Big talk from a pilot-gone-con-man.
As mentioned in the article, there are no credible results of operational test. Also, there is no complete, functional F-35 with go to war systems.
I am curious what the pilot-gone-con-man thinks the F-35 is capable of bombing? CAS? No ROVER. High end threats? Like the "4th-gens" he mentions, not survivable.
The F-35 is too expensive to own and operate for non-high-end threats and too weak to take on emerging threats.
8 comments:
You would have to wonder how his professional links would be in the future.
I saw the "IN FOCUS: Lockheed claims F-35 kinematics ‘better than or equal to’ Typhoon or Super Hornet" article, it's a joke.
My way of thinking is "Stay well away from inferior and useless American made products such as the F-35/Super Hornet/Growler".
As mentioned before the best replacement for the Legacy F/A-18A/B models is either the mixed fleet of Su-35S Super Flanker-E and Su-34 Fullback, or Australian specialized F-15E+ development program... the F-15AU.
Have a look at this website folks
http://www.newaustralia.net/defence.html
Well if anyone is qualified to make an informed comparison it would be someone like Flynn who has flown just about every Western 4th Gen fighter including advanced TVC variants.
That doesn't make his analysis correct just more plausible.
To Another Peter...
With all respect, that site's proposal is a few years old and probably needs a refreshing too.
While the SU-35S and SU-34 are truly amazing wonders of aerospace development and capabilities, that alone unfortunately cannot qualify them as a plausible list of F-35 alternatives for the RAAF.
Sad as it is, the post-cold-war geopolitical situation has not yet ended it's potential for competing geo-strategies at the govt level, and thus is still up in the air and uncertain in terms of potential future intentions and any ultimate agenda.
What is needed then, is arguably a negotiated 'Yalta II' (Final end to Cold War) type arrangement and global multi-lateral code of conduct and agreement.
Until then therefor, it's unfortunately arguable that even such marketing of highly capable and fine Sukhoi or Mig combat jets to a 'western' Air Force could come with strategic uncertain unknowns, at least until such a future 'final settlement' so to speak, is achieved.
Personally though, fwiw, I'd actually propose a future J-15 for RAAF over even the Su-35S, if going radical 'alternative'. Probably more reliable deal and with better strategic and regional-stability-in-mind viability.
So short of that, I'd concur with your F-15AU proposal. Either that or a medium-term 'stopgap' LEASE until the next-gen Korean stealth fighter is available on market for evaluation, or possibly the proposed FA-XX.
For a more detailed version of what is in the Flight Global article go to:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-f-35s-air-to-air-capability-controversy-05089/
BTW, note what the Super Hornet pilot says about the Super’s high angle of attack.
"Well if anyone is qualified to make an informed comparison it would be someone like Flynn who has flown just about every Western 4th Gen fighter including advanced TVC variants.
That doesn't make his analysis correct just more plausible."
From what I have observed, he never lets his ignorance keep him from babbling on pointlessly. Or, he is acting like a con-man.
Both Australia and Canada need to get on the F-15 band wagon. There is no reason why the modern F-15 of today can not be the equivalent on the Su27 to Su35 modernization. In fact a number of the current initiatives with the F-15 program are already on this road. Both Aus and Can have their own expertise and local aerospace firms that can specialize the plane for the environment.
The F-35 is a welfare program for junk. The latest Super Hornet, with the latest upgrades or proposals is a decent plane but not top notch enough to take on high end threats, nor does it have the range it needs for countries with a large land mass and frontier.
Post a Comment