Single engine. The navy doesn't want a small single engine plane, it wants big dual-engine fighters. If you lose that single engine, you're in big trouble.
The total order of F-35Bs and Cs is 680 aircraft. It's pretty clear they don't mind a single engined plane. Besides, F-16 aircraft powered by the PW F100-229 have not had a single engine related loss. The -229 was developed from the F119, which the F135 was also developed from. F110-129 have only had a couple of losses.
Just because it happens one or twice in peacetime, and maybe once from combat damage, doesn't mean it's relevant. It is not.
Small payload. Internal, but very small.
In full stealth, clean, package, it is small. However, that is designed for first day of the war missions. When you add crap to the outside you can conceivably have 14 air to air missiles. When JDRADM enters service, the internal payload will go up dramatically, as will internal Air to air loadout at BLOCK 5.
Lack of cannon on some types.
Hang an external one on it? The Harrier uses external cannons.
Stealth is a plus, the the Raptor is stealthy, and even that has been 'killed' by a Super Hornet.
Well all legacy aircraft such as the F-16, F-15, and even the F-18 have killed the F-22. You know, in situations where the red force has already lost a few hundred aircraft to the F-22. Or, in situations where the Red forces can respawn, and outnumber the F-22 2 - 1 WVR? Those kind of situations? Much like the single engine, just because it may happen a couple of times, doesn't mean it's relevant. It isn't.
Not saying it is invincible, newer radar technology such as bistatic systems, low frequency radar, and datalinks will help detect sheath. But it truely is a massive advantage and is one of the things that separates 4.5th Generation with 5th Generation; it truly changes how we fight.
And then there's export. Any other countries buying the F-35 will most likely have to deal with degraded stealth and whatnot. Along with that, the software can only be upgraded by sending the plane back to the factory, because the countries can't get the key for it.
Actually, there is little to no evidence that JSF partners will have degraded aircraft. It has only been said they will get a 'different' version of the JSF. This could include anti - tampering technology, or perhaps, like in the Norway JSF, a parachute. Why do we have to update the software? What we do need, however, is a way to configure the sensor suite. Given the Norway JSF briefing included a 'Surveillance Mission', I presume it will.
Great plane, but not necessary IMO...
Problem is, something really needs to replace our legacy aircraft. They're grounded or falling from the sky.
Problem with B-2 is the cost. US$44.75 billion. That, for 21 airplanes that have an average mission capable rate of 45%, tells me the moment the number of aircraft was cut to 21, the whole programme should of been cancelled.
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06141.pdfLast edited by Slotback on Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
by machineman9 » Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:46 am 
