Good news for non-USA automakers and Honda and Toyota pickup buyers

[HammaMan]

The F-35 is expensive by design to provide as much pork as possible to contractors in as many congressional districts as possible. The Air Force has been unhappy with the A10 warthog that saved the bacon of American tanks but is considered to be no expensive enough. The planned replacement will fly twice as fast which provides no added value for taking out armored vehicles.

The A10 has been terrific at providing air support for soldiers on the ground whereas the B-1 bomber has kiiled many friendlies with is lack of accuracy and its lack of compatibility with infantry communications equipment. But the B-1 bomber is expensive and so the brass love it.

People should really stop regurgitating corporate press talking points about aircraft. The F35a is the cheapest fighter aircraft to buy as of right now. The A10's job was to kill russian tanks, there's none left and AA missiles and means of firing them have gotten too advanced. Helicopters are having to use standoff munitions today due to the risk of AA weapons. The B1 and B52 with modern munitions are just as accurate as any other aircraft. They're not performing CAS with dumb bombs and they can drop laser guided weapons that track on ground-based lasing. Networked missiles make flying anywhere near enemy troops or sensors a suicide mission in nearpeer conflicts.

The F35's cost is at or below that of any modern fighter available for sale today. We're buying new F15s for more $ than the F35, and it can't get anywhere near the frontline of a modern battle as its RCS is too large. Best case for it is to run high and fast to impart energy into a weapon while staying far away, drop, turn and burn... Which is precisely how the russians are using their fighters.

Sponsored

 

[FaaWrenchBndr]

C5s were always hilarious to watch “fly”

Still see em occasionally, but C17s are far more common now.

Yep, I can still hear that wailing sound of the C5. I can still visualize it almost creeping up and altitude thank God I never had to work on FRED

 

[FaaWrenchBndr]

People should really stop regurgitating corporate press talking points about aircraft. The F35a is the cheapest fighter aircraft to buy as of right now. The A10's job was to kill russian tanks, there's none left and AA missiles and means of firing them have gotten too advanced. Helicopters are having to use standoff munitions today due to the risk of AA weapons. The B1 and B52 with modern munitions are just as accurate as any other aircraft. They're not performing CAS with dumb bombs and they can drop laser guided weapons that track on ground-based lasing. Networked missiles make flying anywhere near enemy troops or sensors a suicide mission in nearpeer conflicts.

The F35's cost is at or below that of any modern fighter available for sale today. We're buying new F15s for more $ than the F35, and it can't get anywhere near the frontline of a modern battle as its RCS is too large. Best case for it is to run high and fast to impart energy into a weapon while staying far away, drop, turn and burn... Which is precisely how the russians are using their fighters.

Very well stated

 

[Cobra129]

People should really stop regurgitating corporate press talking points about aircraft. The F35a is the cheapest fighter aircraft to buy as of right now. The A10's job was to kill russian tanks, there's none left and AA missiles and means of firing them have gotten too advanced. Helicopters are having to use standoff munitions today due to the risk of AA weapons. The B1 and B52 with modern munitions are just as accurate as any other aircraft. They're not performing CAS with dumb bombs and they can drop laser guided weapons that track on ground-based lasing. Networked missiles make flying anywhere near enemy troops or sensors a suicide mission in nearpeer conflicts.

The F35's cost is at or below that of any modern fighter available for sale today. We're buying new F15s for more $ than the F35, and it can't get anywhere near the frontline of a modern battle as its RCS is too large. Best case for it is to run high and fast to impart energy into a weapon while staying far away, drop, turn and burn... Which is precisely how the russians are using their fighters.

I flew in the Intruder community for 20 years up to and during the time it was being phased out. I still kept in touch with some of my former buds that transitioned to the F-18 and then on to the F-35...The few I still talk with say their comrades absolutely love flying the F-35. Sure, there were growing pains, as with any new aircraft and technology, but many of those issues were resolved with the appropriate hardware and software changes/fixes from the manufacturer. Israeli results into Iran with the F-35 speak for themselves....Cheers

 

[HammaMan]

I flew in the Intruder community for 20 years up to and during the time it was being phased out. I still kept in touch with some of my former buds that transitioned to the F-18 and then on to the F-35...The few I still talk with say their comrades absolutely love flying the F-35. Sure, there were growing pains, as with any new aircraft and technology, but many of those issues were resolved with the appropriate hardware and software changes/fixes from the manufacturer. Israeli results into Iran with the F-35 speak for themselves....Cheers

On the ground when the F35's avionics come online, if there's another one nearby all of the screens are fully populated with everything the other 35s are seeing as they're out flying around. It will integrate data from other assets as well if they're transmitting. I have a suspicion that they're testing starlink uplinks as well. They're showing up on naval ships 'officially' now, and the govt's starshield program, a joint northrup/spacex venture is building the DOD their own constellation with a few more features in them (AESA radars).

Think persistent SAR, unjamable coms, Gb+ data speeds, and every wavelength of photon capture, as well as other untold ELINT capability, and they'll be everywhere in LEO. They should be able to detect an AA missiles heat plume, possibly even see an aircraft's tailpipe. Imagine having a true global persistent surveillance capability backed by the most powerful ai with stupid high amounts of bandwidth. It'll see everything, everywhere, all at once, and relaying it to whatever battlefield asset or command structure that'd like to know about it.

As for the F35, Israel used it to destroy ALL of Iran's S300s and their radars. Really speaks for itself. Granted it was designed to kick down the door for other fighters to come in and do their thing so it's not surprising it did. Granted ATACMs has been reducing S400s and their radars into molten metal since the start of that conflict. Or as the russian's like to like to say "all of the ATACMs were intercepted", they just fail to mention that the launchers and radars themselves aren't supposed to be the interceptor.

 

[dochawk]

The A10's job was to kill russian tanks, there's none left

Dear Mr. Zelenskyyi,

Here are our last operational A-10s.

Please use them to destroy the remaining Russian tanks.

After that, you are welcome to send them to salvage.

 

[Calson]

U.S. soldiers have been bombed by B-1 bombers that cannot communicate with the soldiers and ALL high altitude bombers are lucky if the get with a mile of their intended target. The A-10 uses canon fire to hit targets instead of dropping a bomb from 30,000 feet and hoping for the best.

Sadly the brass always goes with the bigger is better approach and ignores reality. During WW II the U.S. Army used B-17 bombers with a crew of 9 men and a bomb load of 4,800 lbs. and it was acknowledged that they were widely inaccurate even when spotter planes were used to drop flaters on targets.

Contrast that to the British De Havilland Mosquito that needed only 2 crew and carried a 4,000 lb bomb load. This aircraft was later fitted with a 6 pounder canon that was used to successfully kill U-boats. The loss rate for the Mosquito was less than 1% as compare to more than 50% on a single mission for the B-17 bombers where more than 3500 crew were killed in a single mission.

The B-1 bomber at $1 billion a copy were designed to drop an atomic bomb on Soviet cities and incinerate every many woman and child. With the breakup of the Soviet Union the need for the B-1 bomber went away but the Air Force was not about to kill the program and have their budget cut and so have continued for the past 35 years to buy them.

The F-35 as a single engine fighter is not a good choice for use on carriers where a single engine failing results in the pilot ejecting and the jet hitting the ocean. Great Britain was equally stupid with its choice of a vertical take-off Harrier for use on carriers. These jets burned so much fuel that there time over the target was so brief as to make them highly ineffective during the war in the Falklands.

 

[Dakar09]

Well well well...

 

[HammaMan]

U.S. soldiers have been bombed by B-1 bombers that cannot communicate with the soldiers and ALL high altitude bombers are lucky if the get with a mile of their intended target. The A-10 uses canon fire to hit targets instead of dropping a bomb from 30,000 feet and hoping for the best.

There is soooo much wrong with this right here. You don't know what you don't know about modern combat.
CAS requires a JTAC (because it doesn't matter which aircraft is used if the pilot can't identify which are friendly and which are enemy). The modern battlefield is well beyond the situations you've engrained in your head as being the only way for things to transpire.

Dumb bombs really aren't used today because it's cheaper to install a guidance tail/wing kit on them and only have to visit the target once. As for accuracy, well we destroy bunkers by putting a JDAM down its airshaft which at most is the size of an elevator. The israelis which use our weapons took out a bunker by continually dropping consecutive bombs in the same spot that burrowed down to it. Drop bomb, make a hole, drop another bomb in the same spot, dig the hole deeper (and so on, in quick succession).
We've even adapted the JDAM (dumb bomb) to hit a moving ship from altitude, more specifically, enter the water near it, dive under it and detonate under the keel. A cheap dumb bomb with a bolt-on cheap tail kit.

The days of B52s carpet bombing are long gone. Sure they can release a lot of bombs in quick succession, but each of those bombs are going to a precise predetermined spot on the map. Once you understand what a JDAM is, you'll notice that's all you ever see being loaded onto aircraft outside of purpose-built smart weapons. https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sh...4572/joint-direct-attack-munition-gbu-313238/

How they're built


The concept

 

[JohnMcClane]

Lets' keep veering further form the F150 topic and start talking about CCA drones the AF is beginning to include, which will prove that you can basically inverse whatever Musk says. F35s are likely already incorporating them and I probably shouldn't say too much more or the ties will call.

 

[Calson]

I am referring to comments and analysis done by soldiers and pilots after actual combat situations and combat deaths from "friendly fire" and not a bunch of youtube videos produce by some nob or someone working for a weapons manufacturer.

General Schwarzkopf Jr. thanked the people behind the A-10 for saving his bacon during the Gulf War in Kuwait. It was the A-10 that proved to be decisive in taking out the Iraqi tanks. The American tanks with their turbine engines spent more time in service for their air filters than they did in combat. Profit taking clouds the information provided by the military as after all war is a business.

 

[powerboatr]

C5s were always hilarious to watch “fly”

Still see em occasionally, but C17s are far more common now.

C5s always look like they will fall out of sky doing touch snd go's.
One big turkey buzzard
I sure miss my h60s.

 

[JohnMcClane]

I am referring to comments and analysis done by soldiers and pilots after actual combat situations and combat deaths from "friendly fire" and not a bunch of youtube videos produce by some nob or someone working for a weapons manufacturer.

General Schwarzkopf Jr. thanked the people behind the A-10 for saving his bacon during the Gulf War in Kuwait. It was the A-10 that proved to be decisive in taking out the Iraqi tanks. The American tanks with their turbine engines spent more time in service for their air filters than they did in combat. Profit taking clouds the information provided by the military as after all war is a business.

I've found the third guaruntee in life:

1. Death
2. Taxes
3. Taxes being wasted on defense spending

And before you try and tell me it's not being wasted, please tell me exactly what Jim is doing at Lockheed to earn *checks notes* ~$23 million per year, go ahead, I'll wait.

C5s always look like they will fall out of sky doing touch snd go's.
One big turkey buzzard
I sure miss my h60s.

 

[Dakar09]

I am referring to comments and analysis done by soldiers and pilots after actual combat situations and combat deaths from "friendly fire" and not a bunch of youtube videos produce by some nob or someone working for a weapons manufacturer.

General Schwarzkopf Jr. thanked the people behind the A-10 for saving his bacon during the Gulf War in Kuwait. It was the A-10 that proved to be decisive in taking out the Iraqi tanks. The American tanks with their turbine engines spent more time in service for their air filters than they did in combat. Profit taking clouds the information provided by the military as after all war is a business.

Wow, you went way back with this one. While I think the A-10 is THE platform for smashing tanks and slow moving ground units, just how many more conflicts of this nature do you see us getting into going forward? Should we talk about the naval battles of WW2 as we approach a potential showdown with China over Taiwan?

Times they are a changin...and our weapons systems need to adapt as well.

 

[JohnMcClane]

Wow, you went way back with this one. While I think the A-10 is THE platform for smashing tanks and slow moving ground units, just how many more conflicts of this nature do you see us getting into going forward? Should we talk about the naval battles of WW2 as we approach a potential showdown with China over Taiwan?

Times they are a changin...and our weapons systems need to adapt as well.

Why stop at WW2, remember when only cowards would hide and shoot rifled muskets at officers whilst men stood in parallel lines and shot their smooth bores at each other?

Sponsored