Military Notebook: Military Discussions

[Armynia]

Re: Military Notebook: Military Discussions

Բաղրամյանի անվան հրաձգարանում հետ է մղվել պայմանական հակառակորդի գրոհը

[Armynia]

Re: Military Notebook: Military Discussions

[Armynia]

Re: Military Notebook: Military Discussions

[Armynia]

Re: Military Notebook: Military Discussions



















[img][/img]

[Armynia]

Re: Military Notebook: Military Discussions

[Armynia]

Re: Military Notebook: Military Discussions

It's all going to this?

[Armynia]

Re: Military Notebook: Military Discussions

A Solution to America's F-35 Nightmare: Why Not Build More F-22s?
http://www.nationalinterest.org/blog...re-f-22s-13858









America’s F-35 clearly has its share of problems. Such challenges only compound the U.S. Air Force’s real dilemma: not having enough dedicated air superiority fighters as potential competitors like Russia and China beef up their own capabilities. The problem stems from the fact that the Air Force’s Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor fleet was terminated after only 187 aircraft were built–less than half of the 381 jets the service needed as a bare minimum.



Indeed, the Raptor has proven to be a formidable warplane with its unique combination of stealth, speed, maneuverability, altitude and sensors. It’s simply the best air superiority fighter the United States has ever produced and it was a foolish, shortsighted decision to end its production run prematurely.

But while many within the Air Force would dearly love to see the Raptor back in production, it is not likely to happen. The first problem is that while Lockheed and the Air Force supposedly made every effort to carefully squirrel away the tooling and instructions for building the F-22, problems have emerged when maintenance crews have attempted to pull the equipment in order to repair damaged jets.

One recently retired Air Force official with direct knowledge about the service’s efforts to repair two damaged Raptors said that they faced severe difficulties with retrieving the correct tooling. In one example, Air Force maintainers needed to build a particular component from scratch to replace a severely damaged part for an F-22. The crews went into the Conex boxes where the tooling and instructions to build the part were allegedly stored, but to their considerable surprise and aggravation, the container was empty. The same pattern repeated itself several times—and as of the last time the source checked–the issue remains unresolved. The bottom line is that even if the Air Force wanted to, it may not be physically possible to restart the line—at least not without a huge additional investment in time and money.


The second factor to consider is that the Raptor’s avionics were dated even before the jet was declared operational in December 2005. While the Raptor is the most advanced operational warplane in the Air Force’s inventory, its computer architecture dates back to the early 1990s. The core processors run at 25MHz–since it took so long to get the jet from the design phase to production. Moreover, the Raptor’s software is particularly obtuse and difficult to upgrade–which is partly why integrating the AIM-9X and AIM-120D missiles onto the aircraft has been so problematic. The jet’s avionics would have to be completely revamped for a production restart, not just because they’re obsolete, but also because the jet’s antique processors and other components haven’t been made in decades. That would be a very expensive proposition at a time when the Air Force’s budgets are shrinking.

The third factor to consider is that the basic F-22 airframe design originates from the 1980s. The Raptor, as of this year, has been in service for a decade. The technology is old—stealth, propulsion, avionics and airframe design have come a long way since the F-22 was designed. If the Air Force were to invest several tens of billions of dollars into an aircraft, it has to ensure that those technologies are still relevant to threats decades from now. By 2035, the Raptor will have been in service for 30 years—most of its systems would be hopelessly obsolete by then.

The reality is that the Air Force likely will never restart the Raptor production line. The technology is dated and the jet may not be relevant to the threat environment past the 2030s–especially if one considers that PAK-FA and J-20 are both around the corner. The Air Force has already started laying the groundwork for a next generation air superiority capability it is calling the F-X. We don’t yet know how it will shape up, but it will surely be designed to fight the threats of tomorrow.

[Armynia]

Re: Military Notebook: Military Discussions

Russia's Lethal Stealth PAK-FA T-50 Fighter: High Hopes, Big Price Tag
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...opes-big-13718










Reports in the Russian media, if accurate, have made a bold claim: Moscow’s PAK-FA T-50 fighter could be much closer to joining Russia’s air force than many expected. However, economic pressures and technological challenges could be a big bottleneck to the program going forward.

In an article by Russia Today, it was reported that “in 2016 the Russian Air Force will get ready to put the first production models of the stealth fighter jet into service.”



RT added: “All weapons and technical innovation in design for the PAK-FA are promised to be ready by 2020, which, among others, will include 12 types of missiles alone, six of which are to be ready by 2017. Some of the PAK-FA missiles will be hypersonic, with most designed specially to fit into fighter’s inner bays so as not to interfere with its stealth characteristics.”

Many in Western circles feel the advanced fifth-generation fighter could be quite capable and a big upgrade for Russia’s air force.

“The analysis that I have seen on the PAK-FA indicates a pretty sophisticated design that is at least equal to, and some have said even superior to U.S. fifth-generation aircraft,” former U.S. Air Force intelligence chief Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula told TNI back in December of last year. “It certainly has greater agility with its combination of thrust vectoring, all moving tail surfaces, and excellent aerodynamic design, than does the F-35.”

Others who are in the know also agree the jet could prove quite sophisticated, rivaling the best Western fighter jets.

“Performance-wise it certainly looks to compete with the Raptor,” one senior military official with extensive experience on U.S. fifth-generation fighters told TNI, also back in December.

But Can Russia Afford It?:

While the PAK-FA certainly has potential, the biggest challenge—just like with the American F-22 and F-35 fifth-generation fighter programs—seems to be cost.


Several months ago, Russia cut its initial order from over fifty planes to just twelve. The most likely reasons for such a move? Western sanctions that are taking a big bite out of the Russian economy along with low oil prices.

Yuri Borisov, Russia’s deputy defense minister for armaments, explained back in March that “Given the new economic conditions, the original plans may have to be adjusted.” He noted that “It is better to have the PAK FA kept as a reserve, and later move forward, while squeezing everything possible for now out of the 4+ generation fighters.”

And Just How Good Will the “Tech” Be?

While cost will be a factor, there is also the question of how strongly Russia can put together one of the big advantages the F-35 seems to hold: sensor and data fusion, along with advanced avionics.

“The real question is can the Russians achieve the same degree of data fusion and networking capabilities of the F-22A and F-35—right now I’d put my money on the U.S. and our allies in that regard,” Deptula explained to TNI in December.

When it comes to the question of avionics, an industry source told TNI the PAK-FA is closer to a Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet or F-16E/F Block 60 than an F-22 or F-35. “Some may claim that the PAK-FA is a 5th gen. fighter, but it's more of a 4.5 gen. fighter by U.S. standards,” the industry official said.

[Armynia]

Re: Military Notebook: Military Discussions

[Eddo211]

Re: Military Notebook: Military Discussions

One more difference between the two is the vertical trust variable exhaust system on F-35 which illuminates the need to land on an aircraft carrier.....it can now land on smaller ships and enemy land with no need for runway.