F-35 racked up a 28:1 kill ratio at recent Red Flag exercises

[MastanKhan]

28:1 means that 2 divisions of enemy strength was decimated---.

Many a top tier pilots were possibly dead---and that would mean extreme fear in the enemy camp---.

Enemy pilots demoralized---possibly not fit to fight anymore---.

Hi,

A division of army is considered destroyed when about 20% fatalities occur

 

[gambit]

NATO militaries have strange training practices

Strange to China? Yes. But not to US. Too bad for China.

There are many LEVELS of 'war games', or exercises.

As I am Air Force, I will speak from the USAF perspective. The most common is 'operational readiness inspection' (ORI).

Mission Readiness: Operational Readiness Inspection set for early '11 > Malmstrom Air Force Base > Display

Basically, this exercise test a wing's capabilities to execute its assigned mission. No wing is identical to another. You cannot test an air refueling wing the same as a fighter wing.

Beyond the ORI is where the 'real' tests begins. One test is to see if a wing is capable to handling a numerically superior force, and the best way to do that is allow the 'Red' force unlimited resources, aka 'regeneration'. This is called a 'stressor' factor.

Another stressor is attrition or losses. Once, I was in a truck filled with pilots and maintainers heading out for the day's sorties. An exercise inspector stopped the truck when we were in the middle of a taxiway. He put a red card on the windshield, signifying we were virtually 'killed'. Now the squadron is out a few pilots and crewchiefs. Not only that, we were not allowed to move the truck, simulating a wreck in the runway system that also blocks aircraft ground traffic. But the squadron still have to meet the takeoff time. This made the squadron outnumbered by the Red Force even though no regeneration occurred.

Being 'killed' this way is not as glamorous as being 'killed' in the air, but the question and result is still critical, that how able is the squadron/wing when under pressures. The exercise inspectors can 'kill' a fuel truck, a bomb assembly area, or even the chow hall. All of these do not make it into the news like how a ship or tank was 'killed' in an exercise. But these simulated 'losses' reveals weaknesses and flaws in ways that many do not expect.

The PLA do not have a record of realistic exercises, as leaked reports revealed. Your exercises are geared more towards propaganda purposes. Too bad for you.

 

[Goritoes]

Strange to China? Yes. But not to US. Too bad for China.

There are many LEVELS of 'war games', or exercises.

As I am Air Force, I will speak from the USAF perspective. The most common is 'operational readiness inspection' (ORI).

Mission Readiness: Operational Readiness Inspection set for early '11 > Malmstrom Air Force Base > Display

Basically, this exercise test a wing's capabilities to execute its assigned mission. No wing is identical to another. You cannot test an air refueling wing the same as a fighter wing.

Beyond the ORI is where the 'real' tests begins. One test is to see if a wing is capable to handling a numerically superior force, and the best way to do that is allow the 'Red' force unlimited resources, aka 'regeneration'. This is called a 'stressor' factor.

Another stressor is attrition or losses. Once, I was in a truck filled with pilots and maintainers heading out for the day's sorties. An exercise inspector stopped the truck when we were in the middle of a taxiway. He put a red card on the windshield, signifying we were virtually 'killed'. Now the squadron is out a few pilots and crewchiefs. Not only that, we were not allowed to move the truck, simulating a wreck in the runway system that also blocks aircraft ground traffic. But the squadron still have to meet the takeoff time. This made the squadron outnumbered by the Red Force even though no regeneration occurred.

Being 'killed' this way is not as glamorous as being 'killed' in the air, but the question and result is still critical, that how able is the squadron/wing when under pressures. The exercise inspectors can 'kill' a fuel truck, a bomb assembly area, or even the chow hall. All of these do not make it into the news like how a ship or tank was 'killed' in an exercise. But these simulated 'losses' reveals weaknesses and flaws in ways that many do not expect.

The PLA do not have a record of realistic exercises, as leaked reports revealed. Your exercises are geared more towards propaganda purposes. Too bad for you.

I once read in a article long ago, that F-16's in its latest block can ( if it manages to survive BVR ) take down F-35 in a dog fight or close combat, is it true?

 

[PurAzamBaHadaf]

I once read in a article long ago, that F-16's in its latest block can ( if it manages to survive BVR ) take down F-35 in a dog fight or close combat, is it true?

This is what I’d like to know as well. I’ve seen quite a few pilots claim F16 is one of the best dogfighting jets and the design of F35 isn’t ideal for dogfights. It’s BVR capability makes it superior but in a dogfight it’s more about the manoeuvrability?

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

I think Americans should bring F-35 to China to exercise against J-20. @gambit

 

[White and Green with M/S]

I think Americans should bring F-35 to China to exercise against J-20. @gambit

Don't be so stupid, its impossible for both countries, if both countries bring F35/J20 to faceoff each other, so they will give their secrets to their enemy, i mean their kinematic performances etc etc

I think Americans should bring F-35 to China to exercise against J-20. @gambit

Don't be so stupid, its impossible for both countries, if both countries bring F35/J20 to faceoff each other, so they will give their secrets to their enemy, i mean their kinematic performances etc etc

 

[Marker]

Strange to China? Yes. But not to US. Too bad for China.

There are many LEVELS of 'war games', or exercises.

As I am Air Force, I will speak from the USAF perspective. The most common is 'operational readiness inspection' (ORI).

Mission Readiness: Operational Readiness Inspection set for early '11 > Malmstrom Air Force Base > Display

Basically, this exercise test a wing's capabilities to execute its assigned mission. No wing is identical to another. You cannot test an air refueling wing the same as a fighter wing.

Beyond the ORI is where the 'real' tests begins. One test is to see if a wing is capable to handling a numerically superior force, and the best way to do that is allow the 'Red' force unlimited resources, aka 'regeneration'. This is called a 'stressor' factor.

Another stressor is attrition or losses. Once, I was in a truck filled with pilots and maintainers heading out for the day's sorties. An exercise inspector stopped the truck when we were in the middle of a taxiway. He put a red card on the windshield, signifying we were virtually 'killed'. Now the squadron is out a few pilots and crewchiefs. Not only that, we were not allowed to move the truck, simulating a wreck in the runway system that also blocks aircraft ground traffic. But the squadron still have to meet the takeoff time. This made the squadron outnumbered by the Red Force even though no regeneration occurred.

Being 'killed' this way is not as glamorous as being 'killed' in the air, but the question and result is still critical, that how able is the squadron/wing when under pressures. The exercise inspectors can 'kill' a fuel truck, a bomb assembly area, or even the chow hall. All of these do not make it into the news like how a ship or tank was 'killed' in an exercise. But these simulated 'losses' reveals weaknesses and flaws in ways that many do not expect.

The PLA do not have a record of realistic exercises, as leaked reports revealed. Your exercises are geared more towards propaganda purposes. Too bad for you.

I am definitely sure that other AFs and their allied services also do similar or somewhat more intense exercises including nuclear or bio attack.

Usually details, outcomes, lessons and revisions in SOPs are not being discussed in public.

Fighting forces need to prepare for unforeseen and un-anticipated destruction. Sometimes these disadvantages can be effectively used through deception and surprise.

The war game parameters are very important. F-35, a 5th gen stealth aircraft being pitched against 4 or 4+ gen aircraft, has already a huge advantage. Boasting that it scored 28:1 kills do not impress me. However, I will definitely appreciate the pilot who achieved success against F-35.

Air to air simulated campaigns with limited ground or air support against an adversary, loaded with most modern radar, ew sensors, and lethal weapons, is always a real challenge.

Good air tacticians knows how to turn the tides using the inferior fly ing machines against the most modern weapons systems.

Example: PAF Mirages taking down US aircraft carrier and PAF F-6s taking down F-15s during various exercises.