On the F-35 - and its many problems

[Skybird]

Of raised interest for Germany. It ordered the A-version.



https://www.defensenews.com/smr/hidden-troubles-f35/

[Rockstar]

I’m thinking this is all part of the process. Those many problems are being addressed and hopefully will be corrected prior to moving into full scale production.

Who knows maybe the F-35A will be good enough the Luftwaffe will start up another aerobatic team.

[Catfish]

Only 35 fighters? How long are they supposed to hold out in a war? Appx. one third can be at the front at a time, rest being repaired or maintained.

Regarding aerobatics or air-to-air combat the F-35 is said to be inferior to the 30-year-old russian SU-29, and the F-35's stealth capabilities are not so good either against modern radar frequencies. Then one turbine, not good. The carrier version is said to develop microcracks in the fuselage, but Germany will not need those anyway.
"Almost 800 problems with the F-35 from which 7 are still considered vital."

It is the only solution to be available in a short time, so ok (for now). I would sure have preferred a european-built fighter like a Tornado's successor, for spares and maintenance dependencies.
But then I read spare parts for the Panavia bird can only be obtained via ebay anymore :D

[Commander Wallace]

^ I would pass on the F-35. There are better and cheaper alternatives like the F-15's and F-16's. If they had thrust vectoring, they might be even better in low speed flight. At high speed, I think it might pull more G's than the human body can withstand-for long. I think they would come in at a drastically lower cost as well.

With regards to the Tornado, I believe they are more of a strike aircraft and less of an air superiority type fighter aircraft like the F-15's and F-16's. If vertical lift is / was an issue, I believe the Brit Harrier, re-engineered would have been a viable alternative as well. The English showed in the Falklands war how good the Harrier can be-in capable hands. With new turbofan engines capable of mach speeds, and a redesigned nose to accommodate modern radars or up to date Blue Vixen radars suites, I believe the Harrier would be even more formidable than it is now.

The Blue Vixen's were compatible with Sidewinders, Aim-120 Amraam's and Brit Sea Eagle's. I would be willing to bet they could be made to work with Israeli Python and other missiles as well.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Vixen


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Python_(missile)

[Skybird]

Kai, the F-35 is licensed to carry US nuclear bombs, and that is what the German buying is about. The Eurofighter could be certified by the Americans to carry them as well, but the machines are still not fully equipped for that AFAIK and the Americans additionally delay the process (to sell their own stuff, I assume). A nuclear carrier is needed by the Germans to maintain the so-called "nukleare Teilhabe", while the Tornados get phased out over the years (they were the nuclear carriers so far). The 35 F-35s (if they really stick to that number, I think it will get reduced over time) do not fully replace the fleet of Eurofighters.

I am like Commander Adama, I do not feel comfortable with all this heavy dependency on networking. One infiltration, one vulnerability exploited - and not just a local or regional capability of the military goes down, but the complete network. Fear the Cylon computer virus!

[Skybird]

^ I would pass on the F-35. There are better and cheaper alternatives like the F-15's and F-16's. If they had thrust vectoring, they might be even better in low speed flight. At high speed, I think it might pull more G's than the human body can withstand-for long. I think they would come in at a drastically lower cost as well.

With regards to the Tornado, I believe they are more of a strike aircraft and less of an air superiority type fighter aircraft like the F-15's and F-16's. If vertical lift is / was an issue, I believe the Brit Harrier, re-engineered would have been a viable alternative as well. The English showed in the Falklands war how good the Harrier can be-in capable hands. With new turbofan engines capable of mach speeds, and a redesigned nose to accommodate modern radars or up to date Blue Vixen radars suites, I believe the Harrier would be even more formidable than it is now.

The Blue Vixen's were compatible with Sidewinders, Aim-120 Amraam's and Brit Sea Eagle's. I would be willing to bet they could be made to work with Israeli Python and other missiles as well.
Again, this deal now is predominantly about secuing an ongoing of the German nuclear participation, that the Germans can operate bombers that can carry American nuclear bombs. Without that, the Tornados would already have been phased out since a few years, most likely. This is not meant to replace the full conventional fighter fleet. The germans have showed to be unable to get their homework for a Tornado-replacement done since many, many years. Now there is panic.

My biggest argument against the F-35 is the logistics behind maintaining it, and the dependency on US-provided certified US technicians. Key components in the planes delivered to foreign customers are not allowed to be maintained by national workers, but only by American personennel. Also, spare parts again make us depending on the US. Its also an intel breach concern, since this arrangement gives the US a deep insight into operations and plans of these foreign customers. Availabiltiy and delivery of spare parts also will be a concern if the US gets engaged in a longer conflict in asia and has own losses it must compensate then. Now wonder where Lockheed'S loyalties and liabilties then will prioritize!

But we cannot come up with a new plane by ourselves in just 2 years. The new European super-wonder-miracle fighter is expected not before 2040 or later - and then it will suffer from plenty of teethign problems, and will need more years to mature, and then will be bought in ridiculously low numbers becasue it will be so hilariously expensive.

We slept too long. Now there are only compromises left, none of them comes without serious disadvantages.

Beside Britian and France, germany and maybe Italy should get their own nukes, too. The French never have and never will put their arsenal under true full European command or NATO command. But Europe should have nuclear options independently from the US to deter certain aggressions, obviously.

[Commander Wallace]

Again, this deal now is predominantly about secuing an ongoing of the German nuclear participation, that the Germans can operate bombers that can carry American nuclear bombs. Without that, the Tornados would already have been phased out since a few years, most likely. This is not meant to replace the full conventional fighter fleet. The germans have showed to be unable to get their homework for a Tornado-replacement done since many, many years. Now there is panic.

My biggest argument against the F-35 is the logistics behind maintaining it, and the dependency on US-provided certified US technicians. Key components in the planes delivered to foreign customers are not allowed to be maintained by national workers, but only by American personennel. Also, spare parts again make us depending on the US. Its also an intel breach concern, since this arrangement gives the US a deep insight into operations and plans of these foreign customers. Availabiltiy and delivery of spare parts also will be a concern if the US gets engaged in a longer conflict in asia and has own losses it must compensate then. Now wonder where Lockheed'S loyalties and liabilties then will prioritize!

But we cannot come up with a new plane by ourselves in just 2 years. The new European super-wonder-miracle fighter is expected not before 2040 or later - and then it will suffer from plenty of teethign problems, and will need more years to mature, and then will be bought in ridiculously low numbers becasue it will be so hilariously expensive.

We slept too long. Now there are only compromises left, none of them comes without serious disadvantages.

Beside Britian and France, germany and maybe Italy should get their own nukes, too. The French never have and never will put their arsenal under true full European command or NATO command. But Europe should have nuclear options independently from the US to deter certain aggressions, obviously.


With the actions of Russia at the forefront of the news and Putin wanting a remake of the former Soviet Union, What you have said makes a lot of sense. For years, Germany neglected contributing enough of it GNP's to it's own defense. I think now, Germany sees how foolhardy this action was.


With regards to the F-15's and F-16s, I'm quite certain they can all be configured to use a wide variety of munitions, if you know what I mean.

[mapuc]

Had to dig into my longtime memory.

When I was young I had this love for aviation mostly American jets. I had a book about the American history of aviation and if I remember correctly they had a bunch of problem with F14 Tomcat or was it F-15 Eagle. When these problem was solved it became one of the most reliable fighter jet in the American Air force and/or Navy.

Markus

[Commander Wallace]

Had to dig into my longtime memory.

When I was young I had this love for aviation mostly American jets. I had a book about the American history of aviation and if I remember correctly they had a bunch of problem with F14 Tomcat or was it F-15 Eagle. When these problem was solved it became one of the most reliable fighter jet in the American Air force and/or Navy.

Markus


The F-14 Tomcat had recurring issues with It's Pratt and Whitney TF-30 engines in that they were prone to compressor stalls. The faughty engines resulted in a number of lost aircraft and crews. It remained an issue through out it's life until the F-14D models were re-engines with I believe GE -F404 and or 110 engines. Only then did the F-14 realize it's full potential. By then, the F-14 program was at the end of it's service life.

[Jimbuna]

The Tornado and Harrier were retired far too early because the UK knew there would never be another war on European soil :doh:

[Catfish]

The Tornado and Harrier all sorts of military hardware were retired far too early because the UK Germany knew there would never be another war on European soil :doh:
Corrected this a bit :03:

[mapuc]

The F-14 Tomcat had recurring issues with It's Pratt and Whitney TF-30 engines in that they were prone to compressor stalls. The faughty engines resulted in a number of lost aircraft and crews. It remained an issue through out it's life until the F-14D models were re-engines with I believe GE -F404 and or 110 engines. Only then did the F-14 realize it's full potential. By then, the F-14 program was at the end of it's service life.

Have I remembered wrong all these year-'cause this fighter jet became one of US most reliable fighter jet. in the decades that followed-So I wonder if it wasn't the F-15 Eagle after all.

Sad is that I don't have this book anymore Got it as a present from my parents.

Markus

[Catfish]

Kai, the F-35 is licensed to carry US nuclear bombs, and that is what the German buying is about.
I generally agree but the Tornado or at last one of its types can carry the 20 US-made B61 nuclear bombs stockpiled in Germany as part of NATO nuclear sharing. Maybe there are newer bombs needing other racks and hardpoints and the Tornado cannot be used for them? The Eurofighter is not ready for this, yes.

[Armistead]

Again, this deal now is predominantly about secuing an ongoing of the German nuclear participation, that the Germans can operate bombers that can carry American nuclear bombs. Without that, the Tornados would already have been phased out since a few years, most likely. This is not meant to replace the full conventional fighter fleet. The germans have showed to be unable to get their homework for a Tornado-replacement done since many, many years. Now there is panic.

My biggest argument against the F-35 is the logistics behind maintaining it, and the dependency on US-provided certified US technicians. Key components in the planes delivered to foreign customers are not allowed to be maintained by national workers, but only by American personennel. Also, spare parts again make us depending on the US. Its also an intel breach concern, since this arrangement gives the US a deep insight into operations and plans of these foreign customers. Availabiltiy and delivery of spare parts also will be a concern if the US gets engaged in a longer conflict in asia and has own losses it must compensate then. Now wonder where Lockheed'S loyalties and liabilties then will prioritize!

But we cannot come up with a new plane by ourselves in just 2 years. The new European super-wonder-miracle fighter is expected not before 2040 or later - and then it will suffer from plenty of teethign problems, and will need more years to mature, and then will be bought in ridiculously low numbers becasue it will be so hilariously expensive.

We slept too long. Now there are only compromises left, none of them comes without serious disadvantages.

Beside Britian and France, germany and maybe Italy should get their own nukes, too. The French never have and never will put their arsenal under true full European command or NATO command. But Europe should have nuclear options independently from the US to deter certain aggressions, obviously.

Say what you want of Trump, he warned you and even demanded Euro NATO nations increase their defense and funding to NATO 2% of GDP. Now there's a rush to do so.

[mapuc]

Say what you want of Trump, he warned you and even demanded Euro NATO nations increase their defense and funding to NATO 2% of GDP. Now there's a rush to do so.

Not for Denmark. Here it ain't a rush-They have decided to s.l.o.w.l.y increase the amount of the BNP to the military so it's 2 % in 2033. Today it's around 1.16 % of BNP.

Markus

[Skybird]

With regards to the F-15's and F-16s, I'm quite certain they can all be configured to use a wide variety of munitions, if you know what I mean.
No doubt they can carry nukes, but whether they can deliver them in a heavily radar-saturated environment - that is something else. The Germans no longer trust the Tornado can do that (and its maintenance by now is beocming a financial and organisational nightmare), and the Tornado specialised in extreme low flying attack profiles, thats what it was originally made for. So low that the British lost two or three of them in low flight missions in Kuwait without enemy effect on them, AFAIR.
The F-35 however claims to be able to handle enemy radar, kind of.

[Skybird]

I generally agree but the Tornado or at last one of its types can carry the 20 US-made B61 nuclear bombs stockpiled in Germany as part of NATO nuclear sharing. Maybe there are newer bombs needing other racks and hardpoints and the Tornado cannot be used for them? The Eurofighter is not ready for this, yes.
Its about the bombs the US has stored in Germany, the B61 block 3 and 4. 15 to 20 are estimated to be still stored here. Two years ago I think I red the US planned to modernise them or replace them with newer stuff. I dont know what came of that.

Russia has a masisve advanatge at tactical nukes, and they are already stationed in forward attack positions, namely Kaliningrad. The West has comporably little numbers of equal-sized weapons ready to retaliate on the battlefield, and would need to fall back to strategic nukes earlier, therefore. Thus, Berlin can be ashered by the Russians with around 4 minutes prewarning time. If they use their hypersonic missiles with a nuclear warhead - even less. In plain German that means: no warning time of practical use at all.

[Jimbuna]

Corrected this a bit :03:

Danke :)

[Catfish]

You're welcome :)

[Commander Wallace]

Have I remembered wrong all these year-'cause this fighter jet became one of US most reliable fighter jet. in the decades that followed-So I wonder if it wasn't the F-15 Eagle after all.

Sad is that I don't have this book anymore Got it as a present from my parents.

Markus

The F-14 was a great aircraft once it was re-engined with the General Electric Engines. unfortunately, with the engine nacelles spaced as far apart as they were and with the old Pratt and Whitney Engines, if airflow was disrupted to one engine and it stalled, It could throw the aircraft into a flat spin. The F-14 had a range no other fighter aircraft could match including the F-18 Hornets and Super Hornets. To use F-18's close to a contested area means having tanker support close which exposes the tankers to enemy fire.

The fire control suite was state of the art for it's time as well. Unfortunately, the AIM-54 Phoenix air to air missiles the F-14 carried had an inflated reputation, as I understand it. The F-14 was a robust aircraft but was said to need 6 hours maintenance for every hour flown.

The Swedish Saab Drakken, Viggen and now the JAS 39 Gripen were all said to be unique and capable aircraft, especially the Viggen with it's double Delta Wings. The Swedes were certainly thinking " out of the box " with these aircraft. :yep:
The Swedes really know how to engineer an aircraft.

[mapuc]

The F-14 was a great aircraft once it was re-engined with the General Electric Engines. unfortunately, with the engine nacelles spaced as far apart as they were, if airflow was disrupted to one engine and it stalled, It could throw the aircraft into a flat spin. The F-14 had a range no other fighter aircraft could match including the F-18 Hornets and Super Hornets. To use F-18's close to a contested means having tanker support close which exposes the tankers to enemy fire.

The fire control suite was state of the art for it's time as well. Unfortunately, the AIM-54 Phoenix air to air missiles the F-14 carried had an inflated reputation, as I understand it. The F-14 was a robust aircraft but was said to need 6 hours maintenance for every hour flown.

The Swedish Saab Drakken, Viggen and now the JAS 39 Gripen were all said to be unique and capable aircraft, especially the Viggen with it's double Delta Wings. The Swedes were certainly thinking " out of the box " with these aircraft. :yep:
The Swedes really know how to engineer an aircraft.

Oh remember when I was a young lad around 12-14 years old Then my biggest dream was to be a fighter pilot and fly the JA 37 Viggen. When I was around 20 My doctor said I did not have the body for it.
Since then my biggest dream was and still are-To become a doctor-Lung and heart doctor.

This is not some kind of military secret-The engine in the JAS 39 Gripen is so build it would take 4 soldiers around 30 minutes to take it out and replace it-Same with weapons around 20-30 minutes to rearm the jet.

Markus

[Skybird]

I laway shad a soft spot for the Gripen. When the design showed up, it was maybe the most modern plane of its kind in the world, imo. For some time its cockpit was at least en par, if not superior, to that of the F-16C from that time in the 80s. Gripen still holds its ground today, though now showing age.



Sweden has designed quite some outstandingly good platforms in service: IFVs, submarines, stealthed warships, and the fighters. Some very good stuff there.