-22s and lower-cost JSFs to achieve dominant capability and force readiness. The JSF is very effective as a low-cost, multi-mission aircraft optimized for attacking ground targets. It is not a substitute for the F-22. The JSF is primarily designed as an affordable replacement for the Air Force's aging F-16s and A-10s, and will depend on the F-22 for air superiority. Just as the F-15 and F-16 are a highly successful, synergistic team today, the F-22 and JSF will be the winning team of the future; however, neither can succeed on its own.
www.fas.org...
Myth: The Air Force doesn't really need the F-22 to maintain air superiority in the 21st century.
Fact: The F-22 is integral to the Air Force's tactical aircraft modernization program and the key to dominating the skies in 2010 and beyond. By the time the F-22 comes online, the F-15 (today's premier fighter) will be more than 25 years old. Without the F-22, the Air Force will steadily lose its edge in air superiority in the 21st century. By 2005, flying the F-15 into combat will be the equivalent of driving a 20-year-old car in the Indianapolis 500.
Myth: Other countries don't have the technology to compete with the F-15's defense and strike capability, so there is no reason to improve on it.
Fact: America's best fighter, the F-15, is on par with current Russian fighters, and behind Europe's and Russia's newest class of fighters set to roll off production lines by 2005. These include the French Rafale, Europe's Eurofighter and the Russian SU-35. The F-22's capabilities are critical to maintaining air superiority.
Myth: The F-22 doesn't bring anything to the fight the F-15 isn't already providing.
Fact: To maintain the levels of air superiority and dominance provided by the F-15 today, we will need the F-22's capabilities of speed, supercruise, maneuverability at supersonic speeds, stealth and integrated avionics to allow our pilots to identify and defeat threats. It also will give our air warriors a capability they've never before had: First look, first shot, first kill. Additionally, the F-15 does not provide any air-to-ground capability; the F-22 will provide first-day, near-precision, air-to-ground capability with the Joint Direct Attack Munition.
Myth: The F-15 will still be able to provide an adequate defense and effective strike force 15 years from now.
Fact: The F-15 is expected to provide an adequate defense and effective strike force for the next five to 10 years (when the F-22 is scheduled to become operational); but not 15. Without the F-22, we won't have the capability to counter the threat because we won't have the speed or stealth -- dramatically decreasing our chances of survival.
Myth: The Air Force's insistence on the F-22 is part of an obsolete, Cold War mentality because future conflicts will be low intensity and not require the same high-tech equipment we needed for the Cold War.
Fact: Low-intensity conflicts are not necessarily low technology. The threat includes not only advanced fighter aircraft, but also increasingly lethal surface-to-air missiles. The number of countries possessing the most advanced SAMs is expected to increase from 14 to 21 by 2005 -- an increase that will overwhelm our current fighter force's ability to gain air superiority.
Myth: The F-22 is cost-prohibitive and not worth the return on investment.
Fact: With an average aircraft "sticker price" (fly-away cost) of less that $85 million, the F-22 will cost less than 1 percent of the Department of Defense budget during its production period. In its most costly year, 2003, the F-22 will consume less than 5.6 percent of the Air Force budget; 1.7 percent of the defense budget and 0.25 percent of the total federal budget.
Myth: Air superiority is a "nice to have" that has to be weighed against budget constraints.
Fact: Owning the sky is worth the cost. For less than 1 percent of the DOD budget, the F-22 will enable all of America's air, land and sea forces to operate effectively and free from enemy air attack. Thanks to air superiority, no airman, soldier, sailor or Marine has lost his or her life to enemy aircraft in the last 40 years.
Myth: As a cost measure, rather than continue with development of the F-22, the Air Force can simply upgrade its current fighters.
Fact: The average F-15 will be 26 years old in 2005. Even with major upgrades, it will not match the capabilities of the newest foreign fighters. An improved F-15 would only provide one-third the effectiveness of the F-22 at nine-tenths the cost.
Myth: The Joint Strike Fighter is a respectable substitute for the F-22 at a much lower cost.
Fact: The Air Force's modernization strategy is to develop a mix of high-capability F-22s and lower-cost JSFs to achieve dominant capability and force readiness. The JSF is very effective as a low-cost, multi-mission aircraft optimized for attacking ground targets. It is not a substitute for the F-22. The JSF is primarily designed as an affordable replacement for the Air Force's aging F-16s and A-10s, and will depend on the F-22 for air superiority. Just as the F-15 and F-16 are a highly successful, synergistic team today, the F-22 and JSF will be the winning team of the future; however, neither can succeed on its own.
reply posted on 28-2-2004 @ 10:28 PM by intelgurl
Originally posted by Agent47
Myth: The Joint Strike Fighter is a respectable substitute for the F-22 at a much lower cost.
Fact: The Air Force's modernization strategy is to develop a mix of high-capability F-22s and lower-cost JSFs to achieve dominant capability and force readiness. The JSF is very effective as a low-cost, multi-mission aircraft optimized for attacking ground targets. It is not a substitute for the F-22. The JSF is primarily designed as an affordable replacement for the Air Force's aging F-16s and A-10s, and will depend on the F-22 for air superiority. Just as the F-15 and F-16 are a highly successful, synergistic team today, the F-22 and JSF will be the winning team of the future; however, neither can succeed on its own.
You're not saying anything that I disagree with here - I hope you didn't take what I was saying in the original post to mean that the F-35 is an affordable substitute for the F-22...
And in case that is what you gathered let me clarify my original statement....
What I said was: "the abilities that the F-22 brings to the table are massive overkill for battlefield support and attack - the US would be ill-advised putting the most expensive fighter in history in a high risk ground support/attack role."
The F-22 has it's place, it is an air superiority fighter, the most advanced one in the world - however, ground attack and battlefield support is not what it was built to do - it can do it - and do it quite effectively - but the F-35 has been designed specifically for ground attack and battlefield support.
Plus the fact that putting a Raptor in that role would be putting a 150 million dollar plane in a high risk position that a 50 million dollar plane can do just as effectively.
Originally posted by Agent47
Id have to disagree with the argument for armament seeing as the F-22 is an air superiority fighter this pic is a good depiction of what it needs to do its job.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
[Edited on 28-2-2004 by Agent47]
I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with -could you be more specific?
reply posted on 28-2-2004 @ 11:02 PM by Agent47
Originally posted by intelgurl
www.abovetopsecret.com...
[Edited on 28-2-2004 by Agent47]
I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with -could you be more specific?
Nevermind, it was a misinterpretation by me.
reply posted on 29-2-2004 @ 02:19 PM by Spectre
F-15 variants can drop bombs with the best of 'em. Here are some quotes from an online article on the F-15E "Strike Eagle":
"Although the slogan of the F-15's original design team was "Not a pound for air-to-ground,"the F-15 has long been
recognized as having superior potential in the ground attack role. In 1987 this potential was realized in the form of the F-15E Strike Eagle."
"While new to the operational inventory, F-15E Strike Eagles were among the first airframes tasked to react to events in the Persian Gulf in August 1990. The 4th Fighter Wing deployed two F-15E squadrons to Southwest Asia in August and December of that year, and spearheaded an attack on Iraqi forces Jan. 16, 1991. The war was brought to a swift and successful conclusion in late February 1991. "
"The mission of the Strike Eagle is as succinct as that of its air-to-air cousin: to put bombs on target. While previous models of the Eagle are assigned air-to-air roles, the "E" model is a dual-role fighter. It has the capability to fight its way to a target over long ranges, destroy enemy ground positions, and fight its way back out. The F-15E performs day and night all weather air-to-air and air-to-ground missions including strategic strike, interdiction, OCA and DCA. Although primarily a deep interdiction platform, the F-15E can also perform CAS and Escort missions. The F-15E is especially configured for the deep strike mission, venturing far behind enemy lines to attack high value targets with a variety of munitions. "
[source]
F-15E Strike Eagle - GlobalSecurity.org
The U.S. is also exporting the F-15I model to Israel. It has air-to-air as well as air-to-ground capabilities.
Personally, I can't wait to see some actual head-to-head comparisons of the JSF with existing airframes
"Although the slogan of the F-15's original design team was "Not a pound for air-to-ground,"
"While new to the operational inventory, F-15E Strike Eagles were among the first airframes tasked to react to events in the Persian Gulf in August 1990. The 4th Fighter Wing deployed two F-15E squadrons to Southwest Asia in August and December of that year, and spearheaded an attack on Iraqi forces Jan. 16, 1991. The war was brought to a swift and successful conclusion in late February 1991. "
"The mission of the Strike Eagle is as succinct as that of its air-to-air cousin: to put bombs on target. While previous models of the Eagle are assigned air-to-air roles, the "E" model is a dual-role fighter. It has the capability to fight its way to a target over long ranges, destroy enemy ground positions, and fight its way back out. The F-15E performs day and night all weather air-to-air and air-to-ground missions including strategic strike, interdiction, OCA and DCA. Although primarily a deep interdiction platform, the F-15E can also perform CAS and Escort missions. The F-15E is especially configured for the deep strike mission, venturing far behind enemy lines to attack high value targets with a variety of munitions. "
[source]
F-15E Strike Eagle - GlobalSecurity.org
The U.S. is also exporting the F-15I model to Israel. It has air-to-air as well as air-to-ground capabilities.
Personally, I can't wait to see some actual head-to-head comparisons of the JSF with existing airframes
First flight for \'flapless\' plane - the Evolution of Aviation
Posted 12 days ago with 4 member flags
Posted 12 days ago with 4 member flags
Dassault Rafale wins India\'s biggest fighter deal for $10.4 billion
Posted 10 days ago with 1 member flags
Posted 10 days ago with 1 member flags
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
Fox News to Cut "The Judge". No More "Freedom Watch" Come Feb 20th. I Think We All Know Why.
Education and Media, Posted 15 hours ago, 42 flags
Education and Media, Posted 15 hours ago, 42 flags
US Marines posed with Nazi symbol in Afghanistan
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 14 hours ago, 24 flags
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 14 hours ago, 24 flags
Here's an update on the "strange metal boxes washed up on Oregon beach"
ATS Skunk Works, Posted 7 hours ago, 14 flags
ATS Skunk Works, Posted 7 hours ago, 14 flags
Iran Worried USA is Building 8500th Nuclear Bomb!!
Jokes, Puns, & Pranks, Posted 12 hours ago, 8 flags
Jokes, Puns, & Pranks, Posted 12 hours ago, 8 flags
'Anonymous' hacker group threatens 'reign of terror' against Israel
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 8 hours ago, 8 flags
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 8 hours ago, 8 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
US Marines posed with Nazi symbol in Afghanistan
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 14 hours ago, 247 replies
Breaking Alternative News, Posted 14 hours ago, 247 replies
Iran Says US Attack Would Be ‘Akin To Suicide’
Breaking Political News, Posted 8 hours ago, 107 replies
Breaking Political News, Posted 8 hours ago, 107 replies
Fox News to Cut "The Judge". No More "Freedom Watch" Come Feb 20th. I Think We All Know Why.
Education and Media, Posted 15 hours ago, 43 replies
Education and Media, Posted 15 hours ago, 43 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.200 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.200 seconds
