MILAVIA Forum - Military Aviation Discussion Forum

Author Topic: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet  (Read 16998 times)

Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« on: November 18, 2008, 05:13:51 PM »
New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
By Dave Majumdar, Special to LiveScience.com

posted: 07 November 2008 04:05 pm ET

The F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is slated to become the backbone of the U.S. tactical aviation fleet. This ambitious program aims to replace the combined U.S. Defense Department arsenal of F-16 Fighting Falcons, F/A-18 Hornets, A-10 Thunderbolts, and the AV-8B Harrier combat aircraft with a single platform capable of being adapted to the divergent needs of the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Navy, and the U.S. Marine Corps.

The new fighter will not only replace those rapidly aging aircraft in the colossal American inventory, but the jet is also expected to become the mainstay of Allied air forces in Great Britain, Australia, and a host of other nations.

The massive undertaking is not without its critics however.

In recent weeks a number of highly critical reports and editorials have surfaced from both defense think tanks and the media. Critics such as Winslow Wheeler and Pierre Sprey of the Center for Defense Information malign the aircraft as an underpowered, overweight monstrosity that will be easy prey for the latest generation of threat aircraft such as the Russian built Su-35BM that are being proliferated around the world. Sprey and Wheeler argued in a editorial published on Sept. 10, that the F-35 which weighs in "at 49,500 lb air-to-air take-off weight, with an engine rated at 42,000 lb of thrust, will be a significant step backward in thrust-to-weight ratio for a new fighter."

Additionally, the two analysts suggest that the F-35 "with just 460 sq ft (43 m2) of wing area for the Air Force and Marine Corps variants, will have a wing-loading of 108 lbs per square foot."

Sprey and Wheeler argue that the F-35 is "actually less manoeuvrable than the appallingly vulnerable F-105 ‘Lead Sled' that got wiped out over North Vietnam" during the Vietnam conflict. The two critics dismiss the aircrafts' advanced stealth and avionics almost in their entirety, pointing to the downing of an F-117 Nighthawk stealth fighter during the 1999 Kosovo air campaign as evidence to support their views.

Full article & Source
http://www.livescience.com/technology/081107-f-35-fighter-jets.html

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2009, 06:00:00 AM »
Winslow Wheeler and Pierre Sprey are idiots! >:(
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline Gripen

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1390
  • Country: au
  • WHATEVER YOUR PAST, THE FUTURE IS GRIPEN!
Re: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2009, 06:16:29 AM »
Wheeler and Sprey also assert that the aircraft will be unable to perform the vital role of close air support (CAS) — striking the enemy on the ground in direct support of ground troops. They argue that the aircraft "is too fast to see the tactical targets it is shooting at; too delicate and flammable to withstand ground fire" and lacks the endurance to meet the requirements of the close air support mission. Further the two academics assert that the aircraft is under armed with only two 2000 lbs Joint Direct Attack Munitions(JDAM) and two medium range air to air radar guided AIM-120 missiles in a full air to ground stealth configuration.

While both Wheeler and Sprey are respected academics, other attacks on the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program have come from less reputable sources. In the Australian media, the JSF was assailed by allegations that the fighters were "clubbed like baby seals" during a table top war-game held in Hawaii by the U.S. Pacific Command. Later, when the source of the report was revealed to be an erroneous backup slide for a RAND Corporation presentation, RAND not only disavowed the slide in question, but also issued a strong denial that the report was ever designed to be a detailed simulation of the capabilities of any warplane- much less the F-35. However, the damage to the public perception remains.

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2009, 06:33:24 AM »
As a former F-111 maintainer, I know TOO well the bad press that surrounded the -111 when it was conceived and implemented. 99% of it was unwarranted and unfounded, and it went on to be HUGELY successful in Vietnam. The press likes to harp on loosing 3 of the first 6 deployed mainly because it was rushed into action and not properly "ironed out". Nevertheless, the 429th and 430th TFS flew some 4000 combat missions with excellent success rates in hitting targets even when visibility was near zero. Only six aircraft were lost in action. The Vietnamese knew it as "whispering death and B-52s pilots began refusing to go on missions without F-111 escort supression. I suspect the F-35s are getting some of the same "smear tactics" be has-been politicos. I mean c'mon, the thing has barely flown and they're already writing it off. It's probably going to give a lot of potential customers "cold feet"! It's too bad because the Air Force, Marine and Navy variants share enough commonality to make them cost affective yet mission affective at the same time.
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline Ramon

  • Scorpion Aviation Photography
  • Global Moderator
  • Fighter Ace
  • *******
  • Posts: 339
  • Country: nl
Re: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« Reply #4 on: January 04, 2009, 11:58:23 AM »
Hello all,

I share the same idea about the F-35 as Winslow Wheeler and Pierre Sprey.

The aircraft has a very poor thrust to weight ratio, the sound production is five
times as high as a common F-16....not very stealthy. Besides that do I believe
that you have to develop a aircraft around a specific task, as the F-111 was.

And not build a aircraft that can replace the A-10, F-18 Hornet and AV-8  ??? ::) :-\
Those aircraft are developed around a specific task, and can not put in one box.
The F-18 is a supreme fighter jet, however will be blown to hell when doing the task
of a A-10. While the A-10 obvious can not handle a SU-27 in a air to air fight.
And the AV-8 has his supreme vertical take-off capability, but will therefore again
be a sitting duck for ground fire. Were are the good old times of producing a bad ass
looking aircraft like the F-111, F-4, A-10 etc, etc. Each aircraft had it's own character,
but now everything is build and bought via politics. The F-35 is supposed to be cheaper
and easier in maintenance, while the aircraft is costing far more than a Gripen.

Well, I hope you can see my humble point.
Any constructive comment is most welcome.

Regards, Ramon
  • Interests: A-10, F-14, F-105, B-58 and warbirds

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« Reply #5 on: January 04, 2009, 05:56:29 PM »
I agree with some of your points especially the "jack of all trades, master of none" synopsis but that's what happens when "bean counters" are involved. According to Lockheed-Martin, the aircraft has increased thrust now and has shed 2000 lbs to remedy it's poor thrust-to-weight ratio concerns. Additionally, the USAF has conducted an analysis of the F-35's air-to-air performance against all 4th generation fighter aircraft currently available, and has found the F-35 to be at least four times more effective. Maj Gen Charles R. Davis, USAF, the F-35 program executive officer, has stated that the "F-35 enjoys a significant Combat Loss Exchange Ratio advantage over the current and future air-to-air threats, to include Sukhois", which are currently being flown by the Russian, Indian, and Chinese Air Forces.
I guess my main argument is the condemnation of an aircraft that is still so early in it's R&D. I mean, it just recently went Mach! they JUST finished the 2nd operational model for Pete's sake! Thankfully the list of countries in line to acquire them is very long (ironically, almost all will be replacing F-16s and F/A-18s currently in their service).
« Last Edit: January 04, 2009, 05:59:33 PM by F-111 C/C »
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« Reply #6 on: January 04, 2009, 06:05:18 PM »
12/18/2008) JSF Scores Best In Candidate Comparison

Dutch Ministry of Defense

Dec. 18, 2008



The F-35, better known as the Joint Strike Fighter, best meets the requirements drawn up by the Netherlands for the successor to the F16. This emerges from the findings of the candidate comparison that the State Secretary for Defence, Jack De Fries, today sent to the House of Representatives. “The F-35 is the best multi-role combat aircraft and by around 2015 will certainly be able to carry out all six main missions successfully.” The F-35 also has the greatest operational availability. In addition, the capital costs of the F-35 are the lowest and it is anticipated that the total life-cycle costs will also be the lowest. The completion of the candidate comparison marks the fulfillment of the commitment made to the House of Representatives to carry out such a comparison prior to the definitive acquisition of the two JSF test aircraft. This is planned to take place by the end of April 2009 at the latest.

The candidate comparison follows on from the candidate evaluation of 2001, from which the Joint Strike Fighter also emerged as the best aircraft for the best price. In 2002 the Cabinet decided to participate in the development of this fighter aircraft. This decision was largely based on the wish to give the Dutch aviation industry an opportunity to win orders in this project. In the present government coalition agreement it is stated that in 2010 the cabinet will take a final decision regarding the replacement of the F-16 on the basis of a comparison of quality, price and delivery time. The Joint Strike Fighter scored the best for all three criteria.

The comparative study, between the Advanced F-16, de F-35 and the Gripen Next Generation, was carried out in cooperation with TNO (Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research) and NLR (Netherlands Aerospace Laboratory) and was monitored by the audit services of the Defence organization and the Ministry of Economic Affairs.) At the request of the House of Representatives, the firm of RAND Europe consider that the candidate comparison was carried out transparently and objectively and that the reports contain an accurate account of the results of the comparison. On account of the lengthy period of thirty years over which the project will extend, the calculation of total life-cycle costs includes an allowance for uncertainties.



Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« Reply #7 on: January 04, 2009, 06:09:24 PM »
(11/21/2008) Norway Recommends Lockheed Martin F-35, Multi-National JSF Partnership Remains Strong

FORT WORTH, Texas, November 21st, 2008 -- Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg has formally recommended to his country's Parliament that Lockheed Martin's [NYSE: LMT] F-35 Lightning II be selected to fulfill Norway's future air-combat capability requirements.

The F-35, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter, was chosen based on its superior performance in “intelligence and surveillance, counter air, air interdict and anti-surface warfare,” according to a statement from Norway’s defense ministry.

"We're very pleased with the announcement and are committed to supporting the Norwegian government in moving forward with the F-35," said Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin executive vice president and manager of F-35 Program Integration. "The Lightning II will help ensure Norway's national security, and also brings substantial opportunities for Norwegian industry."

The F-35 is a supersonic, multi-role, 5th generation stealth fighter developed and funded by a consortium of nine countries, including Norway. It is designed to excel in both air-to-air and air-to-ground operations and features the most comprehensive and powerful avionics of any fighter ever produced. Norway plans to acquire 48 F-35s to replace older F-16s currently in service. The first F-35s would be delivered to Norway in 2016.

Norway was conducting a formal competition between the F-35 and the Saab Gripen NG. One other JSF partner nation, Denmark, is also conducting a competition for its next generation fighter and will announce its decision in 2009. All additional JSF partner nations have completed their analyses in favor of the F-35.
Three F-35 variants derived from a common design, developed together and using the same sustainment infrastructure worldwide will replace at least 13 types of aircraft for 11 nations initially, making the Lightning II the most cost-effective fighter program in history.

Lockheed Martin is developing the F-35 with its principal industrial partners, Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems. Two separate, interchangeable F-35 engines are under development: the Pratt & Whitney F135 and the GE Rolls-Royce Fighter Engine Team F136.

Headquartered in Bethesda, Md., Lockheed Martin is a global security company that employs about 140,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. The corporation reported 2007 sales of $41.9 billion.
F-35 and Lightning II are trademarks of Lockheed Martin Corporation.


Media Contacts:

John R. Kent
Office: 817-763-3980
Email: john.r.kent@lmco.com

Kim Testa
Office: 817-718-8644
Email: kim.m.testa@lmco.com

Joseph W. Stout
Office: 817-763-4086
Email: joe.w.stout@lmco.com

These countries wouldn't be spending 10s of Billions of dollars on the F-35 program if it wasn't MORE capable than existing platforms would they?
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« Reply #8 on: January 04, 2009, 06:14:21 PM »
Here's some more "light reading" on the subject.

Fort Worth, Texas, September 19th, 2008/Lockheed Martin/ -- U.S. Air Force analyses show the Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] F-35 Lightning II is at least 400 percent more effective in air-to-air combat capability than the best fighters currently available in the international market.

The Air Force's standard air-to-air engagement analysis model, also used by allied air forces to assess air-combat performance, pitted the 5th generation F-35 against all advanced 4th generation fighters in a variety of simulated scenarios. The results were clear: the F-35 outperformed the most highly evolved fighters in aerial combat by significant margins.

"In all F-35 Program Office and U.S. Air Force air-to-air combat effectiveness analysis to date, the F-35 enjoys a significant Combat Loss Exchange Ratio advantage over the current and future air-to-air threats, to include Sukhois," said Maj. Gen. Charles R. Davis, F-35 program executive officer.

Recent claims that Russian fighters defeated F-35s in a Hawaii-based simulated combat exercise are untrue, according to Maj. Gen. Davis.

"The reports are completely false and misleading and have absolutely no basis in fact," Maj. Gen. Davis said. "The August 2008 Pacific Vision Wargame that has been referenced recently in the media did not even address air-to-air combat effectiveness. The F-35 is required to be able to effectively defeat current and projected air-to-air threats. All available information, at the highest classification, indicates that F-35 is effectively meeting these aggressive operational challenges."

The Pacific Vision Wargame was a table-top exercise designed to assess basing and force-structure vulnerabilities, and did not include air-to-air combat exercises or any comparisons of different aircraft platforms.

Other erroneous allegations about the program were recently made in a letter distributed and written by industry-watchers Winston Wheeler and Pierre Sprey.

"It's not clear why they attacked the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program," said Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin executive vice president of F-35 program integration. "It is clear they don't understand the underlying requirements of the F-35 program, the capabilities needed to meet those requirements or the real programmatic performance of the JSF team."

Here are the facts:

• The F-35 is a racehorse, not a "dog," as Wheeler/Sprey suggest. In stealth combat configuration, the F-35 aerodynamically outperforms all other combat-configured 4th generation aircraft in top-end speed, loiter, subsonic acceleration and combat radius. This allows unprecedented "see/shoot first" and combat radius advantages.

• The high thrust-to-weight ratios of the lightweight fighter program Wheeler/Sprey recall from 30 years ago did not take into consideration combat-range fuel, sensors or armament, which dramatically alter wing loading, thrust-to-weight ratios and maneuverability. We do consider all of this in today's fighters.

• The F-35 has the most powerful engine ever installed in a fighter, with thrust equivalent to both engines today in Eurofighter or F/A-18 aircraft. The conventional version of the F-35 has 9g capability and matches the turn rates of the F-16 and F/A-18. More importantly, in a combat load, with all fuel, targeting sensor pods and weapons carried internally, the F-35's aerodynamic performance far exceeds all legacy aircraft equipped with a similar capability.

• When the threat situation diminishes so that it is safe for legacy aircraft to participate in the fight, the F-35 can also carry ordnance on six external wing stations in addition to its four internal stations.
Other important facts:

• External weapon clearance is part of the current F-35 test program.

• The government has already proven that no other aircraft can survive against the 5th generation stealth that only the F-22 and the F-35 possess; it is impossible to add this stealth to fourth-generation fighters.

• The F-35's data collection, integration and information sharing capabilities will transform the battlespace of the future and will redefine the close air support mission. The F-35 is specifically designed to take advantage of lessons learned from the F-117 stealth aircraft. Unlike the F-117, the ability to share tactically important information is built into the F-35, along with stealth.

• F-35 is developing, testing, and fielding mature software years ahead of legacy programs, further reducing development risk. The F-35's advanced software, already flying on two test aircraft with remarkable stability, is demonstrating the advantages of developing highly-common, tri-variant aircraft. The software developed span the entire aircraft and support systems including the aircraft itself, logistics systems, flight and maintenance trainers, maintenance information system and flight-test instrumentation.

• Rather than relying exclusively on flight testing, the F-35 is retiring development risk through the most comprehensive laboratories, sensor test beds, and integrated full-fusion flying test bed ever created for an aircraft program. Representing only 25% of our verification plans, still the F-35's flight test program is comparable in hours to the combined flight test programs of the three primary U.S. aircraft it will replace.

• The F-35 is one aircraft program designed to replace many different types of aircraft around the world - F-16, F/A-18, F-117, A-10, AV-8B, Sea Harrier, GR.7, F-111 and Tornado - flown by 14 air forces.

• In addition to 19 developmental test aircraft, the F-35 is producing 20 fully instrumented, production-configured operational test aircraft. No program in history has employed this many test vehicles.
"Simply put, advanced stealth and sensor fusion allow the F-35 pilot to see, target and destroy the adversary and strategic targets in a very high surface-to-air threat scenario, and deal with air threats intent on denying access -- all before the F-35 is ever detected, then return safely to do it again," said Burbage.

The F-35 is a supersonic, multi-role, 5th generation stealth fighter. Three F-35 variants derived from a common design, developed together and using the same sustainment infrastructure worldwide will replace at least 13 types of aircraft for 11 nations initially, making the Lightning II the most cost-effective fighter program in history. Two F-35s have entered flight test, two are in ground test, and 17 are in various stages of assembly, including the first two production-model jets scheduled for delivery to the U.S. Air Force in 2010.
Headquartered in Bethesda, Md., Lockheed Martin is a global security company that employs about 140,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. The corporation reported 2007 sales of $41.9 billion.

F-35 and Lightning II are trademarks of Lockheed Martin Corporation.

Media Contact:
John R. Kent, + 817-763-3980; e-mail john.r.kent@lmco.com
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline Gripen

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1390
  • Country: au
  • WHATEVER YOUR PAST, THE FUTURE IS GRIPEN!
Re: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2009, 03:12:20 AM »
Of course the USAF is going to defend their precious plane, why don't they let an independent source analyse it? Are they scared that the independent source is gonna say the plane is a flying cow turd?! 

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2009, 04:18:36 AM »
I'm sure they won't mind an independent evaluation ONCE they get the thing operational. It's still YEARS away from that!
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline Gripen

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1390
  • Country: au
  • WHATEVER YOUR PAST, THE FUTURE IS GRIPEN!
Re: New Fighter Jet: Controversial Future of the U.S. Fleet
« Reply #11 on: January 05, 2009, 08:42:04 AM »
So the USAF is saying all this stuff about their king pat plane even though there is no operational planes yet, just the prototypes? Or evaluation ones or whatever you call em

 



AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com click to vote for MILAVIA