Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

[DRG]

Thanks everyone. Because of space limitations in the OB I have added that as a new weapon to one F-22

This site has some good info

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-SDB.html

The SDB I will be most effective in the urban and broader close air support, battlefield interdiction, Destruction of Enemy Air Defences (DEAD) lethal suppression and counter-air strike airfield attack roles. Against soft skinned vehicles and structures, armour, point emplacements, runways, aircraft shelters and SAM/SPAAG systems this weapon will be highly lethal.

Where the SDB I will be less than effective is against deep / hardened bunkers, large infrastructure targets, large buildings, industrial plant, bridges, large trench systems, vehicle parks, infantry on the move and other area or large point targets. These remain the domain of larger specialised bunker busting weapons, or large explosive bombs such as the Mk.83/BLU-110 (1,000 lb), Mk.84/BLU-117/BLU-119 (2,000 lb), BLU-109/116/118 (2,000 lb), BLU-113/122 (5,000 lb).

So this is not designed as a tank buster. ......... but the Raytheon GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb II *IS* but it won't be ready until at least 2017

The design objectives for the GBU-53/B are quite different from those for the GBU-39/B. The GBU-39/B is a weapon optimised for fixed targets, especially hardened infrastructure and basing, whereas the GBU-53/B is intended for attacks on moving battlefield targets, especially vehicles and heavy armour. In the simplest of terms the GBU-53/B is a glidebomb equivalent to the AGM-65 Maverick missile, but with a more flexible and countermeasures resistant seeker.

So in game terms don't expect the -39 to be an uber tank killer. That's not what it's for but it will give increased stand off ability

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don glad you found this site! Yes the AUSA site is excellent!! I hope you aerial "jocks" would give it a look. I used the site for the S-400 TRUMF (In a sepreate thread.) submission years ago before I had the SPA/SPAA Thread going and am tracking the S-500 on it as well now. I see technical data not seen elsewhere along with system pictures before there there are system pictures if you catch my meaning. They also have a very respectable weapons database. This is a highly respected think tank that focuses only on air and air defence systems.
I leave you with an abstact based on their technical analysis of the jets involved. Note: As I've posted in the "news" portion in of this thread elsewhere, technically speaking the F-22 is much improved since this abstract was written. It has seen minor (Because that's all that was needed.) inprovements in avionics and major updates electronically (F-35 suite has been/is being installed as posted here as well.).
Enjoy the abstract and have a great weekend!!
PAK-FA vs the F-22 and F-35...
http://ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-300309-1.html

Regards,
Pat

[Imp]

Nice site Pat & they confirm what I have read elsewhere that the F-35 has some huge issues. Cant take on Russia or China

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well here's some more food for thought taking all emotion out of it between the F-22 and F-35. Why is it we're devoting all this time and effort into the F-35, and then turning around and selling it to about ten other countries. Granted we will not give up all the "Bells and Whistles" to the export market but if this fighter is so good in the first place, why are we selling it at all? When nobody will be buying the F-22 or even getting the opportunity to even get close to one to evaluate it. Hmmm, makes one wonder doesn't it? I can produce articles that reflect the true desire of Japan and Korea (Both should one happen land there in whole or pieces in N. Korea.) that they would prefer the F-22 especially facing the growing Chinese percived (Being politically correct here. ) threat to the region. And before someone says something I did post in this thread that the F-22 did deploy to Okinawa, UAE and S. Korea awhile back. Back to F-35; the USMC needs it since the HARRIERS will need a replacement in about 15yrs. and maybe the USN whose fighter fleet is also "getting long in the teeth" but, I'm not so sure about the USAF who afterall are getting RESET F-22 fighters now anyway as posted already.
The deployment issue has always been there for a variety of reasons, but it (F-22) did finally happen as shown below.
http://www.xairforces.net/newsd.asp?newsid=196&newst=8
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/us-ste...ry?id=16227614
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/31/world/...22s/index.html

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Since this is going to be a factor in this area I would think by next year and that this weapon and program caused some rework over the last couple of years I'm posting the ref for FYI purposes only. Basically the USA (And other countries now.) has rethought the role of the APKWS II for use with the APACHE AH-64D helo based on the mission successes experienced by the USMC in combat in Afghanistan. Also the USAF/USMC had stepped up it's testing program (2013) as well with fixed wing aircraft. The live fire exercises are complete. The rocket due to modifications made on it to resist high altitude and speed operations is designated as the APKWS FW it was mounted on the aircraft in a 7 rocket pod. Aircraft used were the A-10C THUNDERBOLT II, F-16 and AT-6 turboprop for the USAF. Of course for the CORPS the A/V 8B HARRIER II was used. Again this is only for FYI but important as it is coming very soon.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...d-phase-02193/

Why the DID site? Note info/status blocks (New this year.) to the right of info provided in each article segment-for me it makes the verification issues easier to check. At bottom are other sources (Which was why DEFPRO was so good.) used to support the current article. Combined with the source articles the reference base grows exponentially-and that's what I'm all about here.

Patch Update
MBT fixes from last year corrected now. Will have a couple of new MBTs, date changes and deletions also. Don also you did such a beautiful job on the Aussie M1A1 camo could use one from their M113AS4 APCs in for the same time period. This is not your standard M113A3. I have a detailed write up in one of the Australian Threads already which I'll use for submission. Quick ref here as well.
http://www.military-today.com/apc/m113as4.htm
Note: Cover pic shows "older/original" camo scheme.

See pics below for paint and game use as well if bored. Yeah that was a stupid comment!!!!



Under the right conditions they might just (Thread word ALERT!!) fly-who knows!?! Anyway have others if you don't see one you like. Presented ones with tanks because that is their SOP for their units.

Hate to "cross threads" but am very tired and had a long day at the "office" and I get to do it again in <9hrs-sorry.

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

could use one from their M113AS4 APCs in for the same time period.

already done 6 months ago........

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Should've known you would've gotten ahead on that Icon as well. To the AUSCAMO M1A1 Icon go the the MBT Thread Pg. 27 Post 264. Proceeding posts back to page 26 provide the background.

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Back on topic...
Steve has just sent me his Christmas and New Year wishes for me and the family in a way only he can. Yeah he was flying with his SQD. again and as CINCLANTHOME noted "how depressing that must've been for him!!" As he's let me post his pictures here before (And in the game also. Thanks Don.) and given the season I'm taking the liberty to post his Holiday card here as well. So since he knows I'm active in this area-I'll simply say from Steve and us to you and yours, however you celebrate the season, Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!!

Enjoy the card!! I couldn't think of a better Wingman!?!


Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I wouldn't normally post something like this, however, due to the nature of the topic and it's ramifications to several OOB's in the game the CBS Network "60 Minutes" will be doing a segment on the status and issues surrounding the F-35 Project. It will be on later today at 7pm EST. For non TV viewing options you can go to CBS.com or 60minutes.com and it should be availible Monday morning EST.
I still think by the games current calendar only the U.S. will have it. Another European country this past week is having to reduce it's current order by at least a third to a half of projected due to economic reasons. Other countries have already reduced their orders for the same reason. For every potential plane lost to reduced orders will increase the cost of the rest of the planes to be built. Sequestration is still alive and well in the U.S. DOD however some minor relief was granted in the budget vote taken just before or just after the holidays on the two year budget deal approved in the U.S.
Concerning the joint Russian/Indian PAK FA/T-50, Russian sources are indicating it should be operational by late 2016. However I've come across several reports to indicate not all is well with this project ethier. Pulling all the information together I have seen mid to late 2018 probaly is more realistic at present.
Many are still holding to the idea that both the F-22 and PAK-FA/T-50 are comparable and nullify each other. But most agree they are both better then the F-35. Chinas plane has already been found to be a "paper tiger" however they are working hard to catch up but are still several years behind everyone else. Of interest to watch will be Malaysia, S. Korea and Japan which will probaly develop a 5th Gen fighter jointly, the ground work has already been laid for this.
Have been tracking these for years now with posts in this thread. That's the update I figured I better do this with the info advert above.

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

From what I've seen the major issue with the F-35 is apparently the airframe is developing cracks. And that's a BIG problem.
You may want to check if the Royal Navy is cutting back their order. I know they were counting on the F-35B (jump jet variant) to replace their Harriers.