What's new

The U.S. Air Force Just Admitted The F-35 Stealth Fighter Has Failed - Forbes

Goritoes

FULL MEMBER
Jan 20, 2021
980
-2
1,356
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Yes and Etri and Asgard as well. :tup:
PAF = GOTG
Pakistani's don't even live close to Israel and they travel all the way to Syria to fight the Jews, Just imagine for a second if they are living next door to Pakistan, LOL Israel would never ever become what it is today unless US like always comes to its rescue and send Pakistan back to stone age using its Military might, Israel on its own is no match for Pakistan, even if Pakistan is militarily/economically devastated all it takes 1-3 nukes and the holy land is radiated for generations to come, no one will live there :)
Massive ground force invasion :D
Pakistan destroyed the USSR by using American/Arab money, back in the day Arabs have honorable leadership and would love to fund Pakistan to fight Jews.
 

That Guy

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 29, 2013
11,601
39
14,618
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
First off, the USAF didn't admit to anything.

Second, David Axe has always been a joke.
 

untitled

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 13, 2008
7,099
2
6,696
Country
Pakistan
Location
Australia
The difference is 4 to 5 times, a ramjet missile will go 4-5 times further than a solid fueled missile of the same size. The reason is simple the ramjet missile carries fuel, warhead and sensor. The solid fuel missile carries fuel, oxidizer, warhead and sensor. The oxidizer occupies the bulk of the internal volume of the missile.
Do you think the Meteor outranges the AMRAAM-D?
 

LeGenD

MODERATOR
Aug 28, 2006
11,755
62
13,450
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
actually that further strengthens my point...not just the missile, but their entire network or radars are piss poorly maintained to where it couldn't even identify a friend from a foe. and there is lousy training of the Syrian military personnell.
I do not get you honestly.

On one hand, you are asserting that Syrian A2/AD assets are poorly maintained and manned.

On the other hand, you are touting that Syrian A2/AD assets were able to detect, track and engage a target as sophisticated and elusive as an F-35.

Seriously, bro? Make up your mind. You cannot have leaps of logic like these and have a convincing argument.

Something for you to digest: https://breakingdefense.com/2020/06...-strikes-against-syria-raise-s-400-questions/
 

GumNaam

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 23, 2016
10,100
-2
13,196
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
I do not get you honestly.

On one hand, you are asserting that Syrian A2/AD assets are poorly maintained and manned.

On the other hand, you are touting that Syrian A2/AD assets were able to detect, track and engage a target as sophisticated and elusive as an F-35.

Seriously, bro? Make up your mind. You cannot have leaps of logic like these and have a convincing argument.

Something for you to digest: https://breakingdefense.com/2020/06...-strikes-against-syria-raise-s-400-questions/
uhm...please read the comments section of that article regarding the validity of that article...
 

LeGenD

MODERATOR
Aug 28, 2006
11,755
62
13,450
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
uhm...please read the comments section of that article regarding the validity of that article...
Oh dear.




Numerous reports are independently verifiable.

REPEAT

On one hand, you are asserting that Syrian A2/AD assets are poorly maintained and manned.

On the other hand, you are touting that Syrian A2/AD assets were able to detect, track and engage a target as sophisticated and elusive as an F-35.

Make up your mind.
 

GumNaam

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 23, 2016
10,100
-2
13,196
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Oh dear.




Numerous reports are independently verifiable.

REPEAT

On one hand, you are asserting that Syrian A2/AD assets are poorly maintained and manned.

On the other hand, you are touting that Syrian A2/AD assets were able to detect, track and engage a target as sophisticated and elusive as an F-35.

Make up your mind.
you talk as if air defence systems are plug & play little to no emphasis on equipment maintenance & competence of the personnel operating it. detecting stealth is not a big deal, L band radars WILL detect stealth aircrafts which the s300 batteries use. but simply having one radar up won't do the job, it's gotta be a network of radars manned by all trained personnel who are well trained in both maintaining the equipment & well versed in the art of air defense against all sorts of air attacks. it is literally simple as that. don't know why is it so hard for you to grasp? now I'm not defending the russian s300s & s400s, I've always maintained that they are selling false senses of security with a hefty price tag & that trump made a total fool outta the russian air defence systems. but the Syrians have always blamed their incompetence on faulty equipment be it tanks missiles, air crafts, etc while never acknowledging their short comings nor making any effort to properly train their military personnel due to a deep sense of over confidence. you gotta admit that much.
 

LeGenD

MODERATOR
Aug 28, 2006
11,755
62
13,450
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
you talk as if air defence systems are plug & play little to no emphasis on equipment maintenance & competence of the personnel operating it. detecting stealth is not a big deal, L band radars WILL detect stealth aircrafts which the s300 batteries use. but simply having one radar up won't do the job, it's gotta be a network of radars manned by all trained personnel who are well trained in both maintaining the equipment & well versed in the art of air defense against all sorts of air attacks. it is literally simple as that. don't know why is it so hard for you to grasp? now I'm not defending the russian s300s & s400s, I've always maintained that they are selling false senses of security with a hefty price tag & that trump made a total fool outta the russian air defence systems. but the Syrians have always blamed their incompetence on faulty equipment be it tanks missiles, air crafts, etc while never acknowledging their short comings nor making any effort to properly train their military personnel due to a deep sense of over confidence. you gotta admit that much.
Let me assure you that I do not believe in picture-perfect weapons and picture-perfect soldiers in reality. Machines are to be improved over time and soldiers are not infallible either (humans after all).

I can see your point as well.

But I wouldn't say that Syrians are aloof to ground realities and incompetent across the board. They had good things to say about the Chinese JY-27 radar system for instance, and got it rebuilt. Therefore, . Good products make their mark everywhere.

F-35 are not flown in isolation either - two at a time at minimum. And there might be additional assets in the mix in a sortie because these jets can facilitate other weapon systems in doing their job as well. Defeating this kind of force is a challenge for even the best equipped force in the world, let alone Syrian.
 

GumNaam

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 23, 2016
10,100
-2
13,196
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Let me assure you that I do not believe in picture-perfect weapons and picture-perfect soldiers in reality. Machines are to be improved over time and soldiers are not infallible either (humans after all).

I can see your point as well.

But I wouldn't say that Syrians are aloof to ground realities and incompetent across the board. They had good things to say about the Chinese JY-27 radar system for instance, and got it rebuilt. Therefore, . Good products make their mark everywhere.

F-35 are not flown in isolation either - two at a time at minimum. And there might be additional assets in the mix in a sortie because these jets can facilitate other weapon systems in doing their job as well. Defeating this kind of force is a challenge for even the best equipped force in the world, let alone Syrian.
I'm sure the isreali f35s fly under the cover of their f16 & f15s. they can't carry big payload inside & big payload outside will make maneuvering difficult & stealth impossible. having said that, my point is that it is not an undefeatable system but defeating it will require thinking outta the box while the Syrians don't even bother thinking properly inside the box. I was their in ksA during the first gulf war in the late 80s & 90s when the Syrians sent their army, even their rifles were rusty & very poorly maintained. everyone including the saudis & the americans were like 🤦‍♂️ at the quality of their personnel & equipment so it's no surprise to me that one of their L band radars managed to pick the f35 up but the s200 was so poorly maintained that the warhead (which itself has a shelf life & requires meticulous maintenance) failed to donate & just scratched the f35 which must've been maneuvering to get away in the first place...result? it goes back come with a broken nose & a damaged ego instead of getting killed & the isrealis understandably label it as a bird hit but without releasing any pictures. why would they announce that their newly inducted stealth plane nearly got killed by a missile from the 60s? now, do we know for sure? no. but is it highly likely? yes. what is highly unlikely is that around the same time they conducted an attack with the f35s during which the Syrians making a claim of hitting one of the f35s, another f35 gets hit by a bird. hard to believe. pretty obvious that the isrealis covered that interception up.
 

LeGenD

MODERATOR
Aug 28, 2006
11,755
62
13,450
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I'm sure the isreali f35s fly under the cover of their f16 & f15s. they can't carry big payload inside & big payload outside will make maneuvering difficult & stealth impossible. having said that, my point is that it is not an undefeatable system but defeating it will require thinking outta the box while the Syrians don't even bother thinking properly inside the box. I was their in ksA during the first gulf war in the late 80s & 90s when the Syrians sent their army, even their rifles were rusty & very poorly maintained. everyone including the saudis & the americans were like 🤦‍♂️ at the quality of their personnel & equipment so it's no surprise to me that one of their L band radars managed to pick the f35 up but the s200 was so poorly maintained that the warhead (which itself has a shelf life & requires meticulous maintenance) failed to donate & just scratched the f35 which must've been maneuvering to get away in the first place...result? it goes back come with a broken nose & a damaged ego instead of getting killed & the isrealis understandably label it as a bird hit but without releasing any pictures. why would they announce that their newly inducted stealth plane nearly got killed by a missile from the 60s? now, do we know for sure? no. but is it highly likely? yes. what is highly unlikely is that around the same time they conducted an attack with the f35s during which the Syrians making a claim of hitting one of the f35s, another f35 gets hit by a bird. hard to believe. pretty obvious that the isrealis covered that interception up.
Look, I respect your experience and opinion, and I believe in your account of Syrian equipment lacking in quality in the First Gulf War. This is something that is independently verifiable as well. I can see where you are coming from but I do have following contentions.

1. It is for the best to not take that S-200 vs. F-35 account seriously. There are too many loopholes in this account to be taken seriously. If this was real, Russia would have capitalized on this development to its advantage to maximum effect. These are the type of incidents that cannot be concealed for long.

Virtually no SAM system is a Fire-and-Forget munition in true sense. There is a reason why these munitions are programmed to take cues from the parent sensor system (command guidance), and some are programmed to take cues from multiple sensor systems (IMAD). F-35 is not absolutely invisible to some of the most powerful radar systems in the world but securing a sustained lock on it from considerable distance sound fishy as well.

The F-35 will know that it is under lock and will illuminate the source of lock for the pilot to decide his course of action on immediate basis. You need to understand the 'situational awareness' aspect of F-35 while talking about this aircraft in general. The S-200 missile is also too massive to not kill a jet fighter at the point of contact irrespective of the warhead used (WE have been through this before).



2. In regards to condition of Syrian defenses in the present, situation is different now. Russians are there in Syria and providing all manner of assistance to them to make sure that Syrian A2/AD assets are operational and not short on munitions. Relevant statistics are rather surprising - over 1000 SAM expended - to engage Israeli jet fighters up to a period of time (Russians are really generous it seems).

3. Syrians are not the only ones to complain about Russian hardware; Armenians are also disappointed.

Now I do not take Russians for granted and I am sure that they are very powerful and dangerous entity. But up against NATO?
 

flameboard

FULL MEMBER
Sep 6, 2010
1,431
0
751
Clean sheet design means more money for defence industry. A pragmatic approach would be the F-16s because the ones being built today are already enhanced to surpass the product of 2001.

The alternative is to licence build the JF-17 Block 3 :P
 

GumNaam

ELITE MEMBER
Sep 23, 2016
10,100
-2
13,196
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Look, I respect your experience and opinion, and I believe in your account of Syrian equipment lacking in quality in the First Gulf War. This is something that is independently verifiable as well. I can see where you are coming from but I do have following contentions.

1. It is for the best to not take that S-200 vs. F-35 account seriously. There are too many loopholes in this account to be taken seriously. If this was real, Russia would have capitalized on this development to its advantage to maximum effect. These are the type of incidents that cannot be concealed for long.

Virtually no SAM system is a Fire-and-Forget munition in true sense. There is a reason why these munitions are programmed to take cues from the parent sensor system (command guidance), and some are programmed to take cues from multiple sensor systems (IMAD). F-35 is not absolutely invisible to some of the most powerful radar systems in the world but securing a sustained lock on it from considerable distance sound fishy as well.

The F-35 will know that it is under lock and will illuminate the source of lock for the pilot to decide his course of action on immediate basis. You need to understand the 'situational awareness' aspect of F-35 while talking about this aircraft in general. The S-200 missile is also too massive to not kill a jet fighter at the point of contact irrespective of the warhead used (WE have been through this before).



2. In regards to condition of Syrian defenses in the present, situation is different now. Russians are there in Syria and providing all manner of assistance to them to make sure that Syrian A2/AD assets are operational and not short on munitions. Relevant statistics are rather surprising - over 1000 SAM expended - to engage Israeli jet fighters up to a period of time (Russians are really generous it seems).

3. Syrians are not the only ones to complain about Russian hardware; Armenians are also disappointed.

Now I do not take Russians for granted and I am sure that they are very powerful and dangerous entity. But up against NATO?
acha chalo, I'll put my point across in a different way, maybe my point of view is wrong & you can show me where I'm wrong. I'll ask a few questions, tell me if you agree:

1. the f35's primary aim is to create total situational awareness of the contested theater from relatively safe distance because of all the sensors it is proliferated with, do you agree?

2. even the u.s. admits that the heat/ir/thermal signature is almost impossible to mask so best to create an aircraft that can manage everything & attack or facilitate the attack of air & ground targets without being in the range of ir guided or thermal guided weapon systems, do you agree?

3. the u.s. also admits that it is impossible to be stealthy against all bands of radars so it is best to be stealthy against radar bands that can pose a direct threat in combat so the radar networks on L band can see the aircraft all they want from afar, because they'll not be able to reach it let alone kill it, do you agree?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom