Lueskelin Breaking Defencestä F-35 -hankkeen puuhamiesten haastatteluja ja uutisia. Pastesin sellaisia lainauksia ja kommentteja joita keskustelussa on sivuttu täällä tai jotka liittyvät Suomen Ilmavoimien tulevaisuudennäkymiin.
aletaan hinnoista, uusimmat airframen hinnat (tuleeko moottori erikseen päälle?)
http://breakingdefense.com/2014/11/new-f-35-prices-a-95m-b-116m-c-102m/
eli:
New F-35 Prices: A: $95M; B: $102M; C: $116M
"The airframe prices (read the headline) should be read in light of the bold pledge made last Decemberby the general manager for the JSF,
Lorraine Martin. She said that by 2019, the F-35A (the Air Force version)
will cost $75 million a copy in current dollars ($85 million in good ole then-year dollars, i.e. counting future inflation), which will be “less than any fourth generation fighter in the world.”"
koiratappelusta sanottua
http://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/...he-f-35-no-growlers-needed-when-war-starts/3/
"The F-35, critics say, can be spotted by low frequency radar (as can almost any aircraft, no matter how stealthy) and isn’t as good at dogfighting as is the F-22. But Hostage says, as do other senior Air Force and Marine officers, that an
F-35 pilot who engages in a dogfight has probably made a mistake or has already broken through those IADS lanes and is facing a second wave of enemy aircraft. The F-35, he says, has “at least” the maneuverability and thrust and weight of the F-16. The F-35 is to the F-22 as the F-16 is to the F-15. The latter aircraft are the kings of air to air combat."
häiveestä, sensorifuusiosta ja 5. sukupolvesta sanottua
http://breakingdefense.com/2014/10/accs-gen-hostage-on-fifth-gen-combat-cloud-and-syria/
"People focus on stealth as the determining factor or delineator of the fifth generation. It isn’t; it’s fusion.
Fusion is what makes that platform so fundamentally different than anything else. And that’s why if anybody tries to tell you hey,
I got a 4.5 airplane, a 4.8 airplane, don’t believe them. All that they’re talking about is RCS (Radar Cross Section).
Fusion is the fundamental delineator. And you’re not going to put fusion into a fourth gen airplane because their avionic suites are not set up to be a fused platform. And fusion changes how you use the platform."
http://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/a-gods-eye-view-of-the-battlefield-gen-hostage-on-the-f-35/5/
"“People think stealth is what defines fifth gen[eration aircraft]. It’s not the only thing. It’s stealth and then the avionics and the fusion of avionics.
In my fourth gen airplane, I was the fusion engine, the pilot was the fusion engine. I took the inputs from the RHWG, from the Radar Homing Warning Gear, from the radar, from the com, multiple radios, from my instruments. I fused that into what was happening in the battlespace, all the while I’m trying to do the mechanical things of flying my airplane and dodging missiles and all these sorts of things,” he says.
"“What we’ve done with the fifth generation is the computer takes all those sensory inputs, fuses it into information. The pilot sees a beautiful God’s eye view of what’s going on. And instead of having to fuse three pieces of information and decide if that’s an adversary or not, the airplane is telling him with an extremely high degree of confidence what that adversary is and what they’re doing and what all your wingmen are doing. It’s a stunning amount of information,” Hostage says.
Combine that information with the kinetic, cyber and electronic warfare capabilities of the F-35 and we may know why South Korea, Japan, Israel and Australia have all recently committed to buy substantial numbers of F-35s, in spite of the aircraft being behind schedule, facing significant technical problems and, of course, being really expensive overall. Several sources with direct knowledge of the negotiations — from government and industry — tell me that
each country went in to discussions with the Pentagon with a great deal of skepticism. But once country representatives received the most highly classified briefing — which I hear deals mostly with the plane’s cyber, electronic warfare and stealth capabilities — they all decided to buy. That kind of national and fiscal commitment from other countries may say more about the aircraft’s capabilities than anything else."
Suomen kannalta huomion arvoista, eikä niin hyvältä vaikuta koska määrät tod.näk vähäiset
"
Hostage: It does. I think an excellent portrayal of the value of looking at the interaction of those parameters is to examine Raptor versus the Lightning. A Raptor at 50-plus thousand feet at Mach 2 with its RCS has a different level of invulnerability than a Lightning at 35,000 at Mach .9 and it’s RCS.
The altitude, speed, and stealth combined in the two platforms, they give the airplanes two completely different levels of capability. The plan is to normalize the Lightning’s capability relative to the Raptor
by marrying it up with six, or seven or eight other Lightnings.
The advanced fusion of the F-35 versus the F-22 means those airplanes
have an equal level or better level of invulnerability than the Raptors have, but it takes multiple airplanes to do it because of the synergistic fused attacks of their weapon systems.
That’s the magic of the fifth-gen F-35,
but it takes numbers of F-35s to get that effect. That’s why I’ve been so strident on getting the full buy. Because if they whittle it down to a little tiny fleet like the Raptor, it’s not going to be compelling."
http://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/a-gods-eye-view-of-the-battlefield-gen-hostage-on-the-f-35/2/
"Bear in mind that the F-35 is the first US aircraft
designed to the requirement that it be highly effective at neutralizing S-400 systems and their cousins.
“The F-35 was fundamentally designed to go do that sort of thing [take out advanced IADS]. The problem is, with the lack of F-22s, I’m going to have to use F-35s in the air superiority role in the early phases as well, which is another reason why I need all 1,763. I’m going to have some F-35s doing air superiority, some doing those early phases of persistent attack, opening the holes, and again,
the F-35 is not compelling unless it’s there in numbers,” the general says. “
Because it can’t turn and run away, it’s got to have support from other F-35s. So I’m going to need eight F-35s to go after a target that I might only need two Raptors to go after. But the F-35s can be equally or more effective against that site than the Raptor can because of the synergistic effects of the platform.”"
Se on hyvä että on asennetta ja intohimoa, mutta relaa silti vähäsen.