SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   US Airforce B-1R (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=136638)

PeriscopeDepth 05-13-08 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steel_Tomb
That depends if any F-15's are still airworthy in a decades time, the way things look at the moment the USAF might be looking at a short fall in its air superiority fighter force if Congress doesn't loosen up those purse strings!

I do hope the F-15 actually gets completely replaced by purely F-22's. It would be expensive... but damn! How badass would that be!

Exactly. The numbers F-22 is being bought in now don't even make it a half assed F-15 air superiority machine replacement. They make it more like an F-117 silver bullet.

And F-35 is NOT the answer. It can carry all of what, four AIM-120Cs when configured for pure A2A? Will big motor AAMs even fit in its weapons bay? But if they don't, we'll just carry them on the external pylons, right? Well no. Because the F-35 NEEDS its stealth. It cannot survive without it any better than a late model F-16 can. It can't simply decline the engagement like the Raptor can if the odds don't look good.

PD

SUBMAN1 05-13-08 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steel_Tomb

OT - I wish they would model slammer D's in Falcon 4.0 AF lol, would kick arse against the AA-12s... they're nasty bits of kit!

If you select the 2010 timeline, aren't they? Playing the F-16 in 2010 was always an act in frustration (i.e. you can't live long enough to enjoy it), so I never looked.

Anyway, when fighting against these SU, stay in AB constant. With Mach 1.2 to 1.4 in your belt, you have the airspeed you need to deal with the AMRAAMSKI by flying perpendicular to it.

Problem is, about the time the 120 D's come online, the Russian counterpart is also not far behind. They have an Improved AMRAAMSKI on the board too.

-S

SUBMAN1 05-13-08 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth
Exactly. The numbers F-22 is being bought in now don't even make it a half assed F-15 air superiority machine replacement. They make it more like an F-117 silver bullet.

And F-35 is NOT the answer. It can carry all of what, four AIM-120Cs when configured for pure A2A? Will big motor AAMs even fit in its weapons bay? But if they don't, we'll just carry them on the external pylons, right? Well no. Because the F-35 NEEDS its stealth. It cannot survive without it any better than a late model F-16 can. It can't simply decline the engagement like the Raptor can if the odds don't look good.

PD

Weapons bay on the F-35 is the seem length as the F-22's. The F-35 is not to be under estimated. The cheif F-22 test pilot is now working on the F-35 and if he says nothing else can touch it besides an F-22, I believe him! :D

-S

PS. Your analogy of the F-15 is like a MiG-21 equipped with an AESA radar going up against a F-15. Yes, has some potential, but not much.

PeriscopeDepth 05-13-08 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
Weapons bay on the F-35 is the seem length as the F-22's. The F-35 is not to be under estimated. The cheif F-22 test pilot is now working on the F-35 and if he says nothing else can touch it besides an F-22, I believe him! :D

It may be the same dimension. But it was designed to do different things. As I said, the F-35 is a four AMRAAM machine IF it is pure A2A. If not it is a two AMRAAM machine. And it will have to get close to do its A2G work, because the F-35 won't be able to sling ANY of the cruise weapons like JASSM internally. The best it will manage internally is JSOW or glide kit SDB.




Quote:

PS. Your analogy of the F-15 is like a MiG-21 equipped with an AESA radar going up against a F-15. Yes, has some potential, but not much.
No. You are twisting my words. I am saying that legacy F-teen fighters with big motor AAM and AESA are one way of dealing with the Su-30/Euro canard threat. VLO F-22 with supercruise and AMRAAM is another. F-35 is a half assed attempt in between created with foreign export profits in mind. And the mass foreign export assures that it will be obsolete within ten years ANYWAYS.

VLO F-16 with four AMRAAMs tops had BETTER be able to kill the threat with its limited number of limited AAMs. Because after those are gone it won't be able to decline the egagement. And the engagement will be starting closer than any legacy F-teen fighter equipped with a big motor AAM.

PD

nikimcbee 05-13-08 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
Quote:

Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth
Exactly. The numbers F-22 is being bought in now don't even make it a half assed F-15 air superiority machine replacement. They make it more like an F-117 silver bullet.

And F-35 is NOT the answer. It can carry all of what, four AIM-120Cs when configured for pure A2A? Will big motor AAMs even fit in its weapons bay? But if they don't, we'll just carry them on the external pylons, right? Well no. Because the F-35 NEEDS its stealth. It cannot survive without it any better than a late model F-16 can. It can't simply decline the engagement like the Raptor can if the odds don't look good.

PD

Weapons bay on the F-35 is the seem length as the F-22's. The F-35 is not to be under estimated. The cheif F-22 test pilot is now working on the F-35 and if he says nothing else can touch it besides an F-22, I believe him! :D

-S

PS. Your analogy of the F-15 is like a MiG-21 equipped with an AESA radar going up against a F-15. Yes, has some potential, but not much.


HHHMM MiG-21:hmm: Now I'm feeling nostagic. I really need to get up to speed on modern fighters. I'm still stuck in the 80's:dead:

cross-post
okay, I need to get up to par on all these new jets::dead:
Su-30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORXhn...eature=related

F-35:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpClG...eature=related

F-22
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_Q6Vb9xJM0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teb4N...eature=related

Su-47
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyjxq...eature=related

SUBMAN1 05-13-08 04:58 PM

Well, lets put it more clearly - An F-15C /w AESA against an AESA equipped foe is going to have big problems since guess what? An AESA equipped foe will negate any advatage of an AIM-120D with simple jamming using the AESA radar. You probably could fry an AIM-120D's electronics with AESA. So the F-15 has to get in close since it would be a wash from range.

What exactly is it going to do at this point when all 2nd teir countries and many 3rd world countries are sporting better aircraft? Get the point yet?

The F-15 is fine for about another 2 years if you like high loss rates. Go into any country equipped with decent Russian equipment with it come 2010, or even today, and you are going to have a 50% loss rate. It would be worse, but they probably don't have enough missiles left to finish the rest off.

In an Air to air engagement against any of the aircraft I list above and I bet you it is dead meat.

What I find funny is the number of times they have said the dogfight is dead. AESA radars just made dogfights the likely scenario of the future to make a kill against non stealth aircraft. Medium or long range fights are becoming obsolete once again.

-S

nikimcbee 05-13-08 05:08 PM

All of this stuff seems expensive. How many F-22's do we have in our arsenal?

SUBMAN1 05-13-08 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikimcbee
All of this stuff seems expensive. How many F-22's do we have in our arsenal?

I forget. Getting up there though. 100? It was operational in 2004 with first deliveries in 2002. We need more.

-S

HunterICX 05-13-08 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikimcbee
HHHMM MiG-21:hmm: Now I'm feeling nostagic. I really need to get up to speed on modern fighters. I'm still stuck in the 80's:dead:

Pfff....I'm still stuck in the 1915 - 1946 period...:p

HunterICX

PeriscopeDepth 05-13-08 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
Well, lets put it more clearly - An F-15C /w AESA against an AESA equipped foe is going to have big problems since guess what? An AESA equipped foe will negate any advatage of an AIM-120D with simple jamming using the AESA radar. You probably could fry an AIM-120D's electronics with AESA. So the F-15 has to get in close since it would be a wash from range.

Jamming with AESA is reality. Mission killing air to air missile seekers with fighter sized AESA radars is pure fantasy on your part. But it does seem like it will be possible with larger AESA arrays mounted on AEW type aircraft. And missile seekers will be able to home in on AESA jamming. Just like they can with today's jammers.

Quote:

What exactly is it going to do at this point when all 2nd teir countries and many 3rd world countries are sporting better aircraft? Get the point yet?
The F-15 is fine for about another 2 years if you like high loss rates. Go into any country equipped with decent Russian equipment with it come 2010, or even today, and you are going to have a 50% loss rate. It would be worse, but they probably don't have enough missiles left to finish the rest off. In an Air to air engagement against any of the aircraft I list above and I bet you it is dead meat.
Name all these countries that will have all this stupendous gear in _numbers that mean anything_. OTHER THAN CHINA, there aren't any. You grossly exaggerate the threat to suit your argument.

Quote:

What I find funny is the number of times they have said the dogfight is dead. AESA radars just made dogfights the likely scenario of the future to make a kill against non stealth aircraft. Medium or long range fights are becoming obsolete once again.
Again, you are assuming that there will be no counter to AESA jamming ever developed. Your argument hinges on this, and that is something I wouldn't count on.

AESA articles:
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...as-jammer.html
http://www.reprintbuyer.com/mags/avi...1-11920469.pdf

And BTW Subman, I'm glad I have nothing to do at work today. I enjoy arguing this type of stuff. As I can see you do as well. :)

PD

Zachstar 05-13-08 09:40 PM

Well now that we are talking close in dogfights with "bad guys" that can fry long range shots...

So no B-1R... Carry on!

PeriscopeDepth 05-14-08 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zachstar
Well now that we are talking close in dogfights with "bad guys" that can fry long range shots...

So no B-1R... Carry on!

Such is the series of interconnected tubes known as: tha intraweb! :D

PD

Zachstar 05-14-08 12:59 AM

A little off topic but is anyone else wondering about these weird proposals from Boeing lately?

First they lose to the F-35
Then they start getting massive delays on the 787
Then the A380 gets shipped and is working well
Then they lose to the KC-45

So they are going to have to do better than Mach 2 Missile trucks they need somthing that is going to actually work for 20-30 years.

If I were them Id start some stealth drone program.

PeriscopeDepth 05-14-08 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zachstar
A little off topic but is anyone else wondering about these weird proposals from Boeing lately?

First they lose to the F-35
Then they start getting massive delays on the 787
Then the A380 gets shipped and is working well
Then they lose to the KC-45

So they are going to have to do better than Mach 2 Missile trucks they need somthing that is going to actually work for 20-30 years.

If I were them Id start some stealth drone program.

It got canceled in favor of F-35. And lost to X-47 for Navy UCAV.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-45

PD

NEON DEON 05-15-08 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
The F-15 is fine for about another 2 years if you like high loss rates. Go into any country equipped with decent Russian equipment with it come 2010, or even today, and you are going to have a 50% loss rate. It would be worse, but they probably don't have enough missiles left to finish the rest off.

So just how many F-15s have been lost in combat since it entered service?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:17 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.