Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

This couldn't wait. The person involved was described as an amateur, but many spies start that way. What worries me from that industry source comment and that I'd like to ask them is, what are there feelings about a professional spy? Well you'll just have to read the article to see what I'm talking about. I promise you the "journey" will be worth it for what this spy plan involved.

Sourced from DID...
http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...ions/85695920/

Have a great "what ever" today.

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

What else is new?
Half the time during the Cold War the Kremlin knew what was in the pipes for new equipment before US field commanders did.

But being the rabid [insert the proper term for a female canine here] that I am ... I still think spies should be shot as tradition dictates.

[MarkSheppard]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Half the time during the Cold War the Kremlin knew what was in the pipes for new equipment before US field commanders did

I know this is slightly off-topic, but each year, the Soviet Embassy would go to the US GPO and buy all the budget documents, discussion documents, etc published each year by the US Government through the GPO and then fly them out to the USSR, where they'd be analyzed.

You can learn a lot from the UNCLASS versions the GPO makes available.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I've posted on this situation with both sources and "my humble opinion" as not necessarily towards the USMC and USAF directly but, the measures required by these branches of the military to maintain they're respective air fleets due to the various delays and cost overruns of the F-35. These issues are exasperated due to not being able to retire platforms, having to maintain those same platforms, training costs for pilots, maintenance crews and beyond maintenance issues the modernization of some of these same platforms. And maybe lives.

For instance, there would be no F/A-18 E/F "SUPER HORNET" series if not for the delay of the F-35C. In fact the USN is forced into buying more "SUPER HORNETS" as noted below. The UK might've rethought their position on at least selling their GR.7/9 HARRIERS to the USMC for their use as spares for the AV-8B II PLUS HARRIERS had they known 1) These delays would be ongoing and 2) They were stuck in having to proceed in completing both QUEEN ELIZABETH Class carriers which was not known at the time they retired their HARRIERS.
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com...-flying-02816/

The planes that have truly benefited from this come from the USAF. In the shorter term that would be the A-10 with (They also brought some out of the boneyard as well due to OP TEMPO.) refurbished airframes and upgraded electronics suite to enhance both offensive and defensive capabilities.
http://www.airforce-technology.com/n...grades-4928602

In the medium term the F-16 later current versions have seen extensive and ongoing life extension programs to cover all noted for the A-10 and beyond. The long term winner I think some of you have figured out, of course, is the F-22 it has everything done as already mentioned and so much more especially related to the "complete package" directly related to the development of the F-35 program. It'll be flying to at least ~2040.

So back to the CORPS problem, of keeping flying and maintaining OP TEMPO and spending money that could have an impact on either their land programs or long term F-35B buys depending on how long these delays keep going on. Here's your story...
http://breakingdefense.com/2016/03/m...how-bad-is-it/
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/stor...ower/81974498/
https://news.usni.org/2016/05/26/nav...surge-air-wing
http://www.janes.com/article/61166/u...capability-gap
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-ne...s-marine-corps
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/mar...id=mailsignout


Economics will always drive military decisions whether in terms of money or, in our world slots.

Some of these planes will yet to be presented for inclusion here.

Regards,
Pat

[shahadi]

A stealthy fighter/bomber only as long as the ammo stores are internal. Once those bomb doors open it is no longer stealthy. If it flies in CAS with external stores, and as I understand, with a reduced load as compared to the A-10, at least in the F-35B it is far from what the money bought.

The many variants of the F-16 are doing fighter/bomber and CAS roles just fine for the many Armed services around the globe.

I just hope they did not take away money from Navy medical to help fund this budget whale.

====

Sourced: http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/not...-wa-1730583428

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

Economics will always drive military decisions whether in terms of money or, in our world slots.

Always does.
I not-so-fondly remember taking up collections among the unmarried folks so the married ones could pay their rent/eat during the Carter years budget shenanigans.

Originally Posted by shahadi

A stealthy fighter/bomber only as long as the ammo stores are internal. Once those bomb doors open it is no longer stealthy. If it flies in CAS with external stores, and as I understand, with a reduced load as compared to the A-10, at least in the F-35B it is far from what the money bought.

The thing folks keep forgetting is the idea is the initial bombing missions with drastically reduced internal stores are to allow opposition air defense capabilities to be neutralized/reduced. After this has happened they can fly with full external stores, and be just as stealthy as say an F-16, because they no longer have to worry (near as much) about high-tech air defense weapons. Sure there will still be non-radar directed AA guns and MPADS and other heat seeking stuff but F-16s currently face that now and manage to still do their job.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

I warn you in advance the below is a very in depth analysis, the topic covers the broad range of issues concerning the RN/RAF use of the F-35, HARRIERS and the F/A-18A/G SUPER HORNETS. Also it covers Carrier Ops, coordinated Air Ops, Carriers (QE Class.) and weapons. These are a series of memorandums from Commander "Sharkey" Ward, DSC, AFC, RN, considered by many as "Father of HARRIER Ops" as sent to MOD and MP's. There are date tabs on the upper Left corner to guide you. To read this you must go to the bottom document and read down again and so on to the top of the ref. The time period covers March - June 2013. I'm only 3 or 4 in myself and find it very enlightening that parallels some of the issues we face here as well.
He has an excellent book out I read back around '95 while on patrol and just received a new hard bound ed. for my birthday just recently on HARRIER Ops during the Falklands War, its development and RN/RAF lack of understanding of it's operational capabilities along with inter services rivalries. Some might find it a interesting read though a little technical in the beginning.
Anyway here you go "Good Luck and Good Hunting"...
http://sharkeysworld2.blogspot.com/?view=classic

Regards,
Pat

[shahadi]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Always does.
I not-so-fondly remember taking up collections among the unmarried folks so the married ones could pay their rent/eat during the Carter years budget shenanigans.

The thing folks keep forgetting is the idea is the initial bombing missions with drastically reduced internal stores are to allow opposition air defense capabilities to be neutralized/reduced. After this has happened they can fly with full external stores, and be just as stealthy as say an F-16, because they no longer have to worry (near as much) about high-tech air defense weapons. Sure there will still be non-radar directed AA guns and MPADS and other heat seeking stuff but F-16s currently face that now and manage to still do their job.

Interesting. Bomb doors is misleading as the F-35 will carry air-air missiles internally as well. In fact, to retain stealth the bird must pack it's stores internally. Point here is that when the pilot opens the Weapons doors to let loose an air-air she's painted a tango. Even the gun is internal on the JSF.

In the game, I use jets although they are more eye candy than game "impactors." I can do more with attack helicopters than jets. Well a USV is handy too.

It was the former president of the United States Eisenhower that warned of a military-industrial complex in 1961.

[MarkSheppard]

From another board; possible initial IOC of CHINESE Y-20 HEAVY TRANSPORT

Following the latest rumour, the first two serial Y-20s were handed over to the PLAAF in a ceremony and are numbered 11051 and 11053 !

If true these numbers would indicate the 12th Regiment of the 4th Division Transport in Chengdu/Qionglai, a former/current Y-7 unit:

Following these reports, the Y-20 entered indeed service today and a ceremony was held at the CFTE. Another rehearsal was also held in Qionglai. There is a high probability that there will be another ceremony and media coverage tomorrow.

Hopefully more later,
Deino

[Suhiir]

Frankly I have to wonder about several of his comments and conclusions.

"The Air Marshal does not appear to understand that the decks of U.S. Navy and US Marine Corps carriers are up to 4 inches thick - whereas our new carrier decks are less than 1 inch thick - and even with its superior deck thickness, the USS Wasp F35B STOVL embarkation demonstrated a need for deck reinforcement."
Since when does the USMC operate any ships at all? The US Army has ships, I thing even the USAF has a few. And 4 inch thick flight decks? Not on anything built post WW II.

"May I draw your attention to the statements given by your witnesses concerning air defence of the carriers without the Crow’s Nest or any other AEW capability. Contrary to your witnesses statements our Daring class destroyers cannot provide long range early warning of threats approaching at very low level such as sea skimming missiles and their launch platforms. The destroyers have a horizon-limited detection range against low level incoming threats of approximately 23 nautical miles which is insufficient to provide adequate reaction time against a missile attack."
Since when do picket ships operate directly on top of what they are protecting? The picket is likely to be 15-20 NM from the carrier giveing the carrier apx. twice as much reaction time.

Amidst much obfuscation, your witnesses endeavoured to persuade your Committee that the choice of the F35B STOVL aircraft for our new carriers is driven by the need to attain an early ‘initial operating capability’ at reasonable cost. It is quite extraordinary therefore that neither Members of your Committee nor any of the witnesses raised the issue of the far more cost and operationally effective options for our carrier air groups – the F18 Super Hornet, Super Growler and Hawkeye aircraft:
I don't believe the flight deck on the Queen Elizabeth is large enough to handle any of the above aircraft.

So perhaps you'll excuse me if I take everything in there with a large dose of salt.