The most expensive weapon system of all times

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

push button warfare...

[Pisces]

[Off-topic]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Their Wingman song is cool too.



Oh yeah, the obligatory offensive language warning applies!

[/Off-topic]

[Bilge_Rat]

1. The basic concept, having an airframe that can be used by more than one service is good. The F-4 was used by both the air force and navy.

2. Is there a need? well the F-15, F-16 and F-18 were designed 40 years ago and are nearing the end of their useful life.

3. Does it have to use the latest cutting edge technology? Based on the F-15/16/18 experience, they will probably have to last 40 years. What will be the anti-air tech in 2050? What is more expensive? building it right from the beginning or having an expensive upgrade in 2030?

4. Is there a threat? These airplanes have a long lead time, Russia and China are both designing their own next generation plane. When, not if, but when the next crisis comes around, there wont be time to develop new planes.

5. should it be scrapped? trillions of dollars down the drain. Yes, there would be an immediate savings, but you still have the problem that the current generation of planes will be obsolete in 10 years.

6. Are manned airplanes obsolete? who knows? Drones can do some interesting things, can they do everything? If you want to fly an infantry division to the next crisis point with C-17s, are you really going to trust their protection to drones? How do you prevent the enemy from jamming the transmissions between the drone and the GCI?

7. do we need so many variants? That is probably where they could have saved some bucks.

[Oberon]

TBH, the F-22 is here to stay. It'll be in limited numbers, used only against nations with no anti-aircraft ability, and kept in cotton wool otherwise. Meanwhile the drone arm will grow and get more competent, and the conventional airforce will make up the shortfall.

In terms of an air war against the likes of China, well, I think it's very unlikely to happen, but if it does and there's a shortage of aircraft, then there's:

[HundertzehnGustav]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

1. The basic concept, having an airframe that can be used by more than one service is good. The F-4 was used by both the air force and navy.

2. Is there a need? well the F-15, F-16 and F-18 were designed 40 years ago and are nearing the end of their useful life.

3. Does it have to use the latest cutting edge technology? Based on the F-15/16/18 experience, they will probably have to last 40 years. What will be the anti-air tech in 2050? What is more expensive? building it right from the beginning or having an expensive upgrade in 2030?

4. Is there a threat? These airplanes have a long lead time, Russia and China are both designing their own next generation plane. When, not if, but when the next crisis comes around, there wont be time to develop new planes.

5. should it be scrapped? trillions of dollars down the drain. Yes, there would be an immediate savings, but you still have the problem that the current generation of planes will be obsolete in 10 years.

6. Are manned airplanes obsolete? who knows? Drones can do some interesting things, can they do everything? If you want to fly an infantry division to the next crisis point with C-17s, are you really going to trust their protection to drones? How do you prevent the enemy from jamming the transmissions between the drone and the GCI?

7. do we need so many variants? That is probably where they could have saved some bucks.

2 -the E and F have sopme 10-20 years left.

3- the cutting edge tecnology is stolen, and therefor no more cutting edge. PAK-FA. Chinese hardware. software leaks.

4- now you have a bunch of expensive toys, and some rustbuckets. not a single proper tool at hand.

5 - drones. cheap. effective. what needs trying is a fighter drone,.. something that has a gun and can put that gun on an enemy Fighter, transport, chopper...
but they drop eggs, and do so in an accurate manner.

6 - as far as i can see: yes.
it is only a matter of time whehn humans will thrust Cargo and Tanker and surveilance roles to manned drones of all sizes and measures.
Some roles get handed to the machines faster... some much later. Including civilian drones carrying passenges in 2060 or 2100

Not that i like any of that. if it were me, the development would have stopped at the A-4 Skyhawk or the Mig-19.
That 35 aint no good for nothing, it seems. and drones are around the corner. Naval drones even.

when toys are the killers, then the detachment from war is complete.
I hope i die soon, for these times are ugly. Careless killings ahead.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

F-4 Phantom II was developed for as naval fighter and there were relatively minor changes to make it suitable for other services. F-35 Ligthning II tried to merge three aircraft requirements to one airframe which is completely different thing.

So what to do then? I would scrap current F-35 program and use already researched technology for fresh start. I would drop Marine's F-35B S/VTOL variant completely. I would build naval fighter version and cram that down the throats of other services (just like with F-4). Its not perferct solution nor cheap but in long term I think it as better option than current incarnation of F-35.

[Skybird]

That still would make it

- a plane with short legs

- an overpriced plane due to the expensive stealth technology - that stealth technology that more and more is being seen as overestimated in the modern hightech war of tomorrow, since better sensors will compromise it sooner or later. The cost-effect balance just does not show a positive number in black.

Skip the whole program. Focus on cybertech. Drones. Build something on basis of the existing conventional fighters.

And finally get a reasonable AA missile that can outrange modern Russian ones.

Any possible war against any of the real big players will likely not be a meeting on the battlefield anyway, but a cyberwar. A war of currencies waged on financial markets. Economic domination. A drone war. An ELINT war. And this will be a war that very easily can cripple Europe and America. Chinese cyberstrikes against civilian Western infrastructure, energy, economy, traffic, I fear more than anything conventionally military they could show up with. And the claim the American military infrastructure is protected and hardened against such a war I do not believe as long as the claim has not proven its truth in real conflict. Not even mentioning the Europeans' believe that it will not get that bad anyway. Infantility is a widespread disease, I often say to myself these days.

[Bilge_Rat]

ah yes Drones, the wonder weapon...



Drones are fine if you want to kill terrorists in the desert, more problematic when you want to go up against a superpower.

First of all, right now drones are propeller driven, with the current performance of WW1 airplanes. Second, the biggest weakness of drones is the link back to the operator, you jam that and they become expensive lawn darts.

yes, if you spend trilions of dollars, you may get unpiloted planes that can do everything manned planes can do now. Will you save any money? doubtful and you still have the pesky problem of how to secure the radio link back to ground control.