maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:08 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 134 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The F-35
PostPosted: Tue May 22, 2018 11:27 am 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 16305
Reputation points: 13228
It would be interesting to know the mods the Israeli's made/make to the F35, if they can.

Read that the US has nixed any mods by anyone, Israel maybe an exception since they're in combat and have hands on combat experience. Possible an US/IDF joint effort.

_________________
“Political Language… is Designed to Make Lies Sound Truthful… and to Give an Appearance of Solidity to Pure Wind.” — George Orwell


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The F-35
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 11:36 am 
Offline
Sergeant

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:27 pm
Posts: 1170
Reputation points: 2952
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/201 ... port-says/
Quote:

Too close for comfort —
Navy’s F-35 doesn’t have range for real stealth strikes, House report says
Risks to carriers, absence of stealth tankers puts "necessary targets" out of reach.


Sean Gallagher - 5/22/2018, 10:30 PM


...
The House Armed Services Committee report hinted at this issue:
Quote:

The committee notes that the aircraft carrier air wing has been optimized for striking power and sortie generation and believes that it may not be configured to support the long-range strike required by current and future threat systems. While the introduction of the F-35C will significantly expand stealth capabilities, the F-35C could require increased range to address necessary targets. The committee believes that several options could be used to address this issue to include developing a stealth tanker capability, improved engine technology, or to develop and procure a strike capability that is purposely built to strike at increased range.


...
Quote:
But the would-have-been $4.38 billion program failed so hard that, in 1991, then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney cancelled it—the biggest program cancellation ever up until that point—and the government sued McDonnell Douglas for breach of contract. Eventually, Boeing (which acquired McDonnell Douglas) had to pay the government $2.8 billion—the $1.35 billion that McDonnell Douglas was initially awarded, plus the interest that accrued while the companies fought the suit over the next 18 years.

...

The US Gov broke a defence contractor in court and got their money back, plus interest?
:shock:

lol, just checked Boing´s stock prizeover the years, must have hurt them mightily:

https://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/chart/BA.N

_________________
- Inhalt beweisgesichert im Auftrag der Bundesprüfstelle für abweichende Meinungen (BuPrüaM)


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The F-35
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 12:38 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 12051
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 16211
Quote:
The F-35C's advertised range is 1,200 nautical miles (roughly 2,200 kilometers), roughly 10 percent longer than that of the F/A-18. But for most strikes, that would require the carriers launching F-35C sorties to be much closer to the coast than falls within the comfort zone.


F-35C has 10% longer range than USN's current carrier aircraft.

So what was the "problem?"

Sounds like a bullshit article to me. Yeah sure, the "stealth" bit of the F-35 is not so useful for the USN version, but then it wasn't designed strictly for the USN and it isn't like the USN already has a "better" machine.

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The F-35
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 12:55 pm 
Offline
Sergeant

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:27 pm
Posts: 1170
Reputation points: 2952
Anthropoid wrote:
Quote:
The F-35C's advertised range is 1,200 nautical miles (roughly 2,200 kilometers), roughly 10 percent longer than that of the F/A-18. But for most strikes, that would require the carriers launching F-35C sorties to be much closer to the coast than falls within the comfort zone.


F-35C has 10% longer range than USN's current carrier aircraft.

So what was the "problem?"

Sounds like a bullshit article to me. Yeah sure, the "stealth" bit of the F-35 is not so useful for the USN version, but then it wasn't designed strictly for the USN and it isn't like the USN already has a "better" machine.


Well it´s the opinion expressed in the House Armed Services Committee report.

The article is getting a lot of comments, this exact issue is being discussed. 2200km may or may not be sufficient range for current and future mission requirements.

I sure hope Germany buys the F-35 at some point instead of doing a co-op with the French for a stealthy Eurofighter Typhoon successor.

_________________
- Inhalt beweisgesichert im Auftrag der Bundesprüfstelle für abweichende Meinungen (BuPrüaM)


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The F-35
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 1:20 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 31600
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
Scharfschütze wrote:
Anthropoid wrote:


F-35C has 10% longer range than USN's current carrier aircraft.

So what was the "problem?"

Sounds like a bullshit article to me. Yeah sure, the "stealth" bit of the F-35 is not so useful for the USN version, but then it wasn't designed strictly for the USN and it isn't like the USN already has a "better" machine.


Well it´s the opinion expressed in the House Armed Services Committee report.

The article is getting a lot of comments, this exact issue is being discussed. 2200km may or may not be sufficient range for current and future mission requirements.

I sure hope Germany buys the F-35 at some point instead of doing a co-op with the French for a stealthy Eurofighter Typhoon successor.


Quote:
I sure hope Germany buys the F-35 at some point instead of doing a co-op with the French for a stealthy Eurofighter Typhoon successor.


I would applaud that move.
There is absolutely no reason that Germany's non-functional (under repair) military hardware should be limited to just Euro produced equipment. ;-)

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The F-35
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 1:33 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 12051
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 16211
Scharfschütze wrote:
Anthropoid wrote:

F-35C has 10% longer range than USN's current carrier aircraft.

So what was the "problem?"

Sounds like a bullshit article to me. Yeah sure, the "stealth" bit of the F-35 is not so useful for the USN version, but then it wasn't designed strictly for the USN and it isn't like the USN already has a "better" machine.


Well it´s the opinion expressed in the House Armed Services Committee report.


Maybe, maybe not. I have not read the "House Armed Services Committee" report and I wager you haven't either. The real question though is, did whoever wrote that article! :P

The article even acknowledges that whatever the HASC report said was "buried" deep inside the lengthy report, classic fake news lingo. You identify ONE line or maybe even one phrase which, taken out of context and adapted for pop audiences, can then be used as a hinge point for a whole lengthy ramble that says nothing, but plays on long standing discourse and reanimates "debates" that have likely been laid to rest by those who know what they are talking about weeks, months or years ago.

Without actually reading more than every other line, that is my take on it.

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The F-35
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 1:51 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 27860
Reputation points: 20000
I think the issue is the longer-term threat of Anti-ship ballistic missile with ranges longer than 2000 km.

Quote:
Main articles: DF-26, DF-21D, and DF-16

China has inducted the world's first [1] operational anti-ship ballistic missile, known as the DF-21D.[2] In 2010, it was reported that China had entered the DF-21D into its early operational stage for deployment.[3]

The DF-26 is also able to carry anti-ship warheads, possibly hypersonic glide vehicles like the WU-14, to attack medium and large naval vessels out to ranges of 3500 km to 5000 km.[4]

China is apparently working on a second generation ASBM using hypersonic glide vehicle technology tested on the WU-14. This would allow the warhead to search for the current location of the carrier, instead of just dropping down to the spot it was first aimed at. The high speed maneuvers would also make the missile much harder to intercept.[5]

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The F-35
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 1:59 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 27860
Reputation points: 20000
Even so, I'm not sure you absolutely need a "stealthy" tanker when you are 1500 km away from the Chinese coast or warships. There is no SAM that can reach anywhere near that distance and they would have to push out fighters at very long distances to get at the tankers.

It is fair to say no US carrier would ever enter the Taiwan Strait in times of tension.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The F-35
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 2:00 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 27860
Reputation points: 20000
Besides..there isn't going to be a war with China...they are going to buy more soybeans from us....and then they will turn into soyboys.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The F-35
PostPosted: Wed May 23, 2018 2:27 pm 
Offline
Staff Sergeant

Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:26 pm
Posts: 3873
Location: not the end of the world but you can see it from here
Reputation points: 10460
jack t ripper wrote:
Besides..there isn't going to be a war with China...they are going to buy more soybeans from us....and then they will turn into soyboys.


Don't be knocking grain sales to China. I'm in the sorghum seed business and the Chinese had slapped 170% tariff on sorghum going to China. Taking that tariff off has made a lot of our customers very happy as there are a lot of failed wheat acres in the Southern Great Plains just begging for some grain sorghum to be planted on them. Also will make the Chinese beer brewers happy as that is what a good chunk of it goes for.

_________________
Texas, where we have the death penalty and aren't afraid to use it! Build the wall!!


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 134 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group