Originally Posted by Commander Wallace (Post 2799735)

^ 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.

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 2799737)

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.

Originally Posted by mapuc (Post 2799747)

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

Originally Posted by Jimbuna (Post 2799751)

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:

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace (Post 2799748)

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.

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 2799736)

Kai, the F-35 is licensed to carry US nuclear bombs, and that is what the German buying is about.

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 2799737)

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.

Originally Posted by Armistead (Post 2799763)

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.