Please contribute to Iran's military

[fatty]

Originally Posted by Heibges

I believe the F-15 was also built to fight a plane that the Soviet's never built?

You could say that 75% of the equipment in the U.S. military was meant to fight a war that never happened :p

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Heibges

I believe the F-15 was also built to fight a plane that the Soviet's never built?

Well now, that depends. The F-15 was built to shoot down the mythical super MiG-25. The problem was, the MiG-25 wasn't so 'Super' as originally thought! So no, the Soviets actually built the plane the F-15 was designed for, but the F-15 was sort of over-built to take on a better plane than the one it ended up having to deal with.

I guess thats a double edged sword on the F-15's part - The fact that is was so good back then means that it is still a viable aircraft today!

-S

[Lagger123987]

I love F-14s too bad they're goin to be in airshows only now.

[Tchocky]

Mig-25 may be fast, but it doesn't accelerate very quickly. If I remember correctly, a Soviet air manual ranked the MiG-23 as both faster and quicker than F-15 and F-16 at low level.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Originally Posted by fatty

You could say that 75% of the equipment in the U.S. military was meant to fight a war that never happened :p

They still build to Cold War specs. JSF anyone?

PD

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth

They still build to Cold War specs. JSF anyone?

PD

They have to. It is not an option. History has always shown what happens to rich countries that fail to protect themselves, and with the US being the richest country the world has ever known throughout all history, actually richer than all past empires put together, it doesn't take rocket science to figure out what would be its fate without its techie weapon systems. AMerica builds those weapons not to fight, but as a deterrant - something it definitely needed in the cold war.

F-35 is now needed as a cheap alternative to F-22. We also need F-22 as well. This is due to Russia building more sophisticated aircraft than anything fielded by the Americans - THe thrust vectoring SU-30 is an example - a much better plane than anything in the US inventory. China now flies SU-30, as well as India.

Our pilots borrowed India's SU-30 and went up against our pilots in our own F-15's and F-16's. The guys in the SU-30's kicked the butt of our pilots in F-15's and F-16's each and every engagement. So to say we don't need F-35 and F-22 is not reality.

One more thing Russia is doing is making SAM systems that are not only cheap, but extremely effective and near impossible to evade by our current generations of fighters. These systems are also being sold to Rogue states and the US will eventually have to deal with them sooner or later. This is why Stealth capability is no longer not an option for the future of fighter aircraft. All aircraft must have Stealth capability - period. You need to give the plane in the sky a fighting chance to survive, and that window is quickly closing on AMericas antiquated aircraft.

Does anyone realize we are flying the 'oldest' airforce in the entire history of the United States Airforce? Most of our aircraft or fast becoming antiquated junk heeps barely able to do the job they are being asked to do in the face of ever increasing enemy technology. Their only saving grace is the excellent training of US pilots who make up in tactics for the failings of their aircraft. On top of this, the US has only had to go up against typically older generations of ex Soviet fighters. THis will not be the case forever. Two examples where the US will face newer generation of aircraft are Taiwan and Korea - both loom as a flash points.

F-35 and F-22 is a must to survive these future fights. We can do it with the F-15's and F-16's as well, but expect horror and shock from the public as you get very close to a 1 to 1 kill ratio between US pilots and their enemy.

Basically the public won't stomach that since they can't even stomach the 3000 dead in Iraq let alone high combat loses in the air in some future conflict! Remember Vietnam? THey had over 50,000 US dead dead in half the time that we have been in Iraq. The American public has grown soft, so we cannot tolerate high loss ratios in the air, and besides, an unfair fight with these new aircraft is exactly what we want - deterrance.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Mig-25 may be fast, but it doesn't accelerate very quickly. If I remember correctly, a Soviet air manual ranked the MiG-23 as both faster and quicker than F-15 and F-16 at low level.

MiG-23 accelerates fast, but I don't think that fast. Sure you aren't confusing it with MiG-31?

[PeriscopeDepth]

Temptin' me to start a JSF thread Subman...

PD

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth

Temptin' me to start a JSF thread Subman...

PD

Maybe you should! I'd rather have more F22's and less F35's, but I'll take F-35's if thats all we can afford right now! F-35's are a much better plane than pretty much anything short of an F-22, so if the choice is no extra F-22's and a bunch of cheaper F-35's - I'll take em!

-S

[TLAM Strike]

Well I just read "Black Aces High" about a F-14A squadron in the Kosovo war and as it turned out it could do things the newer F/A-18 Hornets couldn't. Its FLIR (the TARPS system I think its called) system could locate targets and twice the distance. Now I doubt Iran has any TARPS pods laying around but the point is don't count out an old aircraft simply because its old, the F-14A did pretty damn good againt the folks who shot down the F-117.

As for having or not having AIM-54 missiles I'm sure Iran could retorfit any of those long range suckers Russia sold them like the AA-9 or AA-6. Heck with its payload it would make a damn good bomber.

As for the JSF the F/A-35 and P-8 are proably the biggest mistakes the USN has made since canning Diesel Boats.

[Officerpuppy]

Cant we all just get along?:rotfl:

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Well I just read "Black Aces High" about a F-14A squadron in the Kosovo war and as it turned out it could do things the newer F/A-18 Hornets couldn't. Its FLIR (the TARPS system I think its called) system could locate targets and twice the distance. Now I doubt Iran has any TARPS pods laying around but the point is don't count out an old aircraft simply because its old, the F-14A did pretty damn good againt the folks who shot down the F-117.

As for having or not having AIM-54 missiles I'm sure Iran could retorfit any of those long range suckers Russia sold them like the AA-9 or AA-6. Heck with its payload it would make a damn good bomber.

As for the JSF the F/A-35 and P-8 are proably the biggest mistakes the USN has made since canning Diesel Boats.

I'd have to disagree with you. The version of F/A-18C model that is being replaced is no where in the same league as the F-35. The F-35 beats it in every single catagory, especially range, stealth, and combat effectiveness. The F-35 also incorporates many of the F-22 technologies as well. F/A-18E basically replaced the F-14, and its got a built in FLIR that is many generations newer and much more finely detailed than its F-14 counterpart. The F/A-18C is being retired so the F-14 seems to have lost its last advantage when compared to the F/A-18E. Last but not least, the F/A-18E can carry a much larger payload than the F-14, adn only requires 20% of the maintenance. The F-14 required many ground hours in maintenance to keep it flying for every single flight hour. Its a resource pig.

The upgrades the Navy is doing is the best thing they can do in my opnion. ALl these antiquated aircraft need to be retired since they have outlived their usefullness.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Here is the internal FLIR used by the F/A-18E:

The AN/ASQ-228 Advanced Targeting Forward-Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) is a multi-sensor, electro-optical targeting pod incorporating infrared, low-light television camera, laser rangefinder/target designator, and laser spot tracker developed and manufactured by Raytheon. It is used to provide navigation and targeting for military aircraft in adverse weather and using precision-guided weapons such as laser-guided bombs. It is intended to replace the earlier AN/AAS-38 Nite Hawk pod in US Navy service.
ATFLIR is 72 in (183 cm) long, weighs 420 lb (191 kg), and has a slant range of 30 mi (48 km), said to be useful at altitude of up to 50,000 ft (15,240 m). It has fewer parts than many previous systems, which is intended to improve serviceability (although early examples, in service with VFA-115 'Eagles' in 2003 experienced problems). Crews indicate that it offers much greater target resolution and image accuracy than previous systems.
ATFLIR presently is used only by the US Navy on the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, although it is compatible with the earlier F/A-18C/D. It is normally carried on one of the fuselage stations otherwise used for AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles. Current plans call for a total of 574 pods. As of Jan. 2006, Raytheon has delivered 100 pods.

[SUBMAN1]

This is rather interesting to hear on F-35:

Directed-energy weapons

Directed-energy weapons may be installed in conventional takeoff F-35 Lightning IIs, whose lack of a direct lift fan frees up about 100 ft³ (2.8 m³) of space with access to a drive shaft capable of delivering more than 27,000 hp (20 MW).[39][40] Some concepts, including solid state lasers and high-power microwave beams, may be nearing operational status.

More info:

Frida Berrigan, "Now You See, Now You Don't. The Pentagon's blinding lasers," In These Times, September 27, 2002: "Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, who together had $20.3 billion in Pentagon contracts in 2001, are collaborating on development of directed energy weapons--powerful 100-kilowatt infrared lasers for use on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter."

THe whole article:

Now You See, Now You Don’t
The Pentagon’s blinding lasers.
By Frida Berrigan

U.S. weapons manufacturers are hard at work developing futuristic precision weapons that promise to keep Americans even further out of harm’s way: lasers.

Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, who together had $20.3 billion in Pentagon contracts in 2001, are collaborating on development of “directed energy weapons”—powerful 100-kilowatt infrared lasers for use on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

The JSF program, worth an estimated $200 billion, is Lockheed Martin’s crowning accomplishment. If all goes well, the Pentagon will soon order as many as 3,000 F-35s, making it the largest acquisition program in history. This $40 million fighter plane will be ubiquitous in the U.S. military and throughout the world. England, Norway, Italy, Singapore, Turkey, Israel and others have already expressed serious interest as well.

The JSF laser system could be used to destroy communication lines, power grids, or fuel dumps, or to zero in on part of a vehicle, like the engine. The weapons, which are scheduled to be ready for testing in 2010, would be covert, powerful and untraceable. “There’s no huge explosion associated with its employment, there are no pieces and parts left behind that someone can analyze to say, ‘this came from the United States,’ ” explains an unnamed Lockheed Martin official quoted in Aviation Week and Space Technology in July. “The damage is localized, and it is hard to tell where it came from and when it happened. It is all pretty mysterious.”

So mysterious, in fact, that engineers are only beginning to consider what the lasers will do to people. According to Aviation Week and Space Technology, military planners in Israel are not pursuing directed-energy weapons because of concerns they “might result in new, unanticipated types of collateral damage.” For example, the weapons could disrupt electricity at civilian sites or affect pacemakers.

They could also blind and injure people in the vicinity. As Gordon Hengst of the Air Force Research Laboratory in New Mexico, where the research on the lasers is being conducted, points out: “The reflected energy typically will cover large amounts of real estate and space, since the energy is spreading in many directions.”

He adds that if the target is moving, the possibility of refraction is greater. According to New Scientist magazine, the human eye is very vulnerable to light from lasers: “Safety guidelines warn against staring into beams of only a few milliwatts. … The unpredictable reflections scattered from a 100-kilowatt laser could be devastating.”

Weapons manufacturers concede that blinding and other injuries could occur, but say the benefits outweigh the concerns. “As with all weapons, there is potential for inflicting collateral damage,” says Tom Burris, a Lockheed scientist.

And surprisingly enough, despite the fact that the United States signed the Geneva Convention’s Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons in 1991, these weapons are exempt. The convention prohibits “laser weapons specifically designed, as their sole combat function or as one of their combat functions, to cause permanent blindness to unenhanced vision.” [Emphasis added.] But a small phrase is a loophole big enough for a fighter plane to fly through. Stephen Goose of Human Rights Watch explains, “That protocol was purposely drafted to avoid capturing other types of laser weapons systems.”

Laser weapons blind, whether or not they are “specifically designed” to do so as their “sole combat function.” They are also the wave of the future, says Mike Booen of Raytheon: “We want to replace high explosives [like bombs and missiles] with directed energy weapons.” The Pentagon has been investing accordingly.

Laser weapons seem like the answer to Washington’s prayers for an antiseptic warfare that plays well on television and will not offend the American public with civilian deaths or U.S. casualties. But that’s easier said than done. The Afghan war, which is costing U.S. taxpayers $2.5 billion a month and relies on high-tech weapons and sophisticated communications equipment, has produced deadly errors with macabre regularity. With laser weapons, we can only expect more of the same.

http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/26/24/news1.shtml

[Oberon]

DEW on an F-35...

My respect for these little fighters just went up a notch.