Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
It's Official :Australia Chooses The F-35  
User currently offlineCheshire From Australia, joined Aug 2001, 112 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 7 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5024 times:

From the Australian website:

(http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23607964-31477,00.html)

"THE F-35 joint strike fighter will be confirmed as the best choice to become the RAAF's frontline combat aircraft in a classified review to be presented to Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon later this week.

The final report of the high-level review commissioned by Mr Fitzgibbon in February is also expected to rule out the much more expensive US-made F-22 Raptor fighter as an alternative buy to the F-35 JSF.

Mr Fitzgibbon ordered the review into Australia's future air combat capability as concerns have risen about the development cost and production schedules of the JSF, as well as the capability choices facing Australia as the RAAF moves to replace its long-serving F-111 bombers and the frontline F/A-18 fighters after 2010"


What deterrant value does this aircraft have if you have any late model variant of the Su-27?

I guess my kid had better start learning Chinese.

41 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4917 times:



Quoting Cheshire (Thread starter):
I guess my kid had better start learning Chinese.

Surely you know that this is now state policy* Cheshire. I think, however, you are going to be told that the F-35 as far as the Sukhois are concerned will be like the cat bearing your username - it will vanish. I rather wish it would vanish before we have to pay for it.

But tell me, did we elect a new government or a Me2?

*Those who are slow on the uptake, are allowed to learn Bahasa Indonesia. US flags are to be flown alongside the Aus flag in all schools from fiscal 2008-09.


User currently offlineChecksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4663 times:



Quoting Baroque (Reply 1):
US flags are to be flown alongside the Aus flag in all schools from fiscal 2008-09.

Off topic...but why??


User currently offlineAlien From Romania, joined Oct 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4656 times:



Quoting Checksixx (Reply 2):
Off topic...but why??

I think it's Baroque's attempt at humor. You see some in Oz have been brainwashed by Karlo Kopp and his faulty understanding of airpower. It's a shame really because other than drawing incorrect conclusions Kopp does some pretty good fact gathering.

Earth to Baroque if you get the best fighter available (which shot of the F-22 the F-35 is) then what do you care where it came from. Can Australia build it's own equivalent?


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4630 times:



Quoting Checksixx (Reply 2):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 1):
US flags are to be flown alongside the Aus flag in all schools from fiscal 2008-09.

Off topic...but why??

Oh well, it is actually on topic, but a bit obscure if not Aus - sorry. Basically the previous Min for Defence (B Nelson) who was mad keen (or perhaps just mad) about the F-35 was previously the Min for Ed. During his tenure, there was a scheme for schools to receive Fed money for putting up a flag pole to fly the Aus flag. There was some disadvantage for schools in not accepting this "offer". As far as possible, the opening ceremonies would be by Liberal or National members of parliament, and definitely NOT Labor pollies.

So it is probably just my twisted mind, but if the F-35 now has bipartisan support, perhaps we should go back over some other Nelson policies and US school flags would be a nice touch - remembering the sense of humour common around these parts. Another part of Nelson's policies you guys might like to join in are a really good try at removing refectory facilities at most Universities here. I am sure there are others we would like to give you but I would need notice, those two stick in the mind (aka gullet in this case!).

Nelson was a GP before his political career - started as Labor and switched to Liberal. He was famous for decisions made without it seems reference to the professionals in his department - the Super Hornet it appears. So being approved by Nelson is not really the seal of approval you need!!


User currently offlineSasd209 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Oct 2007, 642 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4623 times:

I am truly at a loss for Australian politics, I'm sorry, but this thread baffles me.....

Is the F-35 good or bad for Australia? I'd like to think it would be a good thing.

SASD209


User currently offlineAlien From Romania, joined Oct 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4589 times:

35 years ago Australia made a big stink about the F-111. Everyone thought is was a bad choice. 25 years ago everyone in Australia though thought the Hornet was a bad choice.

now they are having a hard time letting the F-111 go and the F-18s have given them good service. I suspect the F-35 and Super Hornet will also turn out well for them. Don't be surprised if they order a few F-18Gs as well.


User currently offlineOzair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 877 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4562 times:



Quoting Sasd209 (Reply 5):
I am truly at a loss for Australian politics, I'm sorry, but this thread baffles me.....

Is the F-35 good or bad for Australia? I'd like to think it would be a good thing.

I think the active debate that has arisen from this points to the healthy nature of our political system as well as a population interested in Defence (or at least what Defence is spending the money on).

Is the F-35 good or bad for Australia? Depends on who you talk to. Some people want an aircraft that is cheaper, thus able to be procured in greater numbers as well as being compatible with current weapons (the F-35 will be able to carry 2,000lb weapons, the F-22 cannot). Both are reported to have stealth but the F-35 is not optimised to the degree the F-22 is. The F-22 is designed primarily as an air to air fighter with secondary air to ground, the F-35 will be air to ground with secondary air to air. Factor into the discussion the 99% probability that Australia will never go to war without the US, hence do we buy a plane to defend ourselves or one to complement US assets.

In my mind the F-22 makes more sense as we would receive it sooner (as long as we are are allowed to get it of course) , provide a greater capability against emerging air threats and the air to ground additions currently planned for the F-22 will give it the capability Australia requires. I also don't think the carriage of 2,000lb weapons will be as important to future RAAF strike options. To me 60 F-22 is better than 100 F-35. I am not making the decision though so I guess it's a moot point.

Quoting Alien (Reply 6):
Don't be surprised if they order a few F-18Gs as well.

I agree, now the Super Hornet purchase is confirmed I see the RAAF acquiring 6-8 F-18Gs.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4536 times:



Quoting Ozair (Reply 7):
In my mind the F-22 makes more sense as we would receive it sooner (as long as we are are allowed to get it of course) , provide a greater capability against emerging air threats and the air to ground additions currently planned for the F-22 will give it the capability Australia requires. I also don't think the carriage of 2,000lb weapons will be as important to future RAAF strike options. To me 60 F-22 is better than 100 F-35. I am not making the decision though so I guess it's a moot point.

Cannot argue with that Ozair, except it would be nice if we in the electorate did have a bit more input. I think our new beloved leader has not quite taken on how much we disliked some of the previous beloved leader's policies.

For starters, not only would the F-22 be more capable against Sukhois from the N it would be less of an obvious threat to our near N neighbour as it is less dedicated to dropping bombs. It does seem to take a bit to get through to Canberra (in spite of its supposed Indonesia lobby) that if we have to start bombing Indonesia, we are in a fair old pickle - from which neither F-22s nor F-35s are going to be much of a solution. And even with tankers and whatever, what else can the F-35 bomb apart from Indonesia? Ah yes, New Zealand.

Or putting it in other words, the F-22 has an obvious role in defence, whereas the characteristics of the F-35 make you wonder what it is being bought FOR. The same applied to the F-111. Alien, it is not so much that we have fallen in love with the piggy - certainly the mx folk who are seriously ill are not in love with it - but rather that there is disquiet over trying to replace a capability we never really needed, or were prepared to use, with a similar capability at a greatly increased cost.

I mean if we were ever going to use the F-111 it would surely have been on the Tim Tim border in 1975. So why the heck do we spend billions to buy bombers that irritate our neighbours and we don't intend to use?


User currently offlineOzair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 877 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4476 times:



Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
what else can the F-35 bomb apart from Indonesia? Ah yes, New Zealand.

That is very very tempting............

Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
I mean if we were ever going to use the F-111 it would surely have been on the Tim Tim border in 1975

Although I know the reasons I am still surprised we didn't send the pigs to the first Gulf War. Having had one operational sortie over East Timor during 99 really is a shame for an aircraft that gave Australia sterling service.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
if we have to start bombing Indonesia, we are in a fair old pickle - from which neither F-22s nor F-35s are going to be much of a solution

I'm not worried about that, if we ever dropped bombs on the Indons it would be with their permission.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
So why the heck do we spend billions to buy bombers that irritate our neighbours and we don't intend to use?

Because deep down in the depths of the white paper is the statement that the ADF's most fundamental mission should be the defence of Australia and the F-111 as well as it's replacement the Super Hornet make this possible.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
For starters, not only would the F-22 be more capable against Sukhois from the N it would be less of an obvious threat to our near N neighbour as it is less dedicated to dropping bombs

I think the F-22 appears more future proof to me, if we make that big an investment we should get the option that will go the distance.


User currently offlineAlien From Romania, joined Oct 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 4428 times:



Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
For starters, not only would the F-22 be more capable against Sukhois from the N

How many SU-3Xs do they have now? How many are they likely to have in the future? What will their fuel state be after flying 1300 miles? Do you really think it would be something a few Super Hornets could not handle much less 70 F-35s?

Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
it would be less of an obvious threat to our near N neighbour as it is less dedicated to dropping bombs.

No more a threat between an F-16 and an F-15. The best defense is to have the ability to take out a potential adversary's infrastructure. No air field, no SU-30 threat. Why shoot them down in the sky when you can take care of the problem without them ever taking off. Further, you are ignoring where any threat would most likely come and that is by sea.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
but rather that there is disquiet over trying to replace a capability we never really needed,

See above.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
I mean if we were ever going to use the F-111 it would surely have been on the Tim Tim border in 1975. So why the heck do we spend billions to buy bombers that irritate our neighbours and we don't intend to use?

You are buying multi role aircraft that gives Oz the option of playing offense or defense. What neighbor have you irritated by having the capability to defend yourselves from most plausible threats independent of the US.

Quoting Ozair (Reply 9):
I think the F-22 appears more future proof to me, if we make that big an investment we should get the option that will go the distance.

The F-35 will be just as future proof as the F-16 is. It's not just about stealth. As a weapons system the F-35 will be far superior to the F-22. Do not be fooled. The F-35 is being talked down because the Air Force wants more Raptors now.


User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4354 times:

F-22 is not for sale right now, so that moots that point from go. What always seems to get lost in the fog is that the original JSF RFP was for four times the AA effectiveness of the F-16. Everything I'm hearing says that F-35 is meeting or exceeding that goal.
There are many types in the US inventory that do more than one job but IMO, the F-16 is the only true multirole aircraft. The Viper is the only one that does the AA role as well as the AG with equal effectiveness, without a dedicated variant (a la F-15E).
I look for F-35 to do suprisingly (to most) well in the AA role.

[Edited 2008-04-29 10:50:03]


Airliners.net Moderator Team
User currently offlineChecksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4224 times:



Quoting Alien (Reply 10):
What will their fuel state be after flying 1300 miles? Do you really think it would be something a few Super Hornets could not handle much less 70 F-35s?

Agreed. I've seen this point made time and time again and its always ignored.

Quoting Alien (Reply 10):
The F-35 will be just as future proof as the F-16 is. It's not just about stealth. As a weapons system the F-35 will be far superior to the F-22. Do not be fooled. The F-35 is being talked down because the Air Force wants more Raptors now.

Well...we have to be careful because both are excellent at what they do. I wouldn't say its far superior to the F-22 because one was built for air dominance, the other, air to ground/attack. True some of the new technology is pretty neat, system wise, but they'll both have to fight the same. The F-35 is a 9g airplane and should be able to dogfight with the best of them. External store's (wingtip) AtA missiles have already been through the wind tunnel process. Truth be told...other than the first or second day, the F-35 will be rolling with external stores.

Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 11):
The Viper is the only one that does the AA role as well as the AG with equal effectiveness, without a dedicated variant (a la F-15E).

Only made due to a systems, carriage requirement issue for all the mudslinging they wanted to do with it...(F-15E)


User currently offlineOzair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 877 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4166 times:



Quoting Alien (Reply 10):
The F-35 will be just as future proof as the F-16 is. It's not just about stealth. As a weapons system the F-35 will be far superior to the F-22. Do not be fooled. The F-35 is being talked down because the Air Force wants more Raptors now.

Having seen presentations on both aircraft I am not yet convinced the difference between the F-35 and F-22 is as much as your indicating.

Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 11):
What always seems to get lost in the fog is that the original JSF RFP was for four times the AA effectiveness of the F-16. Everything I'm hearing says that F-35 is meeting or exceeding that goal.

Can you quantify this for me? I have never seen a four times assessment in AtA for the JSF over the F-16, merely parity performance.


User currently offlineConnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4119 times:



Quoting Checksixx (Reply 12):
Well...we have to be careful because both are excellent at what they do. I wouldn't say its far superior to the F-22 because one was built for air dominance, the other, air to ground/attack.

I have a problem with these statements: the F-35 is still (and fairly early days) in test flight. IIRC only the B model has flown to this date. So how can it be known 'right now' that it is 'excellent at what it does'. It's not in service, it's testing, and in fact was grounded for several months after a serious electrical problem.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineCpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4880 posts, RR: 37
Reply 15, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4110 times:



Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 14):
I have a problem with these statements: the F-35 is still (and fairly early days) in test flight. IIRC only the B model has flown to this date. So how can it be known 'right now' that it is 'excellent at what it does'. It's not in service, it's testing, and in fact was grounded for several months after a serious electrical problem.

My preference, for my taxes, would be a hedged bet, F18/E/F, EA-18G and F22. I know it is going to be an expensive option, but you should never spend too little on national security.

And we know how the F22 performs - and that is, extremely good. So much so that it could well operate without opposition. There is a need for that kind of plane in Australia. The F22 is the kick-proverbial machine that overwhelms everything else, allowing strike aircraft to operate with impunity. Even a F22/F111 combination is a very dangerous one.

The F35 is still at very early days, price doesn't appear locked down, so it could become more expensive still - and the program is still full of potential twists and turns. It doesn't make sense to put all of our eggs in one single basket.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 16, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4104 times:



Quoting Ozair (Reply 9):
Because deep down in the depths of the white paper is the statement that the ADF's most fundamental mission should be the defence of Australia and the F-111 as well as it's replacement the Super Hornet make this possible.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
For starters, not only would the F-22 be more capable against Sukhois from the N it would be less of an obvious threat to our near N neighbour as it is less dedicated to dropping bombs

I think the F-22 appears more future proof to me, if we make that big an investment we should get the option that will go the distance.

And what I find difficult to understand is how bombing various places about 1000 km away would help our defence. What would we want to destroy in Indonesia and what would we be capable of destroying? Even more to the point what could we destroy that would not turn an apparently difficult situation into an even worse one.

Quoting Alien (Reply 10):
How many SU-3Xs do they have now? How many are they likely to have in the future? What will their fuel state be after flying 1300 miles? Do you really think it would be something a few Super Hornets could not handle much less 70 F-35s?

Wrong set of SUs, the Indonesian ones are not likely to be a threat. It is trying to assist Indonesia to defend Natuna that is a more likely scenario.

Quoting Alien (Reply 10):
You are buying multi role aircraft that gives Oz the option of playing offense or defense. What neighbor have you irritated by having the capability to defend yourselves from most plausible threats independent of the US.

Possibly you don't read the Indonesian newspapers. Relationships became difficult after the Timor election, and then when Howard strutted the stage as Dep Sheriff they were poisonous. Strangely, it took the Bali bombing to cause a rapprochement. At that point, even Howard seemed to realise that a few policemen plodding around Indonesia were a greater form of security than huffing and puffing and threatening to invade them if we felt it to be convenient.

The effect of the original F-111 purchase is difficult to assess because relations were already poisonous after the Irian takeover.

Australia should stop feeling threatened by Indonesia and the reverse is also true. The biggest danger would arise if starvation occurs (again) in Indonesia and masses of boat people try to come over. I am not sure how bombing refugees from a famine would go over as a strategy - not to mention that with so many boats it might not even be effective!


User currently offlineChecksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4060 times:



Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 14):
Quoting Checksixx (Reply 12):
Well...we have to be careful because both are excellent at what they do. I wouldn't say its far superior to the F-22 because one was built for air dominance, the other, air to ground/attack.

I have a problem with these statements: the F-35 is still (and fairly early days) in test flight. IIRC only the B model has flown to this date. So how can it be known 'right now' that it is 'excellent at what it does'. It's not in service, it's testing, and in fact was grounded for several months after a serious electrical problem.

So you have a problem with it...we can't do anything about that. But...only the A model has flown to this date, not the B model...in fact the B model (BF-1) just came out of paint the other day....

http://attach.high-g.net/attachments/f08_29642_114.jpg

It cannot be known right now without validating all the data in flight test. But, being that it was designed for what I was saying, and the success of the F-22A...I don't think I'm off the mark here.


User currently offlineConnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 18, posted (6 years 7 months 22 hours ago) and read 3981 times:



Quoting Checksixx (Reply 17):
So you have a problem with it...we can't do anything about that. But...only the A model has flown to this date, not the B model...in fact the B model (BF-1) just came out of paint the other day....

OK, my bad. A, not B. Not enough coffee at 5:30 AM. But the point is, the damn thing is a _prototype_ . The F-35 has not _proven_ or _demonstrated_ a single thing in terms of combat capability. That may, or may not, come.

UH60FtRucker was right.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineChecksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 7 months 20 hours ago) and read 3951 times:



Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 18):
But the point is, the damn thing is a _prototype_ . The F-35 has not _proven_ or _demonstrated_ a single thing in terms of combat capability. That may, or may not, come.

Agreed...if we all want to be really techical none of the following aircraft have proved a single thing in terms of combat capability:

F-22A
Gripen
Typhoon
Rafale
F-35 Series (some not built yet)

The true test is where the metal meets the meat in wartime conditions...personally, I think the world has enough problems and I'd rather not see them tested.


User currently offlineConnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 11 hours ago) and read 3881 times:



Quoting Checksixx (Reply 19):
Agreed...if we all want to be really techical none of the following aircraft have proved a single thing in terms of combat capability:

F-22A
Gripen
Typhoon
Rafale
F-35 Series (some not built yet)


I would, say, however, that the Raptor is in fact in front-line service now, and in essentially war-game exercises has been more than just 'effective' , it's been overwhelming - at least from what I have read of the Alaska-centred exercises.

Typhoon just entering service, perhaps not yet enough base data to judge. Rafale, not enough of them. Gripen, I just don't know. But it's a sexy little beast.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineChecksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 7 hours ago) and read 3841 times:

True...I was just going for actual wartime use...BTW, has Eurofighter been deployed yet? I thought it was going to Afghanistan?

User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 22, posted (6 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3734 times:



Quoting Checksixx (Reply 21):
True...I was just going for actual wartime use...BTW, has Eurofighter been deployed yet? I thought it was going to Afghanistan?

Well they seem to have been forecast to be in operations their in "spring" - as the article was written in Oct 2007, that presumably means by spring 2008, so anyone there should keep a sharp look out! But I could not find a report of it actually having flown in combat.

However, you raise an interesting question. Afghanistan hardly demands the F-22 but if it did would it in fact be flown there, and - shock horror - what if one fell for whatever reason in Indian territory.

Or in other words, is the F22 effectively so precious that it is too much of a risk to use it.

I am reminded at the dumb way the British flew the H2S centimetric radar in IIRC Stirlings over Germany and duly lost one on its first flight. Apart from coastal Hamburg it was hardly a determinant and by doing that they "told" the Germans how they had been catching U-boats by surprise for some months in the Bay of Biscay.

So does the US have a bit of a dilemma with the F22, you might not want to use it just where you might need it?


User currently offlineVonRichtofen From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 4634 posts, RR: 36
Reply 23, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3589 times:

I remember hearing that Canada was interested in the F-35. Have any commitments been made?


Thanks



Word
User currently offlineVonRichtofen From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 4634 posts, RR: 36
Reply 24, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3585 times:

Well I just found this while searching for info

http://www.forces.gc.ca/admmat/dgiip/jsf_e.asp

Looks like there's a decent amount of Canadian involvment. Hopefully that turns into several orders for Canada too.



Word
25 Alien : Why would you need to use it in a place like Afghanistan where A-10s and Harriers are of more use? Is there a significant A2A threat we where not tol
26 Baroque : You are missing part of the point of my question. It does not matter where, or how and F-22 came to earth, if it was in less than friendly territory,
27 Checksixx : Well certainly we wouldn't need to send them over there with no major AtA threat. Now I could see it happen as a 'keep your hand out of the cookie ja
28 Baroque : So the lack of a direct answer to the question suggests that indeed, use of the F22 outside the US is likely to be limited by fears of losing one and
29 Alien : No, two people just told you why the Raptor would not be used in Afghanistan or Iraq, but for your benefit I will spell it out very plainly again. Th
30 Baroque : Simply reacting to the obsession about secrecy. You will recall that there is still uncertainty about how much access to codes the UK will receive in
31 Checksixx : Well for what I was discussing as far as Raptor use, which Alien hinted at again for you...you don't seem to know much about air warfare. Not a big d
32 Baroque : Air superiority I understand and the ability to use second line aircraft in areas of lower threat. I suspect most would just about have the capacity
33 Springbok747 : Actually F-22s falling on Indian territory wouldn't be a problem, but if they fell on Pakistan (which is more likely)..then it would be a problem.
34 Baroque : Glad someone picked up on the double entendre Springbok. At least with a fallen bird of prey (or is it pray?) in Indian territory, the bits would go
35 Checksixx : Will the use of it be limited to keep it secret? Operationally, no. It will be used when necessesary. B-2's are regularly based oversea's and have be
36 Baroque : Thanks, that is what I was asking. That was my point, it has to be possible to detect the plume. Even possible to find a plume, track it to the hot e
37 F27Friendship : well... since today modern sensors are able to pick up heat generated from skin friction of the air, that is pretty fantastic what you are claiming t
38 Checksixx : Well I was meaning a heat seeking missile sensor actually. I think we all know you can track hot surfaces with IR sensors...seeing how its been done
39 Alien : Now put something in a fighter that can find it, track it and target it. Good luck. Remember you need to view it from certain angles and IRST has a v
40 Baroque : I think that this has been invented and it is called a radio. That is a ground station scans for suspicious heat plumes and advises fighters under it
41 F27Friendship : modern seakers (fired in range at an F-22) will have no problem hitting it. It won't even need the exhaust. Getting in a position to fire an IR missi
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic It's Official :Australia Chooses The F-35
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Is The F-35? Is It The JSF? posted Thu Apr 15 2004 18:14:33 by AndrewUber
Cool Video Of The F 35 posted Fri Apr 25 2008 14:29:43 by Mortyman
It's Official. Boeing Offers Advanced KC-767 posted Mon Feb 12 2007 19:42:52 by USAF336TFS
Interesting Claim About The F-35 posted Tue Dec 27 2005 03:19:45 by AerospaceFan
Czech Republic Chooses The Gripen posted Thu Dec 18 2003 17:34:15 by Soren-a
It Thrilled The Crowd But Won't Be Seen Again posted Mon Apr 14 2008 16:18:45 by Columbia107
Contract Losers - Y23 And The Y34 Was It? posted Fri Feb 15 2008 02:23:40 by Phil K
Is It True That F 35 Will Replace All F-18 Model? posted Mon Dec 31 2007 10:53:59 by 747400sp
The Chinese J-10 Fighter: Is It Any Good? posted Mon Sep 24 2007 21:11:18 by Alberchico
RAH-66 Commanche-Why Can't It Replace The Apache? posted Sun May 13 2007 05:12:53 by AirRyan

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format