« Source Watch: Wheeler on Defense Budget | Main | Talkin C-17 Blues »

March 07, 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c8e7153ef00d834fb9f4653ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The F-35B Strikes Back (Part 2):

Comments

Bob Ehling

Return comments below [in brackets]. Cheers.

Do you really think that it's anything like an equalizer?

[I don't know. I've been told viffing gave the Harrier an edge at low altitude engagements against our own aircraft (F-16s, etc.) and Soviet aircraft (simulated) in past exercises.

The lift fan theoretically gives the F-35 a similar capacity to turn tighter for a missile shot. It might boost the roll rate as well.

Remember that they wargame these platforms in the digital domain well before they bend metal.

Your concerns are valid; the F-35 may be less than it's cracked up to be. It may be more. As a taxpayer, I'm hoping for the latter. As an American, I'm expecting a little of both.]

that day is still a long, long way away. By the time the death rays are ready for service, there will be a new generation of aircraft better suited for a weapon of that kind.

[Directed energy weapons might not be as far away as you think. If they aren't, we want to get there before or the same time as everyone else. They may portend a true revolution in military affairs.

What "new generation of aircraft" are you referring to? UAVs? If so, note that the F-35 is already under consideration as an unmanned platform.]

Is that risk extreme enough to deserve such a costly mitigation strategy?

[I don't know. You can also ask the converse: can we afford not to mitigate the risk?

My impression is that a lot of our defense establishment looks to past American failures to keep pace with trends in world aircraft design -- i.e., WW I and II, and Korea -- and are motivated not to repeat those mistakes. Does that mean we now tend to overmitigate? Possibly.

The matter doesn't seem to be subject to easy proof or resolution, except by an exchange of opinion, like we're doing here, or maybe taking a vote. At this stage in the voting process, it looks like the F-35's moving ahead, despite your perfectly rational concerns.]

Bill Sweetman

Two points: the Harrier can VIFF (although it drains energy) because it can simply rotate its nozzles down. F-35B won't because it has to engage a clutch and open doors that aren't designed for high speeds.
Also, if you have a DE weapon on a fighter, it is different because it can fire full-envelope in any direction. So if the weapon works you don't need agility - you want speed and stealth.

Jordan Retro 8

Just as the saying goes that you are never too old to learn. I believe it. At first keeping reading all the way can enrich our leisure and knowledge. We can learn a lot from reading. Do you think so?

Creative Recreation

Your webpage content is specifically what I necessary, I like your blog, I sincerely wish your website can be a rapid enhance in visitors, I will help you market your blog and glimpse forward for your web page continually updated and turned into even more towards the additional rich and colorful.Welcome to visit my web http://www.sneakers4sales.com

Bryan

Keep this up! Gotta say I love reading your articles. Thanks

The comments to this entry are closed.