First_dual_F_35C_aerial_refueling

WASHINGTON: The American who leads the leading edge of our sword in the Pacific — the Air Force — worries that China‘s sometimes “aggressive approach” in using its fighters, bombers and ships to signal its territorial claims across the Pacific creates “the potential” for a serious incident in the region.

But Air Force Gen. Herb “Hawk” Carlisle carefully calibrated his response, praising the “professionalism” of the pilots engaged in the cat and mouse game across the Pacific. Carlisle also pointed to China’s recent consolidation of its maritime law enforcement agencies, who used to labor under five different organizations, as a positive sign. Command and control appears to be improving as a result of moving four agencies into the State Oceanic Administration.

But the United States and its allies are clearly working well together to remind China that it faces enormous power and cannot act unilaterally without cost. The latest American fighters and bombers will be deployed in an arc from Japan to India, lacing across all of China’s maritime regions, Carlisle made clear.

America’s most capable all-around air weapon, the F-35, will be deployed first in the Pacific once it achieves Initial Operating Capability (IOC), Carlisle said. Air Force F-35s probably will head to four bases: Misawa, Japan; Kadena, Japan; Osan Air Base, Korea; and Kunsan Air Base, Korea. No final decision has been made but Carlisle made it pretty clear these bases fit the glove best.

In Australia, the U.S. Air Force plans to send “fighters, tankers and at some point in the future, maybe bombers on a rotational basis,” Carlisle said during a Defense Writers Group breakfast. They will operate near the Australian Air Force base at Darwin.

Singapore is buying F-35Bs. Other US fighters will fly from Korat air base in Thailand. And American aircraft may operate from Indonesia and Malaysia, and a base in India, Carlisle said.

Comments

  • TerryTee

    “America’s most capable all-around air weapon, the F-35, will be deployed first in the Pacific once it achieves Initial Operating Capability (IOC), Carlisle said.” when will that be 2025 ??? It still doesn’t have a “Helmet” that works, “Software” is YEARS behind schedule, still hasn’t landed on a Carrier yet. China will most likely be flying J-31’s off their carrier, and J-20’s from land bases before we can get the “Junk Strike Fighter” out into the Pacific.

    • Don Bacon

      IOW, don’t count your strike fighters before they’re hatched. “Hawk” Carlisle should appreciate that.

    • bridgebuilder78

      But don’t worry, we have two models of the LCS with which to fend off the Chinese, provided that you ignore the 200%+ budget overruns, structural cracks, rust problems, survivability rated no higher than a fleet oiler, generator outages, etc.

      Things are going swimmingly.

      • PolicyWonk

        Actually, the survivability of the LCS is *less* than a fleet oiler. Oilers are built to the level-2 survivability standard, while the LCS is built only to level-1 (the lowest navy standard there is).

        And by a small margin, the LCS is only just slightly better armed.

        • bridgebuilder78

          Ooops, rechecked and agree, LCS is ‘less’ survivable than a fleet oiler. Oh shit…

      • Jtjames2112

        The carrier battle group is an obsolete weapon. Anyone wonder why we have not sent carriers to Korea in the last decade or so? It’s called “Area Denial” boys and girls and North Korea invented it. Basically area denial is when you make a couple thousand just smart missiles, not the brilliant cutting edge stuff in U.S. Inventories but say two even three generations old now dirt cheap tech just smart enough to tell a carrier from a frigate and not be spoofed by the countermeasures most of the time. This way they fire 1000 or 1500 of these realitivy cheap and easily produced missles all targeted at the incomming carrier say 1500 miles from shore. The Aegis systems are fantastic, best in the world, and they claim they can kill 98%. Great! Fantastic! That means that only between 2000 to 4000 thousand pounds of high explosives detonate deep in the carriers hull where it stores it’s fuel and bombs bullets ect… That is exactly why no carriers have been sent to intimidate Norht Korea and now with China’s DF-21 ballistic anti-ship missle being deployed, a missle we admittedly have no defense against….we need to rethink things in a big way and possibly need to shift our focus as we did from the battleship at the beginning of War Two.

        • bridgebuilder78

          Very difficult to imagine a scenario against a peer competitor where our carriers can survive unscathed.

          In China’s case, the carriers best stay in eastern Pacific.

          • Jtjames2112

            Don’t forget that it was North Korea who invented “Area Denial”. By using hundreds and hundreds of cheap only smart anti ship med range missles (as opposed to the genius cutting edge missles like our block v tomahawk). Just like with PC’s if you buy one that is three or four steps behind cutting edge then it’s dirt cheap, same thing here. All they require is that it’s smart enough to tell a carrier from a frigate and to be able to defeat countermeasures and spoofs most of the time.
            Say we respond to a NK aggression by sending a battle group. A thousand or so miles from shore the NK’s fire say 1000 missle’s targeted at the carrier. The Arleigh Burkes get 99% of them, possibly even more, lets just say 99.9% even for fun even though I don’t think it could. That means only one humongous warhead burries itself deep into the carrier below the water line, where things like the aviation fuel, bombs, ammo, rockets, nuclear reactors and cooling systems are all at and store. At the absolute minimum the carrier would be combat ineffective and forced immediatly to return to port for emergency repairs. Most likly it would result in a massive explosion and sink, worst case a meltdown and major nuclear incident. If more than only one hits then there is no chance of its survival simply due to the massive size of the warhead itself.
            Remember when NK angered the world by actually testing a new medium range missle by firing it literally over the island of Japan? That was the missle in question here and by testing it in the way they did it was also a big warning to America, saying keep your carriers far away from here or you just might not get them back. Notice, even though there have been lots of incidents with NK since then that not one carrier group has been sent there to intimidate since that test? That is the reason why.

    • Jtjames2112

      Your 100% correct in what you posted but add the following to the overall strategic equation… The Chinese, in addition to their new J-31, which lets all be honest is a direct copy of the original F-22 which had greater payload and capability than the model we eventually fielded in order to reduce unit costs, are going to make far more than we did the F-22. In addition they are buying literally hundreds of Russian Su-31’s, and keep in mind that the Sukohi Su-30 smoked the U.S. Air Forces F-15 Eagle in war games between us and the less capable, not as well trained pilots of India’s Air Forces in 2004. By all accounts the Su-31 is a far better fighter than the earlier Su-30. Now factor in China’s new ballistic anti ship missle, guided even in its terminal phase by both optical and radar systems enabling it to accuray prosecute maneuvering ships at sea. Needless to say it is being called the anti carrier missle and we have no defense for it now and cannot hope for one for years to come. All of that to gather means that China will soon have the power to move into phase 3 of their 3 phase plan, as they publicaly claim to be deep into phase 2. Phase three is where they take Taiwan back via invasion and they remove the U.S. From the pacific all the way back to Hawaii in essance, again by force. They will soon have the power to do exactly that as our gov announces deep military cuts, most significant a reduction of naval force and ships at this critical time.
      I hate to say this but we will fully deserve what the Chinese will soon give to us in large quantities. How could they possibly view us as anything but stupid especially as they are being completly open and honest, announcing to the world and their own people in address after address, news article and interview after news article and interview, then backing their words by doing exactly what they said they were going to do, the entire time saying they are going to retake Taiwan through invasion and forcefully remove the U.S. Navy and U.S. influence from the western Pacific Ocean and they target the year 2020 to execute phase 3 and thus do so.

  • CharleyA

    “Singapore is buying F-35Bs.” Errr, haven’t seen that confirmed, now several months on after reporting back in March that the announcement was due “sometime in the next 10 days.” Perhaps something is afoot?

  • Don Bacon

    “[China’s] territorial claims across the Pacific” links to the Senkakus dispute with Japan, the islands being located in the East China Sea, not in the Pacific. In fact, China has made no territorial claims in, across, under or over the Pacific Ocean.

    • Curtis Conway

      Pedantic and argumentative. Any US forces most likely to address any problem in the region will most likely be based in the Western Pacific, or Australia. Few other locations to date have given firm permission to use their territory for these quantities of forces. A Carrier Strike Group (CSG) home ported in that region was to be at Perth Australia. That will not happen, and no new sites are yet available.

      • Don Bacon

        So you’re saying that it’s the U.S. making new additional territorial claims in the Pacific? Or what?

        • Curtis Conway

          We are not making claims on anything. But a guy that thinks just like you just expressed allowed me to be beaten nearly to death, while he and others stood by and watched. Love that Christian behavior. G-d put you here for a reason, and its not to let the strong take advantage of the weak, particularly when it is outside the law and international treaty.

      • Falconer375

        The placing of a CSG at Stirling Naval Base was only ever something floated by a US think tank I doubt that either government took the idea all that seriously Japan is much closer to any potential trouble in the region and as such is a better chose for a forward deployed force.

  • Don Bacon

    Lockheed has recently started the build on the 100th F-35, despite the fact that the Air Force has not yet tested any combat capability. Also:
    –To date, slightly more than 11 percent of development contract performance specifications have been verified as met and the development flight test program has cumulatively accomplished just over one-third of the test points and test flights planned.
    –Flight, ground, and lab testing has identified significant technical and structural concerns that, if not addressed, would substantially degrade the F-35’s capabilities and mission effectiveness.
    –Recent management actions to refocus software development activities and to implement improvement initiatives appear to be yielding benefits, but software will continue to be a very challenging and high risk undertaking for this program, especially for mission systems.
    –The F-35 needs 24 million lines of software to operate. That includes 10 million on the plane itself – three times more than the F-22, the Air Force’s hottest warplane, and six times more than the latest version of the F-18, the Navy’s best fighter.
    –The first four LRIP contracts over-ran their target costs, in total by $1.2 billion.
    –F-35 operating and support costs (O&S) are currently projected to be 60 percent higher than those of the existing aircraft it will replace.
    — mostly from the GAO Report

    • squidgod_the_unbannable_2.0

      Too big to fail. It’s the American way.

      • SS BdM Fuhress ‘Savannah

        Yes and we will probably be Pearl Harbored by the American way. I imagine China will take Pearl on the first round, won’t need to not do a 3rd round. Messing around with enemies with Nukes can end up being a total mess for all. You think the way this is going the Chinese had that NK dictator at the helm. We got our version of Rodman in the White House. Go out back Barack, shoot a little basketball. Wait for the message from Pearl or Hillary can knit a sweater for Bill as it happens.

        • PolicyWonk

          The National Intelligence Estimates don’t agree with your assessment – unless you’re referring to the previous incumbent of the White House…

          • Jtjames2112

            I don’t understand your comment except as a shot at Bush in support of Obama. Have to say that even for this lifelong republican Bush was a nightmare and might have even cost the country it’s future in this shift to combat terror at the cost of being able to prepare for true strategic threats. His Bush family Vandetta war was a national humiliation and stain, no real reason was given for iraq’s invasion just a continual recycling of the proven lies-like ties to Al Queda. Havering said that however, Obama is a horrible president and has done damage that will take decades to repair if it can be at all. I was honest about Bush why is it that democrats can never do the same?

      • Another Guest (from Australia)

        @ squidgod_the_unbannable_2.0

        The F-35 JSF (Joke Still Flying) is already a failed project of all time.

      • Jtjames2112

        That is one of the stupidest comments I’ve ever seen, let me guess you are of the new enlightend self entitled generation, star at blah blah elementary with shelves full of trophies for participation on teams where. No score was kept and everyone was a winner as long as you showed up.

  • PolicyWonk

    America’s most capable all-around air weapon, the F-35, will be deployed first in the Pacific once it achieves Initial Operating Capability (IOC)…

    ====================================================

    I can see the Chinese cringing over this one (before they burst into hysterical laughter). This would be great if the original mission profiles the F-35 has yet to meet are ever met. But that isn’t likely, since when the plane couldn’t meet its designed performance parameters, they simply changed them to parameters the plane *could* meet.

    The test results published at Aviation Week are not encouraging…

    Hence – the legend of the F-35 is growing in the fertilizer-filled minds of those who want to believe no one is paying attention.

  • brownie

    Great advice. Get rid of the F-35 and build more F-16s. Brilliant logic.

    • george

      Sorry. If you go down that road and you are a foreign power, the best plane would have to be a Eurofighter. Sad but true.

    • Franco

      Yes- the F35 should be immediately scrapped, and all the money being wasted diverted into other programs, like UAVs.

      If we’re really worried about China, the best defense or offense will be to flood the air space with cheap (compared to JSF) UAVs that are hard to find and can be easily and cheaply replaced.

      • From Mars

        The only problem with your strategy is that such semi-autonomous multi-role UAVs are not yet developed or ready to be procured.

        A fair interim stopgap measure would indeed be to buy ‘off the shelf'; e.g., F-16 or EuroFighter, etc..

        Obviously, UCAV will become a larger portion of the future overall Tactical mix once the designs are mature and proven.

    • Another Guest (from Australia)

      Another brilliant choice is to build more advanced F-15s too.

  • douzo

    Countries that carefully compare/contrast technologies are purchasing the F-35 over the competition, and spending billions to do it. I guess they have no clue what they’re doing and the internet commenters know it all….or maybe….nah.

    • george

      Soft power. That is why specifications sometimes get a back seat to American influence.

    • Don Bacon

      Yup — Netherlands recently took delivery on two — and parked ‘em. Other countries have tentatively stuck with the program, but with tight restrictions including periodic reviews (as in Italy).

      Technology is interesting — but most of it hasn’t been tested. There’s an assumption that it’ll work. Take it on faith. But faith has been proven not to work on machines like it works in religion. Beyond technology is cost. Countries have reduced their projected buys, and one reason they’re
      staying in at all is because the true cost figures haven’t come out yet.
      Reports on unit costs for Italy have ranged from $133m to $200m. This
      on a plane which was supposed to cost $65m.

      “My number-one concern is affordability,” said Air Force Lt. Gen. Christopher C. Bogdan, program executive officer of the Joint Strike Fighter. He said prime contractor Lockheed Martin Corp. and engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney have a five- to six-year window to bring costs down. (Which is the reason that cost is being covered up.)

      Another cost factor is O&S, which is actually the highest ingredient of program cost. F-35 operating and support costs (O&S) are currently projected to be 60 percent higher than those of the existing aircraft it will replace. The Pentagon guesses that it will cost a third more to run the F-35 than the aircraft it is replacing. Ashton Carter calls this “unacceptable and unaffordable”.

  • george

    Singapore has also made clear it will use controls to ensure that at least 60% of its citizens are ethnically Chinese. If push comes to shove can we still be sure we are welcome?

  • change

    Lots of nonsense from posters about the F-35 and China. F-35 is having similar PR wars as the F-15, F-16, F-22, C-5A, B-1B, B-2 and other non-fast mover aircraft. All so similar sky is falling rantings. F-35 will be a fine plane.
    As for China and its territorial desires, its true so far they have only claimed, according to Reuters, all of the South China Sea and islands of the Ryukyu’s, the Yellow Sea up to the Okhotsk’s. Lets not forget China’s bold claim to be an Arctic power as well.

    Anyone who thinks China’s maritime territorial claims are modest and limited hasn’t been paying attention. They have vast land based territorial claims as well.

    • Don Bacon

      I’m paying attention — clear up the “nonsense” and tell us what claims China has made “across the Pacific” and also some facts on China’s “vast land based territorial claims as well.”

      • Don Bacon

        tick, tock, tick, tock…

  • Don Bacon

    China Will Soon Face Arc Of US F-35s

    Gen. “Hoss” Cartwright
    It’s not just the legislative process that lags behind Moore’s Law, however: It’s also the traditional Pentagon procurement process. Consider the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the Pentagon’s largest acquisitions program, which is still trying to fix problems in the design. “I wrote the requirement for the F-35 in 1979,” said Cartwright. “We still haven’t fielded the first one into the fleet.”

    That was 34 years ago, and the plane is nowhere near its IOC.

    NOTE: The ancient Egyptians took less time — about 20–25 years — to complete the Great Pyramid at Giza.

  • Another Guest (from Australia)

    Calling the F-35 is most capable all-around air weapon is a total joke. It’s a “Fat Pregnant Pig”.

    The F-35 will be inadequate to deal with the anti-access & area denial high threat environment which has shown that the aircraft has a lot of limitations and it cannot do a lot of things as expected to show and promise that is a true fifth generation fighter, because it’ll never meet all the requirements of partner nations.

    The F-35 was defined during the mid-1990s to have “affordable” aerodynamic performance, stealth performance, sensor capabilities and weapons loads to be “affordably” effective against the most common threat systems of that era past – legacy Soviet Cold War era weapons, not for the 21st Century emerging anti-access & area denial high threats. The F-35 is designed primarily to support ground forces on the battlefield with some self defence capabilities and is not suitable for the developing regional environment and, not suitable for close air support missions. The aircraft is unsuited for air superiority, bomber and cruise missile defence due to limited range/endurance/agility, limited weapons load and limited supersonic speed. As its limitations are inherent to the design, they cannot be altered by incremental upgrades. The F-35 will be ineffective against the current generation of extremely powerful advanced Russian and Chinese systems, as detailed above; In any combat engagements between the F-35 and such threat systems, most or all F-35 aircraft will be rapidly lost to enemy fire.

    If you have the F-35s that just aren’t capable of dealing with the anti access & area denial threat zones, it just doesn’t do you any good of going ahead with the failed program and sink the money. Because the F-35 will be increasingly expensive aircraft that will fail the air defence program.

    “Why will the F-35 fail the requirement? It has the ability to penetrate heavily defended airspace and hold targets of interest at risk any time you want to. That’s what the F-35 can do because it’s stealthy”.

    Well unfortunately there’s absolutely no point of selecting the F-35 because some hostile nations could well be purchasing the Nebo M Mobile “Counter Stealth” Radar, advanced S-400 and S-500 SAM systems which will make the F-35 obsolete.

    If anyone wants to find out more about this counter stealth radar, here’s a description if you’re interested.

    Development initiated late 1990s leveraging experience in Nebo SVU VHF-Band AESA radar;

    2012-2013 IOC intended;

    Designed from the outset to detect stealth fighters and provide early warning and track data to missile batteries and fighters;

    The VHF component will provide a significant detection and tracking capability against fighter and UCAV sized stealth targets;

    High off-road capability permits placement well away from built up areas, enabling concealment;

    Rapid deploy and stow times permit evasion of air attacks by frequent movement, defeats cruise missiles like JASSM;

    Initial Nebo M builds for Russian Air Defence Forces, but expected like other “counter-stealth” radars to be marketed for global export to arbitrary clientele.

    The VHF band element in that radar will detect the F-35 at a distance of tens of miles. That is without a doubt. What that means is that the aircraft is going to be in great difficulty if it tries to deal with what I call a modern or contemporary threat. The same is also true when you deal with these newer stealth fighters, because they are designed to compete with the F-22. They fly higher; they are faster and more agile—much, much more agile. They have more powerful radars and much, much better antenna packages for other sensors. The F-35 is not meeting its specifications and its specifications are inadequate to deal with the changed environment.

    If the F-35 was to be able to meet its specifications, the aircraft will have the ability of going up against a 1980s Soviet air defence system of the type that we saw destroyed very effectively in Libya last year, the F-35 would be reasonably be effective in that environment, because these older Soviet radars would not see it.
    But if you are putting F-35 up against the newer generation of much, much more powerful Russian radars and some of the newer Chinese radars, the aircraft is quite detectable, especially from behind, the upper side and from the lower sides as well.

    Also F-35 will also be detected by the L-Band AESA. It is used for targetting which they’ll be able to track LO/VLO stealth planes such as the F-35 especially from behind, the upper side and from the lower sides as well. Unfortunately the exhaust nozzle of the F-35 will be extremely hot. The back end of the F-35 in full afterburner is something like 1600 degrees (Fahrenheit). In terms of temperature, aluminum combusts at 1100. You are talking about something really, really hot. If you have got a dirty big sensor on the front of your Su-35S or your PAK-FA or whatever, it lights up like Christmas lights and there is nothing you can do about it. And the plume, because of the symmetric exhaust, is all over the place. It is not shielded, it is not ducted in any useful way. The Sukhois will be able to seek and destroy the F-35 when using the heat seeking BVR AA-12 (R-77) Adder AAMs.

    The APG-81 AESA radar. The nose geometry of the F-35 limits the aperture of the radar. This makes the F-35 dependent on supporting AEW&C aircraft which are themselves vulnerable to long range anti-radiation missiles and jamming. Opposing Sukhoi aircraft have a massive radar aperture enabling them to detect and attack at an JSF long before the JSF can detect the Sukhoi. It has Medium Power Aperture (0) (Detection range around 140 – 150 nm at BVR)

    Compared to which other aircraft’s radar?

    The N011 Irbis-E (Snow Leopard) for the Su-35S Super Flanker-E

    NIIP claims a detection range for a closing 32.3 square feet (3 square metre) coaltitude target of 190 – 250 NMI (350-400 km), and the ability to detect a stealthy aircraft while closing 0.11 square feet (0.01 square metre) target at ~50 NMI (90 km). In Track While Scan (TWS) mode the radar can handle 30 targets simultaneously, and provide guidance for two simultaneous shots using a semi-active missile like the R-27 series, or eight simultaneous shots using an active missile like the RVV-AE/R-77 or ramjet RVV-AE-PD/R-77M.

    The PAK-FA will feature the N050 BRLS IRBIS AFAR/AESA?, similar to the Su-35S N011.
    * Frequency: X-Band (8 – 12 GHz)
    * Diameter: 2 ft 4 in (0.7 m)
    * Targets: 32 tracked, 8 engaged
    * Range: 250 nmi (400 km)
    EPR: 32.3 ft; (3 m): 86.3 nmi (160 km) and 0.11 sq.ft (0.01 sq.m) target at ~50 nmi (90 km)
    Azimuth: +/-70°, +90/-50°
    * Power: 4,000 W
    * Weight: 143 to 176 lb (65 to 80 kg)

    Again, the F-35 will be detectable from behind the fuselage, the upper side and from the lower sides as well, except for the front area, a conservative estimate for the frontal RCS of the F-35 would be 0.0015 square metre which is only stealthy in the front, this is what I call “Partial Stealth” which the F-35 does have. Because if the situation arises, the Sukhoi family of fighters, upcoming J-20 or J-60 can out-run, out-climb and out-manoeuvre, and be able to track the F-35 using L-band AESA, IRST sensor (from the upper and lower sides and aft fuselage) and launch their AAMs from any altitude at speed etc.

    The bad news is, with the changed environment the F-35 will be obsolete when the aircraft arrives in 2018 or later, the US as well the allies are armed with this aircraft will make their air power totally ineffective in the next 30 to 40 years. I’m complaining about Lockheed Martin lying and misleading to the military and the public what they state their facts what the F-35 can do etc etc. And I don’t see any contradiction with the way I’ve promoted these new Russian/Chinese radars etc.

    The F-35 is a boondoggle, nothing but a turkey of the program.

    • M&S

      I confess that this notion of an airborne L-Band Anti-LO sensor breakthru is interesting to me.

      L-Band to the IEEE is roughly 800MHz to 1.5GHz. It is principally a military telemetry channel with some satellite digital audio and phone use. The last time anything like it was used militarily as an AI installation was in WWII when the German Lichtensteins operated in the 400-500MHz regime with an operational range of perhaps 3-4nm, largely because the yagi arrays could not create a sharp enough beam to negate clutter intrusion, even from 15,000ft.

      OTOH, L-Band to the military is 40-60GHZ. Which is well up into the millimeter wave bands and thus apt to be subject to terrible attenuation issues.

      I would really like to know which they mean. Not least because there is also an ‘L-Band DEW’ rumored for use with the F-35.

      If, as I suspect, this is a UHF/SHF radar, just shy of S-Band; such a system, mounted in the wing LE flaps, implies a large but flat antenna array with polarized dipole transmitters and maybe some kind of helically wound spiral superhet receiver arrays like the old ‘bullets’ on some aircraft RWRs.

      Such a system would also have very limited lobe control as elevation scatter volume performance with overlapping pulse trains meaning you could be vulnerable to multiple clutter loss as signal:noise overlap range thresholds like the false returns from a convergence zone in submarine acoustics.

      Add to this the louse angular resolation (say 7-10` @ 20nm and 15-20` @ 50nm) and I confess I do not see how putting such an array in an articulated wing surface does any good for dynamic targeting of airborne objects where you don’t have a separate antenna feeds for height find and signal polarization rejection of individual ghost tracks through multiple waveguide feeds.

      Does it cue the ORLS or the IRBIS/NO-50 to sector search?

      If it doesn’t provide more than vague ‘over thataway’ cueing, then it’s utility for as regained BVR envelope is limited, iMO.

      But let’s say that it does work as advertised. Does the fact that the F-35 cannot be dominant (read: shoot and refuse further engagement) based on a 20` front-sector LO cone and 2X 20nm subsonic MRM shots inside 40nm surprise anyone?

      Since no one is apt to be shocked on -this- forum, what are some options to redress the shifting balance here?

      The first two that come to me are EWP as Encapsulated Weapons Pods and the AIM-152 AAAM.

      Particularly the GD/Westinghouse version which was packaged in (I kid you not) a 5″ airframe with both multispectral homing (SARH, IIR, AA-ARM) and pulsed rocket technology that could loft the weapon through 100,000ft before snapping it down onto targets at ‘twice the effective Phoenix envelope’ distance. Which is to say probably 70-80nm for fighter targets.

      The AIM-152 was designed as a tubed, wooden round, weapon which could be clutched in threes on any wing pylon or in special conformal ejectors while, for all that it had a separable boost-can and was multiplateau (relight) capable in it’s sustainer, it was still only 12ft long. AMRAAM class.

      AAAM Under F-14
      http://www.f-16.net/attachments/aim_152a_188.jpg

      Both of which should make it ideal for a bay-mount application where you only need to clear the TER adaptor.

      The solid motor made the weapon cheaper than the equivalent H&R company ramjet competitor in the period 1986-92 and would likely still do so today, though you might fit it with gel instead of solid motor capability. It also made the GD weapon faster for the first 2/3rds of it’s trajectory because it could function at a higher loft altitude whereas the ramjet was a camel in a quarter mile race (thinking of comparisons with Meteor here…).

      If such a weapon could be fitted into an EWP, X3-X4, and at least X2 in the primary weapons bays of an F-35, you would have a significant edge vs. any target which dared to make extensive use of it’s active sensors with a weapon that came plunging down into the hotside of a VLO aircraft (where all the dumps for the ECS and fuel intercoolers were) after passively tracking the jet with ASQ-239 linked AA-ARM modes through midcourse.

      Obviously, the OLS-35 MAKS system is going to see the weapon. But at what distance and with what target maneuver reserve vs. a Mach-7 class weapon that has endgame TVC because it has a relight capable motor? And what if there are two shots and not just one?

      It is my belief that once you take the 4th Gen weapons off the F-35 and fit it with Gen-5 systems fit to match it’s own capabilities, you will see such massive improvements in total range extension as time of flight reduction that the aircraft will be able to engage from distances where minor increases (due to twin EWP on LO-fairing wing pylons) in frontal RCS will not make a enough of a difference to total signature to matter.

      Such standoff distances being necessary anyway to prevent TKS-2 supported Flanker skirmish line tactics from generating a wide enough baseline to see past the LO cone which protects the aircraft nose-on RCS.

      Of course, there is one uncertainty and that is whether the APG-81 can generate good target datums of it’s own in the 80-100nm range class on Soviet or Chinese -export model- PAK-FA or J-31 PLO threshold signatures.

      If it cannot, then you still have various LINK-16/MIDS as CEC datalink options to feed it weapon tracking data from the likes of an RQ-4 Blk.40 with AEW configured ZPY-2 RTIP. Or an SPS-48/SPY-2 linked radar.

      IMO, the best use of the F-35 is now, as it has always been: as a weapons truck. The sooner we acknowledge that so that the necessary 20+ billion in additional targeting platform support as new weapons design can begin (GBU-53 needs a booster, Coyote needs to become an AShM etc.), the better off we will be in terms of dealing with the platform we bought rather than the one we should have.

      The alternative is dumping F-35 to begin a crash effort on F/A-XX with JSF/ATF harvested technology and we may simply not have the time or the finances to do so.

  • Another Guest (from Australia)

    Way too expensive. The F-35 is a compromise aircraft designed to work for all 3 services. As a result it has degraded capability. Whenever you make something that does everything, it actually does everything poorly. I cannot understand how contractors and pentagon brass still make this type of basic mistake. The F-35 has too many bells and whistles make for a poor anything; poor performance, difficult to operate, poor reliability and extreme cost.
    The F-35 needs to be flushed down the toilet ASAP.

    • M&S

      Actually, if the JSF had been designed to ‘be everything to everyone’ it would be an alright airframe.
      The problem is that, in practice, ‘Jointness’ has -not- meant commonality. And so it is the three different _landing modes_ which are critical to performance and economics here.
      Even so, neither the CVTOL (as a replacement A-12) nor the F-35A (as a replacement F-16) needed much attention. For them, a 28,000 or 32,000lb airframe is not that big a deal breaker.
      It was the weight issues and their relation to the USMC STOVL version that has destroyed this program as a low cost, affordable, 700nm strike fighter _not a CAS provider_.
      First by requiring major structural redesigns which weakened the airframe and removed things like the Quickmate subassembly joins.
      And then by insisting that the jet have a thrust to weight ratio which required a 17,000lb fuel load as an interdiction platform instead be reconfigured as a 14,000lb (12,000lbs in hot and high) CAS provider. When the engine SFC hadn’t changed.
      First they didn’t give the jet a common basing mode and then they differentiated it’s flight modes by starving it of gas while still insisting (with multiple doors and vents and added holes in the stealth configuration) that these were ‘jointly’ interoperable.
      Not.
      I will never understand why a variant airframe which is going to occupy all of 8 detachment spots on an amphib configured gator freighter or 25 spots on a junior-miss Escort Carrier, somehow deserved to be given such preeminent program status.
      Never.
      Especially now that the DH-10, DF-21D and various ‘coming soon’ supersonic systems (HN2000, Klub, Brahmos) are all looking to make the littoral boundary a lot more glass-bottom boat ‘extended’ than they already are in terms of mines and subs and conventional air strikes.

  • Another Guest (from Australia)

    For more information of why the F-35 can’t cut it on the modern battlefield.

    http://www.ausairpower.net/jsf.html

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcxxKr1AOdI – The F-35: A Citizens’ Hearing May 30th, 2013 by Pierre Sprey

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxDSiwqM2nw – Why the F-35 is a lemon Pierre Sprey (Runaway Fighter) Fifth Estate Extended in Interview.

    • Don Bacon

      Pierre Sprey: Having been designed to do everything, “It’s not good at anything.”

      That’s if it even functioned properly, which it doesn’t.

  • From Mars

    I’m sorry, but this Carlisle is sounding a bit too hawkish and hardline for my calculated liking. In fact, he actually sounds much like any one of the unreasonably hawkish PLA generals popping off his provocative mind and warning the US etc, from time to time. So I’m not sure if this is an intentional tit-for-tat type tactic, or if it’s just Carlisle’s character? I just feel it is counter-productive and far from strategic to say the least.

    In addition, he’s totally losing credibility for US’s posture and deterrence due to his rather provocative over-exaggerations and flat out inaccuracies with respect to ‘massive arcs of F-35s soon to be deployed facing PRC. When is soon, 2025?? Geezus man, USAF’s Tacair force structure deterrent is rapidly shrinking and becoming more geriatric every year thanks to the stay the course F-35 cannibal… I feel you need to be replaced.

  • henry

    Other than Korea and Japan, and Aust it is unlikely countries like malaysia , indonesia are mot likely to accept usa base.
    Aust is a loyal dog. Jap is another. Korea has no choice and need usa to defend agst Nth Korea. Other than that it has too much trade to lose to a war started by usa
    Singapore will only allow use to refuel, rest, repair etc but retains sovereignty. Pay and go.They may not want to be involved when war breaks out. Tiny Singapore may not be able to absorb the impact of convent BM or cruise missiles on changi nor Singapore port.
    Thailand years ago ask usa to leave. There is to much trade to allow usa to start a war.
    Try asking india for a base.
    Veitnam and Philipine have separate agenda and ownership of tiny island and oil exploration interests in the seas.

    • Aussie777

      This is a marathon. Sort of relevant overall.

      Don’t be too sure on Australia if the USA decides to take sides in Asia unless it is on really firm ground. [We would never go into another Vietnam].

      To me as an Australian that is the main problem I have with the F35. It might make us feel obliged just to keep the USA on-side to do something stupid like that and destroy all the trust we now have in Asia. The F35 is not a good aircraft for Australia – bloody thing is not capable of operating on its own except in uncontested airspace without tremendous support close at hand,e.g. areas with no radars that can pick it up. It is neither one thing or another, it needs tankers with its current range of weapons, how would it operate out of our very basic northern airfields, send it back to Sydney for a service after every few sorties or fly in 10 transports of equipment?, it needs susceptible AWACS, if the enemy has the ability to pick it up you can’t then take it in low and fast below most radar, it can’t run for long on afterburner – the only way it has a bit of speed, it can’t loiter over a battlefield for fear of taking a bullet or running out of fuel, it can’t go in high and fast for long. It has only one thing – part stealth. It has nothing else others have not got or are getting and will have by 2020. The earliest we will see a truly operational F35 with full software. Most all the time say the F35 it will get first shot – OK if it gets first shot at a Flanker SU35 or upgraded Flanker at say 80KM [50miles for US readers] – that’s pushing it – I don’t see any Flanker driver getting in too much of a cold sweat with an AMRAM launched at that range. At least they will know where the F35’s are once that happens. They also will know even better if the F35’s turn tail and try to stroll off – if they decide to run off even more so with those afterburners on. Odds are the Flanker driver will have the fuel and sustained speed even after dodging the first AMRAMS to quickly close on the fleeing F35 without losing a matter of seconds and some altitude. If it is a purebred SU35 then it will have an enormous fuel reserve and speed advantage to close the range.

      In normal circumstances they will only have got missiles off to the lead or wing Flanker. That’s the way they will always fly a non stealth aircraft when they could encounter a partial stealth one. One up front to draw the first missile wing men also in case the F35 comes in from the sides. That way only 1 Flanker at risk. Just like an infantry patrol in heavily timbered country should be conducted. spread out and with a lead scout and one man on each flank. Only one can get killed or injured or hopefully missed. Immediately the missile or missiles are launched at the detected Flanker the balance Flankers will know where to head at full speed with there enormous load of mixed missiles. Up against Stealth aircraft they will always fly very wide and in depth I am certain. What are the F35 drivers going to do.

      I suppose they could also play the same game, Fly wide but then they expose there non stealth aspects even more to the Flankers. Run? stay for the knife fight? The odds are not good overall. OK for the USA – they will have enough late F15’s to fly cover for the F35 when it goes on its Bomb run or hopefully they will have F22’s protecting them.

      All this assuming they are not in an area covered by Stealth tracking ground radar that will virtually negate there stealth advantage.
      Personally for Australia I wish we could buy at a reasonable price some SU34 Flanker equivalents and SU35 equivalents. The only option there is the later F15 derivatives. A much safer way for us to remain independent. Maybe we should just stay with the Super Hornets we have. We have no real emerging threats in our area. They with Tankers and AWACS and the “Growler” should be good enough for the next 20 years. [For some reason the F35 concept makes me nervous.]

      OK. Why the USA should not assume Australia will always be there.

      [If we continue and buy the F35 we probbaly will need to be – reluctantly.]

      The rest of the world still seems to think Australia is some sort of old British/European outpost. With over 10% of our population now of Asian descent and less than 50% of British descent and our close ties to Asia in terms of trade most of us don’t view China or other Asian nations the same way as the US and the old imperialists of Europe. We realize they often have there own very valid point of view. We also realize it is not easy for them just as it is not easy for us to solve all problems overnight. It took the USA hundreds of years of conflict and two major Wars [not counting the one against the native Indians] to become a reasonably united Nation. The last thing most Australians I know want is to be seen as a “lackey” of the USA. [I think Europe now understands that and the gap is growing generation by generation.] That is something that became a part of the Australian ethos starting at the time of WW1 when we lost too many good boys in the main thanks to British Generals and British policies at the time. The War with Germany the British wanted to have.They faced the same problem as the USA faces now. A united Germany was proving to be far more power-full than Britain in economic terms and the days of “Britain ruling the World” were ending. [The USA and China.] Also it was still fresh in French minds there humiliating defeat during the Franco-Prussian War in 1870 [a War France started to try and stop the Unification of Germany. It probably achieved the opposite like most recent USA interference in Latin America etc. The Armistice given to France at that time was far more Just than the one Germany got after WW1.

      To think this attitude still lives on in some British minds is beyond belief. Margy -Atilla DeThatcher going to Moscow to try to get there help to stop the reunification of Germany in about 1987’s. What a shock she must have got when the Russian leaders told her as far as they were concerned it probably was the best thing that could happen and they wanted no part of her scheming. The old Born to Rule attitude in Britain certainly is taking a long time to die. How long for that to happen in the USA now as it becomes less relevant?

      Australians are prepared to be good international citizens and play there part. But we do not want another Vietnam or Iraq based on lies. The way the War in Vietnam was fought by our US allies using too much Firepower and very young Conscripts not up to winning the Hearts and Minds of the Vietnamese people is not our way. Also supporting a Military Dictatorship in South Vietnam was really democratic. I would say 95/99% of Australians accepted those facts about Vietnam within a decade. What about the USA? Also we know the bullshit we were fed it was a Communist Conspiracy – [Chinese and the USSR] was never really true. It was basically a War of Independence. First from the French and then from the USA. Very quickly proved when Vietnam soon after attacked China over a border dispute. All facts a well informed US should have understood and we should have gone to the trouble of finding out instead of “all the way with LBJ”. I note McNamara now as an old man admits with much regret and sadness for the millions of Vietnamese that died and the tens of thousands of American lives lost and ruined the US should never have been there. At least Australia did one thing correctly – we ran our own show over there that did win the hearts and minds of the vast majority of the Vietnamese in the two provinces we operated. Other Australians who have visited Vietnam tell me there is still a lot of hatred towards the USA for its actions during the War and after the War. They tell me it is the opposite in the Provinces Australians fought in. Yes – understandable – we used entirely different tactics. No indiscriminate firepower and we used well trained troops of 21years of age plus. The Australians I have spoken to say in the Provinces where Australia operated they respect the Australians as simply Soldiers doing there job in a decent and respect-full way. There is much anger about the disrespect shown to Vietnamese women by the normally very young US servicemen. It is very simple to understand. We used accurate artillery to protect our troops. Not indiscriminate air power. We did not use Napalm in a broad scale way. We also did not operate in such a way that our troops were used as mainly to draw the Vietcong out – then to be bombed into oblivion along with many innocents often in Villages who could not win whatever side they appeared to be on. All our troops went out to find the Vietcong and North Vietnamese Regulars and fight them away from civilians all the time. It is good to see the USA finally understands this is the only way to do it in places like Afghanistan. There is no easy way. All our troops more or less operated as Special Services Troopers. In other words we did not fight in such a way we hurt innocent civilians. They tell me in the provinces where the US forces operated there still is tremendous hatred for the USA and the way they conducted there War of Liberation. It was not seen that way by most Vietnamese and of course it was not. It was simply a way of getting at the USSR and China who gave North Vietnam some support. Not that much once Soviet Records were revealed. Not thousands of Anti Aircraft Missile detachments as we were told for years. About 600 over the entire period and often not the best. Mig15’s and 17’s to start with – about 75 and then Mig21’s. Lucky for the US they never gave them any Mig 25’s. There would have been slaughter over Hanoi. The US would not have been able to operate there air strikes if the Vietnamese had got there hands on even 12 Mig25’s. .

      Another thing fresh in Australian minds. The “fabricated” intelligence used by “Bush and Blair” to draw others into Iraq and the fact as usual they did not plan or think ahead. I very much doubt Australians will be drawn into some conflict like that again for many decades. Most Australians also see the US stance on Syria as being based on there old lingering anti Russia dogma. Not based on the facts. All independent sources tend to indicate that Russia is correct and the most effective opposition forces there are extremist Muslims if not Terrorists. A trusted British journalist [maybe we should say Egyptian] who has lived most of his life in Egypt and understands the Middle East well recently spent about 2 weeks with the Freedom Army [the good guys in simplistic US and British and French thinking]. He said when the Syrian Army came they just faded away. They really do not want to fight there fellow Syrians. Often they try to be in captured areas to stop excesses by the Muslim extremists. He said having spent 2 weeks with them it would not surprise him if in the long term the Freedom Army ended up joining with the Syrian Army to stop the Muslim extremists getting power. Exactly what Russia has been saying all along.

      Russian wisdom and lack of bullshit. And guess who is probably financing the Extremists. Saudi Arabian Princes and Billionaires. Is that where US arms are going to end up? Yes I have been to Russia a few times. They have problems and they can’t have a democracy yet as we know it I now understand – most of the people just do not understand how to harness there power so those with money still tend to have too much power. The present setup has some similarities with the USA where Corporate power and money can still influence Government too much. The USA was there model of course but many thinking Russians are now saying they would like something like Germany as they get to see and understand the outside world better. But they have to do it! Putin can’t stop all corruption. It does not seem to have sunken in and they have to put up a few dollars each and do some work at a base Party level to make it work. At the moment it is only the radicals against everything that are active in Politics. In the next 20 years as there emerging Middle Class gets stronger and young Russians get to an age they are ready to assume power we will probably see most of the Oligath control diminish. They tend to still control too much at Local Level with there money and there candidates. I was in two cities where all the locals welcomed Putin throwing out the elected Corrupt Officials financed by the money and appointed administrators. Despite all the money given by Moscow to the Local Authority for roads nothing was done except for a few token new bits. [What does US and British media and some of there Politicians have to say on this – “Putin and his non democratic ways”. Just ask the Russians who live in those cities what they think. The exact opposite. Despite all there complaining though they don’t understand they need to organize so when the next Local Election comes up they have good honest candidates ready and they as Volunteers will be there to support them. It does not take a lot of money that way. Older Russians still do not understand they have to make democracy work. We in the West having grown up with it instinctively understand. We can blame Yeltsen for that type of Election. That was the way Yeltsen got elected – a massive TV campaign financed by his mates with money who he paid back handsomely with Russian peoples assets. You can’t blame Putin for that – he inherited that setup and too a large degree has tried to break it but he is only one man. Overall the thing that most impressed me was the wisdom that old Russian culture has. Also the balance at times they display. Something most don’t understand. Sure many come across in an abrupt straight up way. There Cossack thing but that does not mean they don’t have balance and wisdom. Putin is simply true to many of his culture. Straight and too the point. People overall who find it hard to be false.

      Back to Syria – The real problem as they have been saying is the Muslim Extremists [Terrorists]. Sunni Extremists in the main. Assad may not be the best but how much worse could the alternative be? What about the future of Iraq? As mis-managed as that campaign was at least it did get almost there in the end. [I was in Russia just after the invasion and saw Putin on TV address the nation on Iraq with a good interpreter. Surprising as it may be to many in the USA he agreed Sadam had to go but as usual in his balanced way he said the way Bush and Blair were going about it was wrong. He pointed out the use of extreme force was not the answer. The about 500,000 conscripts in the front line were in the main conscripts who overall did not support Sadam. Proven in the end by the factthey did not fight once they ahd the chance to surrender. To bomb shit out of them for 6 weeks was not very clever he though. After that he predicted the Coalition would face endless conflicts once they entered Iraq. All those in the front line have family and friends and for every one killed or badly injured you would end up with something like 20-50 sworn enemies once you tried to occupy. He called for a more considered approach. Don’t make the same mistake Yeltsen made in Chechyna – about 5% hated us originally – now 95% hate us because of the excessive force he used. [Yes 19,000 bombing sorties plus indiscriminate use of artillery.] Also he challenged the official figures on the innocent killed by the so called precision bombing – every innocent killed results in more sworn enemies. He said also it has been proved time and time again a Regime change in any country must be supported by the people and have the support of the people and they need to play an active part. The way the Iraq invasion was rushed and carried out was not the way to achieve that. Also he pointed out the fact virtually all the existing Police Force and other Bureacrats were dismissed and barred from serving there own nation. He said a dumb idea. When you do that you immediately turn yourself into an Invader. That is Putin Wisdom but he is decisive when the situation is clear. Just look at what they did when the US supported Gerogians attacked Southern Ossetia etc. All over in a few weeks and all the nice shiny new weapons and well serviced weapons with US help destroyed within a week or two. Meanwhile Bush and his Cronies kept trying to tell the World Russia had attacked Georgia. Why the hell is the US still helping such an unpredictable leader arm up? Pride or or just spitting the dummy because Russia made quick work of first attempt [without indiscriminate bombing]. Why? To get influence in an area that is none of there business in reality? Just a hunger for power? A bribe to stop some truths emerging? Supporting a less than predictable and not all that democratic a leader to me is not all that clever in the long term. The same policy that has failed in South America. All the old US puppets now rejected by the people of South America. Obviously the Syrian conflict is now starting to spill over into Iraq just as the Russians warned it would. It has the potential to de-stabilise all of the middle east even more. I now do listen to Russians – they have experience in that area. Real experience with many Muslim States being part of the old USSR. This complete lack of understanding of the true situation in Asia and the Middle East by the USA and certain European nations annoys the majority of Australians. Most of us may not understand the Middle East well but we certainly understand Asia far better than they do. We live in Asia. We also get annoyed at the lack of understanding of our own country. We are quickly finding our closet neighbors and our main trading partners in Asia tend to understand us better. It certainly is a pleasure to go to say China as an Australian and find how well respected we are and our products – especially our food products. It helps our government does not all the time criticize China. A recent Prime Minister we had tended to do that but I decided she was only first generation Australian of British descent. Many of her British attitudes still remained. The USA though is the worst offender. e.g. Espionage on the Internet. Don’t try and tell me the USA isn’t continually trying to find out all about the latest China has by way of infiltrating there Companies and Government etc. Nobody in the world spends near as much as the USA onespionage. This crap so often put out by US politicians about Asia and Asian nations really annoys us when we know there would be no greater offender than the USA. Sure Chinese companies copy. So do US companies. We all do if we have a brain in our head and can get our hands on the info. We find less “bullshit, less marketing, less propaganda, more moderation, more honesty, more balance etc.” dealing with Asians overall than we do elsewhere. Generally we find them more sincere is the best word to use. Sure they disagree with us at times but they always seem to be able to go beyond that. Far to often nations are afraid to disagree with the USA for fear of the retaliation that may come. I personally feel the only way there will be any big US bases here is if some emergency arises of mutual interest. In the meantime I hope the US understands we will gradually be co-operating more and more with Asia. As a British journalist who was here and spent a considerable amount of time here said on TV last night. “Australia is not the European outpost I expected. You are very different – your attitudes are different, I did not understand how truly multicultural Australia was. It certainly understands and respects Asian nations far more than we do in Europe. [Add to that the USA.]
      I also would like to know the territorial claims China has that have no justification as one writer above asserts. No facts. They have said they will resolve them by arbitration – not conflict. While they do nothing else I respect there word. Just remember it was Japanese who occupied an Island in dispute recently. Not Chinese. Just because Japan at times has tended to lick the US’s ass does not make Japan always correct. Just because Russia has and continues to question the US should not make them an enemy also. They have a point of view – often the correct one. To me Russia has been reasonably balanced in the last 20 years. Also remember Russians at heart having been victims both internally and of other powers for a long time. [e.g. Britain formed an alliance in 1905 with the Japanese to effectively stop Russia from making Korea a colony. Something the Europeans had done with all of Asia. Throughout history they know big powers often abuse there power. As a result they feel a genuine responsibility to try to be a balancing Power in areas they can be. They feel they owe it to the World to for example be the balance in the Nuclear Arms area. Just the balance! Not to dominate as the US continually tries to do. [Have a look at what Henry Kissinger has said on this – one of your most respected Diplomats – he admits the US is one of the biggest pronblems in this area. e.g. The Defensive Missile complex in Europe in countries where Morgan Gallop Polls say the majority of people do not want them. What does the US then do? Bribes there Governments and tries to bribe the people with sweeteners to put in place Missiles that have nothing to defend against at present except Russian missiles. Iran is miles away from having a missile good enough, accurate enough and with a warhead compact enough to be delivered. They have not even done there first test of any bomb. But as usual the USA insists on provoking Russia with this non essential Missile shield. What is wrong with stationing a few of your Missile ships in the vicinity until Iran actually looks like getting close.

      WHY? Provoke?
      That is a question Australians ask all the time. I certainly hope US culture has not disintegrated to the stage that is it. Always provoke and a bigger gun solves everything and shout at people instead of talking to them.
      I know it has not overall but that element in the USA seems to be getting more and more power. Why?
      It is time for the USA to try and becomes Mates with the rest of the World and not seeing a conflict in everything.

      An Asian “ideal” – {Mutual Respect}

      Exactly what to be good Mates means in Australian. The key component is Mutual Respect for each others points of view and opinions.

      Bully boys of the block have no place here. We have them like everywhere but they are not respected and very rarely tolerated.
      Australia is not perfect. We have failed in one area badly. The plight of out original Native Australians. How we fix it is the problem. Many ideas but it does none have worked. Money is not the answer. The last report I saw was we spend about $100,000 on every Indigenous Australian. It is obvious it is not being spent the correct way. Maybe we make the same mistake here the USA often makes. We fail too often to listen to and understand what they really need. We stay with our mainly Superior European and now Asian ideas. We never really ask them how we can help and listen. We still try to force our values on them right or wrong.

  • M&S

    I know General Carlisle and/or the writers of the basing plan are wrong in one critical area of their ‘coverage arc’ containment strategy at least.

    Korea 7TH Air Force Map
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Korea_map-7thaf.jpg

    Kunsan is roughly 200nm and Osan only about 100nm from the DMZ.

    Well within reach of the kinds of ‘Estes Class’ weapons Hezbollah fired into Israel in 2006, never mind the types of SCUD+ (as Scarab/Spyder) equivalent weapons that North Korea is likely to possess.

    Even with high protection level HAS (and the TAB-V is hardly that) the General is playing balls-balls-who’s-got-the-bigger-brass-ones brinksmanship games with anything up to 3X18X2X120 million = 108 jets as 12.96 BILLION WITH A B dollars worth of hardware.

    And it’s totally unnecessary because **radius of action** is the JSF’s forte`.

    A simpler, less offensive (to the Chinese), and ultimately more survivable solution would involve basing the jets at Eilsen, who gave away their A-10s only what, seven years ago? A little milcon for a hush house and hardened BOQ, a little decontam of the soil as bottled water and fresh plumbing, and you’re back in business.

    With the F-35s 600nm radius, you don’t need to be anywhere on or near the Peninsula when the Norkian’s next go postal.

    It must also be said that Alaska also has vastly better instrumented training ranges for the kinds of lobshot JDAM (15nm at supersprint, assuming they don’t burn off the tails) and lofted SDB (45nm+ within 15` of ground track, 25nm for up to 60` off axis release) work that the JSF is presumably going to be doing a lot of.

    Comparatively, Korea is almost as bad as Europe when it comes to good ranges. Their population puts up with a lot of noise as airspace use with a grimly determined certainty that it’s for a good cause but it’s still a tiny country. There is absolutely no room to practice BVR or extended range PGM tactics in the face of a well coordinated ADGE even the PI with the Nitnois was better.

    If/When the next round in the Korean reunification talks turns ‘south’, staging forward to operate out of Itazuke on Kyushu gives you the ROK support mission, while Chitose on Hokkaido provides for the Sneak-In-The-Back attack on DPRK BMC3/IADS/Missile sites. All without direct exposure of either Japanese or PACAF assets to Korean Sneak Attack.

    _Do Not_ place more than a carrier group worth of military hardware square on some of the most heavily over-targeted pieces of real estate on the planet. Between the Commandos, the Rockets and the deep cover Moles it’s not certain which enemy kinetic effector will get them, but one surely will.

  • kent05r

    Lets see Pop in total U.S.A. 370 million plus or minus, Total Pop in China, 1.3 Billion. We better have a whole bunch of them to stop the rain of human carnage they are willing to lose anyway. Russian and USA are controlled by the same Central banks and the CFR. Nato says stay home to Obama.. China has brought a big bucket to the sandbox. We don’t need to get into a war to keep a president who can’t find any other way keep his job. Worst president in history. 143 days as a senator and thinks he qualified to run a country. He can’t take the heat. Fast and Furious,Benghazi and domestic squabbles. Reported by a liberal media is one thing. Stepping up to the plate and striking out at this level will cost our troops. 79 percent of our losses in Afghanistan are under Obamas watch. Why?… Because he is no leader of men and women that stand for Freedom. He supports no one but his ego and religious friends that hate the US. Bring the troops home,protect our borders from invasion of foreign enemies. Stay the hell out of Syria.

  • Sejarah Melayu

    The US shutdown is good news to all the people of the world, except for the
    Americans & its Zionism allies. The plan to make war in Syria had to
    abandoned, as now the US doesn’t even have the money to pay for its jet fuel for
    its fighter planes. Almost all airborne training except for mission in
    Afghanistan had to be shelved and more than 2/3 of its fighter planes had to
    be grounded. Even some of the airplane technicians had to be furloughed. No war more is good for the peaceful co-existance for the people of the world, but bad for
    the American & its Zionism allies. Now they don’t have the money to fly the
    jets, bomb & kill other people anymore…. ;-)

  • Sejarah Melayu

    The China threat is a hoax!!! By promoting the China threat of military
    expansion towards South East Asia, the US has managed to convince some stupid
    ASEAN countries to let the US to base its fighter planes & military inside
    their own countries. The US plans is actually to scare the shit out of the
    ASEANs. And when the ASEANs are scare shit of the Chinese, they unconsciously
    let the Americans occupied their countries with its military.

    The same thing happen to the Arab Gulf countries. The US managed a propaganda
    war against the Iraqis for decades, saying the Iraqis have chemical weapons,
    developing the nuclear weapons & etc. If you let the Iraqis developed the
    nuclear weapons, sooner or later the Iraqis will be a threat to whole the Arab
    Gulf States. Sooner or later the Iraqis might start a war & occupy the smaller
    Arab Gulf states.

    Thus, to prevent the future Iraqi aggression against them, these stupid Arab countries with their corrupted leaders agree to let the Americans to base its military personnals and fighter planes inside their countries, in the pretext to protect them from the Iraqis. But the Arab Gulf states are fool Arabs. It’s all a hoax. In the end, the Americans managed to occupied all of the Arab Gulf states without even firing a single bullet!!!

    Now, once the US already have a foothold in these stupid Arab states, you think that it will be easy to kick the Americans out? U think those stupid Arab sheikhs, willing to go to war against the Americans? No way. Let me become a billionaire, buy some English football clubs while the majority of my fellow citizens suffers.

    In Sun Tzu’s Art of War, Chapter 3: Attack by Stratagem, he said “In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy’s country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them.”

    Another of his words, ” Therefore the skillful leader subdues the enemy’s troops without any fighting; he captures their cities without laying siege to them; he overthrows their kingdom without lengthy operations in the field.”

    In addition, he says, “With his forces intact he will dispute the mastery of the Empire, and thus, without losing a man, his triumph will be complete. This is the method of attacking by stratagem.”

    Thus, it looks like the greatest triumph of the US military is not the occupation of Iraq, but the occupation of the stupid Arab Gulf states like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Kuwait & Oman, without even firing a single bullet & without even losing a single American soldier.

    The Arabs leaders have been deceived and they are such morons! By the way, I’m
    a Malay & a Muslims, and I detest the wasteful & corrupted habits of the Arab
    leaders. These are the Wahabbis, spreading their extreme “Islamic” ideology to
    the rest of the Muslim world. The Libyas, Iraqis, Afghanistans & Syrias have
    all been living peacefully together for generations. Until these stupid Arab morons coming to these peaceful Islamic countries & spreading their extreme brand of Wahabbi ideology, which is not Islamic at all.

    Islam, or “Salam” means peace. But the Wahhabi ideology only existed during
    the 1st World War, by Muhammad Abdul Wahab in Saudi Arabia. The Wahhabi
    ideology spread terror & sectarian wars between the Sunnis & the Syiahs. Whereas, before this, the Sunnis & Syiahs have been living peacefully in Iraq, Syria & Afghanistan for generations.

    – DON’T BE DECEIVED BY THE STUPID WAHHABI IDEOLOGY.
    – DON’T BE DECEIVED BY THE MORONS ARAB LEADERS OF THE GULF STATES.
    – & DON’T BE DECEIVED BY THE CUNNING PROPAGANDA WAR BY THE US AGAINST THE CHINESE.
    – CHINA IS NOT A THREAT TO ASEAN. BUT IT IS THE US THAT ARE A THREAT TO THE ASEANS & ALL THE PEACEFUL NATIONS OF THE WORLD.

    • M&S

      Mr./Mz. Melayu,

      I’m sorry, you’ll never get anywhere trying to sell Islam with me because I view organized religion as a whole as being the greatest spiritual fraud ever perpetrated on man as a control psychology by other men.

      It subjugates you to preconditional rules (the world is not about ‘peace’, peace is entropic) which enable the powerful to oppress and contain your will to power and it divides you into camps which they may then throw at each other as you self-differentiate by use of insult as a regional, religious or ethnic epithets.

      That said, Islam came out of the Arab peninsula as a bandit religion whose justification of conversion was one of pillage, rape and theft, wherever it went. India and Malaysia were no better treated than North Africa or Europe.

      If you do not like the Arabs then you are a fool for what you take from them as being anything /but/ a religion of peace.

      Relative to the ongoing religious wars as an attempt to fragment and resubjugate Arab willfulness, harnessing their oil to global needs, it takes two to tango.

      And while the Twin Pillars doctrine of controlling pricing as geostrategic access through backing the Shah and Faud family fortunes (two of the three largest voters on the OPEC pricing council) was a good idea when trying to cut from the market the largest petrogas supplier on the planet, the Soviet Union, the collapse of Iran into corruption and then religious extremist revolution was not well conceived.

      Particularly as the Soviet’s moved in next door.

      Where the U.S. was truly, abysmally _stupid_ was in punishing Iran for her rebellion and the hostages while attempting to control the rabidly Arab-nationalist Iraq by encouraging the latter to make war on the former as a blood sport attritional event.

      American and European banks secured MASSIVE military equipment loans through the Saudi controlled GCC and when Saddam was within perhaps a week of victory, we yanked the targeting and advisor support that let him plan his Armor movements for almost six weeks, giving the Iranians a chance to stabilize their lines, with the most absurd of Red Key actions.

      We then further sponsored a decade long war, adding debt atop bad debt without ever intending to supply the war winning technologies which would have given -either- combatant victory.

      And when it was all over, ironically because the losing side wanted to expand the mining campaign outside the Gates of Hormuz and Lloyds said no.

      We called those debts in.

      And when Iraq could not pay them and the U.S. used it’s influence to force repayment in a manner that would be considered Usurious by most Muslims, they turned their eyes upon Kuwait.

      And we actually had the gall to use a /woman/, April Glaspie, to tell Saddam that ‘It wasn’t the U.S. police to interfere in Arab business.’ Even though he explicitly warned on National Day that things were approaching the brink of another war. Even though we had CIA aerostats monitoring the buildup of Armor along the border for months before the attack.

      That war came, he lost, he refused to give up such things as the means to continued WMD access as ‘national power’ (via particle separators which we caught him displacing on massive semi-trailers so the threat was real) and so he fed the paranoia of a Western rent-seeking political industrial partnership that needed an expeditionary blockade force excuse to sustain Cold War levels of force structure when all the rest of the world was disarming in preparation for recapitalization and modernization after the turn of the century.

      The Arabs were not ‘stupid’ in their acceptance of this status quo because nothing in their Holy Books says that they cannot use infidel mercenaries to oppress other Islamic powers and even if it did, ‘those are really just guidelines’ because Mohammed was an illiterate psychotic whose foaming at the mouth (epilepsy) prognostications were never recorded until 2-3 generations after he was dead.

      And because Iraq was itself something like #4 or #5 on the top producer list, denying it export rights for all but a starvation ration of food-for-oil profits would assure that those states which had to make up the difference would _make a killing_ in terms of increased production quotas of their own.

      We benefited from this in the form of cheap oil and gasoline ($1.05 per gallon) kickbacks at a time when the rest of the world had been paying anything from 4-7 dollars /per liter/ for decades.

      This, at a time when we were in an orgiastic frenzy of ‘downsizing and outsourcing’ our civilian industry to offshore, slave labor, locales.

      Continued massive expenditures on useless military mercs for Arab oil profiteers + zeroed civilian heavy industry + continued credit spending as consumer index gains based debt on cheap fuel for distributionist-centrist ‘retail economics’ should have equaled instant implosion of the U.S. economy, much as it did Hitler’s ‘miracle’ efforts in the 1930s.

      It did not.

      And the reason is that the U.S. Dollar is the sole currency of marque by which oil is traded and thus it, as our overinflated economy, is sustained on a gold standard. Black Gold.

      Men like Osama Bin Laden saw this circle jerk of immoral actions for what it was and wanted the U.S. out of their holy dirt so bad that they engaged in ever escalating policy of terror attacks both within The Kingdom and neighboring Arab states.

      The Saudi GIP and Mutaween being like this / when it comes to internal state political security, ran down UBL within days and gave him an ultimatum: “We hate the Americans, we like their money, fight the infidels outside the Peninsula, or get dead in a hurry.”

      And UBL, who was a momma’s boy, completely out of his element, who knew what was ethically right but was ultimately as immoral as anyone in fighting the wrong enemy for it, chose to attack the Far Threat because he knew he could not beat the Establishment in his own country.

      He had help in this decision in the form of his closest advisors and second in command, Ayhman Al Zawahiri.

      9/11 happened, another decade was spent funding the MIB as it’s own cause. Political gaffmanship and an ignorant American public saw us walk away from 120 billion barrels of undepleted Iraqi oil reserves as a control rod on OPEC price gouging. And China is now set to take over as the world’s strongest currency base, just as soon as we finish ‘expanding the debt ceiling’ past the point at which anyone will take our chits.
      And now we are on our way out of AfG as the last thing keeping the Iranians from pushing Pipelinestan eastward to give the Chinese economy the one thing it _must have_ to sustain it’s own rise to dominance: free power from petrogas.
      The U.S., having foolishly (no knowledge of geography) walked out of Vietnam as a noose around the South China Sea, now chases any reason as proximal access back into to SEA, hoping to disrupt Chinese plans because without the USD:oil association, we are truly doomed.
      And -this- is the likely reason for our ‘stir the pot’ presence on the Pac Rim.

      Do not think that evil thrives based solely upon stupidity. It thrives via active collusion by the participants in the deliberately debilitating actions against society global and local, which give chaotic nature it’s ‘evil’ visage as power realigning and assets falling away.

      In this you must also understand that for those of a political bent, conflict is the means to that power and thus peace as a balanced leverage of national and international interests rather than selfish personal motive is anathema to that Nietzschian psychology of the leaders who enact policy.

      This is the only strategic truth there is.
      For as long as leaders exist, of any color, race or creed, they will always seek to upset any and all healthy balances that they might be in a position to catch the windfall as fallout from the consequences.

      Their ‘strategic goals’ of personal empowerment then being of benefiting or damnation to those who actively align or hold simple nationalist as affinity group loyalty unto them.

      Such is the expression of a genetic algorithm which, at it’s basest, may be stated as greed, succeed, breed as the driving instinct which underlies all our existence. Want more than you have, take it from others, spread the success of your seed. Driving us forward into change rather than ‘balancing’ a dynamic into staticism, as entropy.

      Hitler was right in this.
      It is and always be a struggle among races as competing gene algorithms. This is neither stupid nor wise but simply the artifacted action of evolution. The West is dying because we refuse to be honest about what made us a success. Our ruthless pursuit of gain, solely for ourselves, combined with our technical and philosophical superiority of understanding of what Just Is.
      The rest of the world is too primitive to put moral sophisms beyond functional truths. And so they step forward to replace us.

    • Colin Clark

      China has done the best job possible of driving ASEAN countries to seek US help and assistance. No one could have invented the South China Sea, Spratly and other conflicts that China pushed to new heights!

  • chen

    But be careful about the Chinese spies!!!! Prevent Snowdens in our Air Force! There’re a lot of Chinese women who’re actually Spies! Just have sex with them DO NOT trust them!

  • Chris Ferguson

    All these anti-f35 comments are inane. Not one person in here has any excess to relevant information that would qualify them speak with any knowledge on what this weapon system’s capabilities are.

  • bobcat

    australia is waste a lot of money on this of f
    35 strokers they are underpowered not up to the job