So the navy is going to replace their carrier based planes with shorter range F35s at a time when carriers are parked further and further away from shore because of land fired Exocet 'carrier killer' anti-ship missles.
<face palm>
NoSo the navy is going to replace their carrier based planes with shorter range F35s at a time when carriers are parked further and further away from shore because of land fired Exocet 'carrier killer' anti-ship missles.
<face palm>
No
Not even close
They are better than what we use now, but I still think basically all of our planes are way too short ranged. And that includes the F-22, which IIRC is actually notably shorter ranged than aircraft like the F-15, F-16, or F/A-18.
Even with external fuel tanks?
IIRC the F-35s are actually longer ranged than many of the aircraft we use now. Its just that basically the whole fighter fleet of America is incredibly short ranged.
Those might add range, but they lower maneuverability and reduce the amount of weapons that can be carried, and in the case of the F-22 and F-35 they compromise their stealth, which means they lose one of their best assets, and they become seen flying ducks in the environment they are supposed to be operating in.
I think I mentioned before that "range" is a complicated topic.
Well, the main concern that has been huge in my current thinking is the ability for naval aircraft to hit the same targets they have before, but this time with the aircraft carrier groups restricted to operating much further back due to the massive A2/AD threat, especially stuff like ASCM and DF-21 ASBM. Add to that the need for long range missiles so that the aircraft themselves do not have to come in close range to AA defenses, especially stuff like the S-400.
You need to remember its all about detection ranges.
Far too many see stealth as binary: you are either invisible or have the radar signature of a barn door. People need to remember that the U.S. has a huge lead in both stealth technologies, and in sensor technology. So Russian aircraft do not have anything in the class of the APG-77, and I'd argue they probably never will.
All that said, I'd bet a pretty penny that you will never see an F-22 or F-35 strapping EFTs when the mission involves confronting a credible air defense. AA refueling will be used instead.
Correct
Unlike other aircraft, F-35's and F-22 have more options to skip the bags and go it alone.
Gonna be interesting once they introduce buddy refueling to the F-35.
You burn a lot of fuel climbing 10 miles into the sky in a 25 ton jet. Tankers don't need to be very far from the airfield or carrier to significantly extend the range of a tactical jet.
Also the air is much thinner at 50,000 feet.
Didnt know that. It does make a lot of sense however. Guess a lot of it is all about momentum.
Also, everything that I've read says that the current F-35s being delivered can only hold two long range air-air missiles (can't currently carry short range "dog fighting" missiles) and two bombs and it will be many years before this is rectified. Supposedly the cannon isn't accurate either due to the drag created by opening the gun door causing the aircraft to move slightly. Is it just me or does this seem like a seriously limited combat loadout?
There are also issues with the sensor fusion technology that forces pilots to turn off some of the sensors so they don't see "ghost targets" yet we are taking delivery of the aircraft in this condition? I mean I really want to see the F-35 be a serious badass but why the hell would we be buying gimped up planes that we are going to have to pay to have "upgraded" to what they are supposed to be in the future?
Edit: Oh yeah, they currently require civilian contractors to be deployed with them because of some maintenance software bullshit that takes a day per jet to setup. So if you deploy 10 jets it will take 10 days before they are all operational.
I think you need to find new sources.
I could have sworn that correct info and explanation were posted earlier in this thread.
Edit: Oh yeah, they currently require civilian contractors to be deployed with them because of some maintenance software bullshit that takes a day per jet to setup. So if you deploy 10 jets it will take 10 days before they are all operational.
I was just searching around and the info on the AAMs is a little confusing. Currently the F-35 can carry 4 AMRAAMs internally. That will go up to six in a later block update (early 2020s). They can carry AIM-9x, but only externally because it is a rail launched missile. (It would probably not be difficult to develop a drop version, but it would need to be funded, which doesn't seem too likely right now).
4 AAMs is fine. How often do fighters exhaust their AAM stores these days? It's rare to shoot more than one missile. The days of epic air battles around long bomber formations are gone.
I think you need to find new sources.
I could have sworn that correct info and explanation were posted earlier in this thread.