Japan Chooses F-35 For Next Generation Fighter Jet

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by Ze-Jamz

Exactly, this isn't just about which aircraft will win in a dogfight it's about a massive investment and future proofing that investment.

Why would you spend that much money on a SuperHornet which is as stealthy as a brick and how much could you actually upgrade that aircraft? 5yrs? 10?

It's not just about speed and turn rate anymore, we stopped worrying about that 20years ago

True, on the one hand, however I am critical of the major argument being stealth. First, it reduces weapon loadout options quite immensly, speed still is probably the most important criteria when it comes to survivability (and THE criteria for an interceptor) and last but not least, maintance of stealth aircraft almost completly negates the effect of having a new airframe. Top that off with current stealth tech just being a gap filler, redundant within 10 years development of RADAR technology (if not already) and the japanese still might bite their behinds for their descision.

However, the F35 probably is the best current fighter for small carrier operations, so IF they build that ship their descision makes somewhat sense.

[Ze-Jamz]

Please remember I'm not saying this aircraft is the all and be all, it's far from it.

I'm saying or giving an opinion on why it was picked out of the 3 they looked at nothing more.

This isn't about which one is the best fighter/interceptor.

I'm sure news in the near future will start to shed light on why they picked it and we can all sleep better.

[Ze-Jamz]

Originally Posted by addman

That's funny, by the pictures we've seen of the captured drone it doesn't look very "crashed" to me. Maybe it crashed from an altitude of 3 meters at a speed of 8 km/h LOL!

Agreed
Seems to me alot of speculation is going on here..

Think it's fair to say none of us know and if we did I'd like to know how.

I suggest we get off the 'it cannot be hacked routine' though..even jamming a so called secure signal is bad enough.

As already stated looks pretty good condition to me for a drone that 'crashed'...not once have I seen any report of it being fake or that this or that is out of place

[addman]

Originally Posted by Ze-Jamz

Agreed
Seems to me alot of speculation is going on here..

Think it's fair to say none of us know and if we did I'd like to know how.

I suggest we get off the 'it cannot be hacked routine' though..even jamming a so called secure signal is bad enough.

As already stated looks pretty good condition to me for a drone that 'crashed'...not once have I seen any report of it being fake or that this or that is out of place

Yes, I will settle for the "nobody here really knows anything about this" option.

Originally Posted by Ze-Jamz

Agreed
I suggest we get off the 'it cannot be hacked routine' though..even jamming a so called secure signal is bad enough.

A signal being secure has nothing to do with its ability to be jammed. That's like saying you can hack a person's computer, but instead all you did was cut the power to his house.

As for "it doesn't look like it crashed" Read this.

http://ko6bb1.multiply.com/journal/i...._._._Old_news

They have been careful to not show off the underside of the UAV and it's pretty obvious from some of the pictures that one of the wings has been reattached, had putty applied, and repainted to look intact.

High Resolution Photo: http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/3.jpg (notice the giant seam in the wing)

It seems to me that it was a crash landing that left the unit intact.

[Ze-Jamz]

Yea sry should of worded it differently, I understand that.

What I'm saying is being able to jam the signal is bad enough.

Yes I have seen the damage you talk about, still doesn't seem like a crash though to me..more like an attempted botched landing hence why I'm saying IMO there was a bit more involved than just a signal being jammed in the first place.

We're never know anyhow..not for a while

[trashcanman]

http://info.publicintelligence.net/U...larWarfare.pdf is an interesting read. Section 2.4.4 deals with GPS jamming that I posted about and not the comms links

2.4.4 Threat to Position, Navigation, and Guidance

There is a wide range of methods that a determined adversary can use for
attacking RPA guidance and navigation systems. The report mentions here only three
categories of threats without going into the details:
Small, simple GPS noise jammers can be easily constructed and employed by an unsophisticated adversary and would be effective over a limited RPA operating area.

GPS repeaters are also available for corrupting navigation capabilities of RPAs.

A US Air Force study identified this as a potential threat. If you would prefer to believe what employees of the manufacturers who make handsome profits from these programmes say then that's up to you

Originally Posted by Ze-Jamz

Yea sry should of worded it differently, I understand that.

What I'm saying is being able to jam the signal is bad enough.

Yes I have seen the damage you talk about, still doesn't seem like a crash though to me..more like an attempted botched landing hence why I'm saying IMO there was a bit more involved than just a signal being jammed in the first place.

We're never know anyhow..not for a while

Jamming is not hard, and if done properly is impossible to counter. This isn't representative of their abilities, only that the Russians have lent them some of their jamming hardware. Another analogy would be the guidance signal being like a conversation between two people in a language you have never heard of. What the Iranians most likely did was scream really loud next to the conversation. The didn't hear anything the two were saying, they didn't control what either of them said, all they did was drown out their conversation.

Again the damage issue:

That UAV is designed for high fuel efficiency and flight stability, two things that are important for long loitering times over its intended targets. When it's fuel load is expended that thing is going to be very light. Given it's shape, it is going to have excellent glide characteristics, and the on-board avionics are going to keep it level. As it runs out of fuel it's going to start a very controlled glide towards the ground. Maybe only one time out of 10 it might land as intact as it did, (which shows signs that a wing was severed).

Iran is very, very far behind in electronic intelligence and lacks the technical expertise and the equipment to hack a drone. This is not meant as a racial slur against them, it's just the environment in the country since the revolution has not been very conducive to training people in these matters. They are catching up, but are still very far behind.

[Viking]

Yea, that's exactly the way that I would program an expensive ultra secret drone spying over other nations territory.

1: If we lose connection fly in circles until reestablished.
2:If still no connection wait for fuel to run out, still flying in circles.
3:When fuel is out glide carefully to ground and try to make a good landing. NOT!

I think it would be: If lose contact fly home! If cannot go home self-destruct!

And about all the rednecks in bars claiming they "know" what happened but cannot tell: BS!
If you are cleared to get that kind of info you don't share! Not even with family or friends! PERIOD!

Viking

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by Viking

If lose contact fly home! If cannot go home self-destruct!

Vik are working at the City or in Wallstreet as a trader ?