Aircraft Super Thread Mk.VII

[Chronocidal]

I think one of the biggest source of setbacks the F-35 has dealt with is that it's essentially a tech demonstrator that got pushed into full scale development and production. Where you can sometimes make a new aircraft, and fill it with tried-and-true hardware, or upgrade an old airframe with new hardware and capabilities, the F-35 is going for broke. It's an entirely new airframe full of hardware that's never been deployed in combat on any aircraft. So yeah, it's going to have massive growing pains.

As far as it being an Air Force vs Navy thing.. the numbers they're purchasing are telling. Dunno if they're up to date, but the Wikipedia listing puts the USAF as buying almost 1800 of them, while the Navy is aiming at less than 300. Granted, that's probably partially due to the Navy having other things to focus on (and less places to put them).

But think about this.. when was the last time Lockheed Martin built a navy fighter? The closest thing I can find is basically the S-3 Viking, which had most of the carrier specific features designed by LTV, since Lockheed didn't have carrier aircraft experience. Barring that, they haven't made a carrier-based aircraft since the navalized T-33 in the late 1950s. They just don't have a history with the Navy, and I think that's made the process of developing something the Navy wants pretty difficult.

Edited March 21, 2015 by Chronocidal

[Shadow]

1800 just comes off as staggering for what was basically a tech demonstrator as mentioned. Rather cut the number of orders down and put it to speeding up the upgrade process to the F-22 fleet while increasing the size of the fleet to 240-280. As I also mentioned, adopting the Block 60 F-16 could be a good stopgap aswell.

[hutch]

1800 just comes off as staggering for what was basically a tech demonstrator as mentioned. Rather cut the number of orders down and put it to speeding up the upgrade process to the F-22 fleet while increasing the size of the fleet to 240-280. As I also mentioned, adopting the Block 60 F-16 could be a good stopgap aswell.

UAE owns the Block 60.

[F-ZeroOne]

There aren't going to be any more F-22s. Its just not going to happen, the same way the F-14 is gone. If we're (by which I mean, us who like fly-y/shooty/carry-y things) really lucky, the "sixth generation" fighter might be based on it or the YF-23 (more likely, all that development). And this is the thing with the F-35; like it or lump it, its pretty much the only game in town.

Chronocidal, you make a good point about the F-35. To a certain degree, its probably no wonder its had issues, and its certainly been ambitious. And the more ambitious the aircraft, the more trouble is likely to pop up during the programme. Incidentally, I'm reminded that the F-15 was originally supposed to be Mach 3 capable like the Foxbat...

[miles316]

I thought LockMart/Gov preserved all the Tooling for the F-22 and documented extensively the all the proseses involves into the assembaly of the F-22 prior to the end of the F-22 production.

Un like during Dick Cheney tenure as Defence Sec who ordered all the F-14 tooling destroyed.

[Shadow]

Hmm, I hadn't known the UAE had exclusive rights to the Block 60.

About the F-22s tooling, I've read that aswell. Personally, I still think it has a chance to see a production line again. Depending on if the situation calls for it or simply depending on the defense goals of a future administration.

I've also read that the AIM-120D was supposed to start getting fielded by the Navy last year with Air Force getting the missile in 2017. Not sure if this has come about.

Edited March 22, 2015 by Shadow

[F-ZeroOne]

I think I overstated my case a little (I'd forgotten about the tooling and meant to ask if the F-22 tooling was still around); I think what I meant is that I don't think we'll see a F-22 as is now, but something that may use a similar airframe but with improved avionics etc and that it won't be called a F-22, because twenty-year old designs aren't sexy enough for the marketing and P.R. people.

[mickyg]

I can't believe the F-22 is 20 years old now. That's just nuts...

[hutch]

I thought LockMart/Gov preserved all the Tooling for the F-22 and documented extensively the all the proseses involves into the assembaly of the F-22 prior to the end of the F-22 production.

Un like during Dick Cheney tenure as Defence Sec who ordered all the F-14 tooling destroyed.

They did that, reportedly, because they didn't want any spare parts from junk yards ending up in Iran prolonging the life of their F-14 program. There's really no chance of that happening with the F-22...

[raptormesh]

I can't believe the F-22 is 20 years old now. That's just nuts...

20 year old design but operationally only 10 years old as the IOC was back in 2005. That said, I get what you meant.

[Shadow]

The YF-23 is 25 years old. If you displayed it at an airshow, most people would probably think it was a brand new design.

Edited March 24, 2015 by Shadow

[Knight26]

The YF-23 is 25 years old. If you displayed it at an airshow, most people would probably think it was a brand new design.

And Northrup has revealed that they plan to use it as the basis of their 6th gen fighter.

[F-ZeroOne]

If it doesn't win this time, I think I'm going to take up trainspotting.

[F-ZeroOne]

The US military is looking into the development of new engines, for the 2022 timeframe, intended for use with its fighters. They're hoping for a 35% increase in fuel consumption efficiency. Obviously this isn't a hard and fast figure but it would be interesting to see what that will mean for the F-35B, which is always getting stick for having a lower fuel payload than the other variants...

[David Hingtgen]

And Northrup has revealed that they plan to use it as the basis of their 6th gen fighter.

Light or heavy fighter? (I personally hope for super-heavy, but Northrop has traditionally gone small---the YF-23 is an oddity for them, size-wise)

[Vifam7]

Light or heavy fighter? (I personally hope for super-heavy, but Northrop has traditionally gone small---the YF-23 is an oddity for them, size-wise)

Well, Northrop does have Grumman now so...maybe their next fighter will be a big cat of some kind?

[F-ZeroOne]

Oh, can you imagine the forums if its gets named "Tomcat II"...

[renegadeleader1]

Anybody know where I can get an old school flight cap with goggles like Marco from Porco Rosso wears? Preferably before next friday?

[dizman]

Anybody know where I can get an old school flight cap with goggles like Marco from Porco Rosso wears? Preferably before next friday?

A quick search brought up this site http://www.uswings.com/product-category/accessories/caps-and-hats/snoopy-cap-and-goggles/

I've never bought from them but they are in Ohio so you could probably have them by friday.

[F-ZeroOne]

The A-10 is so hard, its the personal aeroplane of Chuck Norris...

http://defensetech.org/2015/03/23/chuck-norris-writes-to-save-the-a-10-warthog-from-retirement/

[miles316]

The A-10 is so hard, its the personal aeroplane of Chuck Norris...

http://defensetech.org/2015/03/23/chuck-norris-writes-to-save-the-a-10-warthog-from-retirement/

Their has been a giant pissing contes betweed Defence Hawk over the A-10 and F-35 for some time on Defence Tech.org.

[Scyla]

I just read about the shocking news about the Germanwings aircraft crash where they assume that the co-pilot crashed the plane on purpose killing 149 people and himself. I also was shocked to discover that there was no policy in place to prevent that a person could lock himself in the cockpit. On top of that I learned that pilots don't have to attend a psychological screening on a regular basis.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32063587

Can anyone explain to me why there aren't such policies mandatory for pilots. I know this is different on US based carriers so any input appreciated.

[F-ZeroOne]

Psychological screening appears to be on a company-by-company basis, some of the reports I've seen indicate that Lufthansa at least do undertake such screening. The cockpit locking appears to be the result of terrorism fears; presumably it works the way it does so that one member of the crew can't be coerced by threats of violence to another member of crew to open the door (or, for example, by forcing the person on the outside of the cockpit to give up the entry code).

Edit: possibly its worth pointing out that such incidents are rare; one report I heard the other day stated that one of this type of Airbus involved in the incident takes off from an airport worldwide every twenty seconds.

Edited March 26, 2015 by F-ZeroOne

[miles316]

Is their any requlations on how many people have to be in the Cockpit I have been watching CNN coverage they have been talking about when pilots can leave the cocpit inflight?

Edited March 26, 2015 by miles316

[Scyla]

Yeah I get why the door security system is in place. What I don't get is why it is not mandatory to have two people in the cockpit all the time. I think it is common practice for US carriers to have one of the cabin crew in the cockpit when one of the pilots has to go to the restroom.

Maybe they didn't thought this scenario would be possible. I couldn't believe the news myself the first time I heard them.

[sketchley]

Yeah I get why the door security system is in place. What I don't get is why it is not mandatory to have two people in the cockpit all the time.

That's starting to become mandatory with some carriers. Again, it's on a company basis, and not an industry-wide measure.

[Sildani]

That'll soon change. News reports say the various European countries will require having two persons in the cockpit at all times, and that will go into effect damn quick.

[renegadeleader1]

Curious question for those in the know, but how effective are today's stealth and countermeasures against a typical missile today? Is it possible that in the near future something like the laser anti missile system be developed for fighters that render them obsolete?

I ask because while working on my air combat in anime panel I started to wonder if advances in technology could render the long range missile shot obsolete and bring about a return to "classical dogfighting" and air combat manuvers.

I'm also wondering about drones. I read all this stuff about how they can stay in the air longer, do manuevers a manned plane can't because a human can't handle them, and how they are the wave of the future.

I personally am not impressed since I know even with the high technology there is still lag time issues, and the signal encrypted or not can still be interupted. Its not a real big issue when bombing durka durka's driving around in toyota pickup's, but what about a more advanced country closer in technology rolling with modern ECM?

The only thing I see as a game changer would be a full A.I. computer pilot system that, but that's decades away.

[miles316]

Curious question for those in the know, but how effective are today's stealth and countermeasures against a typical missile today? Is it possible that in the near future something like the laser anti missile system be developed for fighters that render them obsolete?

I ask because while working on my air combat in anime panel I started to wonder if advances in technology could render the long range missile shot obsolete and bring about a return to "classical dogfighting" and air combat manuvers.

I'm also wondering about drones. I read all this stuff about how they can stay in the air longer, do manuevers a manned plane can't because a human can't handle them, and how they are the wave of the future.

I personally am not impressed since I know even with the high technology there is still lag time issues, and the signal encrypted or not can still be interupted. Its not a real big issue when bombing durka durka's driving around in toyota pickup's, but what about a more advanced country closer in technology rolling with modern ECM?

The only thing I see as a game changer would be a full A.I. computer pilot system that, but that's decades away.

Given the limitations of Data/Sat links it might be a long time before UCAV that can out manuver a F-22 become common place. A Artificial Intelegence might nulify the Low weight benefits of being a unmaned plane.

[Sildani]

As for lasers, I forsee that when truly effective and cheap-ish AAA lasers become a reality, the warplane as we know it will become almost instantly obsolete. No airplane can evade a beam of light, and if the laser can target the aircraft it can instantly punch a good-sized hole in it. No, it can't handle BVR, but in today's combat environment, area denial is the name of the game, and a AAA laser could deny a good 2-3 mile radius or perhaps more. The same laser would be quite effective at killing missiles, I think, depending on if its targeting system is quick and discerning enough. Compound this problem by a factor of five, if not more, if such a laser system becomes man-portable.

At that point, aircraft may well become BVR stand-off weapon platforms for stealthy ordnance. We'll see, I doubt a laser to my specs becomes a reality for 10-15 years yet.

[Shadow]

I've thought that aswell in regards to laser air defense systems. Shortrange platforms like the SA-15 and SA-22 are already capable of knocking out some types of incoming AG missiles.

Edited April 1, 2015 by Shadow

[ErikElvis]

The anti-aircraft laser thing is kinda scary. I foresee that becoming a reality far before true ghost planes. So where's that bring us back to? Loads of Soldiers on the ground I guess.

[F-ZeroOne]

There have been reports that at least one U.S. company, possibly Lockheed-Martin, has been looking into producing a small missile that can be mounted on fighter planes and used to intercept incoming anti-aircraft missiles.

It will be interesting to see if railguns will wind up competing with or complimenting laser systems.

[Vifam7]

As for lasers, I forsee that when truly effective and cheap-ish AAA lasers become a reality, the warplane as we know it will become almost instantly obsolete. No airplane can evade a beam of light, and if the laser can target the aircraft it can instantly punch a good-sized hole in it. No, it can't handle BVR, but in today's combat environment, area denial is the name of the game, and a AAA laser could deny a good 2-3 mile radius or perhaps more. The same laser would be quite effective at killing missiles, I think, depending on if its targeting system is quick and discerning enough. Compound this problem by a factor of five, if not more, if such a laser system becomes man-portable.

At that point, aircraft may well become BVR stand-off weapon platforms for stealthy ordnance. We'll see, I doubt a laser to my specs becomes a reality for 10-15 years yet.

A weakpoint of any such system would likely be the searching/tracking/guidance radars. A reason why stealth could become even more important.

Another weakpoint may be the power source. Probably not a problem aboard a ship but may be more difficult to deploy on land.

Also, by the time such systems are deployed, countermeasures would also likely be developed.

[electric indigo]

Let's see how far we'll get against lasers with large scale drone/cruise missile swarms.