xcraftllc Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Thought: I wonder if it would be possible to mount the GAU-22 gun pod on the A model F-35. It would increase weight/drag/RCS and such but it would definitely make for a more effective ground attack configuration. Double the ammo and rate of fire, and two separate guns for maintenance redundancy in case one fails in the middle of a TIC. Any commander who has the balls to sign off on that one would have my vote to be the next 5-Star General of the Air Force! Oh well I'm just dreaming. Better just plan on dropping JDAMs from 35,000 feet with altitude hold on... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
11F Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Thought: I wonder if it would be possible to mount the GAU-22 gun pod on the A model F-35. It would increase weight/drag/RCS and such but it would definitely make for a more effective ground attack configuration. Double the ammo and rate of fire, and two separate guns for maintenance redundancy in case one fails in the middle of a TIC. Any commander who has the balls to sign off on that one would have my vote to be the next 5-Star General of the Air Force! Oh well I'm just dreaming. Better just plan on dropping JDAMs from 35,000 feet with altitude hold on... Second thought: Why just load one GAU-22 when you can load 20?! Then that commander could be the next 6-star General of the Air Force and then F-35s could fly at 70,000 feet and drop 2 JDAMs with altitude AND attitude hold on...troll 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestik Møøse Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Or why don't we just keep flying hawgs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McDonut Posted December 24, 2014 Share Posted December 24, 2014 Or why don't we just keep flying hawgs. forever and evar and evar and evar!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark Griswold Posted December 26, 2014 Share Posted December 26, 2014 (edited) Or why don't we just keep flying hawgs. Could do that or move to the next Attack platform. Sounds like some A-10 guys have started working on it but I think the F-35 has sucked all the oxygen up for itself. Pilots Plan Tomorrow’s A-10 If the AF changed it's mind (doubtful) and decided that the F-35 would be at least complimented with a dedicated attack aircraft in the inventory, I think the only thing that would have a snowball's chance in Clovis would be an F/A-18 optimized for the AF like the proposed F-18L was. Minus the stuff necessary for carrier ops, you had more capacity for stores, fuel, etc... you could take an Advanced Super Hornet and optimize for CAS and have a good 4.5+ dedicated, capable, survivable platform. 0.69% chance of happening, that's optimistic. Edit: redundancy removed. Edited December 26, 2014 by Clark Griswold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HU&W Posted December 26, 2014 Share Posted December 26, 2014 Pilots Plan Tomorrow’s A-10 Because CAS missions often take place at very low altitudes and low airspeeds—anywhere from 150 knots to 300 knots—the aircraft must be able to perform a two-G sustained turn at a rate of five degrees per second with a turn radius of no more than 2,000 feet. So, they're saying they want a plane that can sustain 60 degrees of bank in level flight at 195 ktas? Or am I missing something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark Griswold Posted December 26, 2014 Share Posted December 26, 2014 (edited) So, they're saying they want a plane that can sustain 60 degrees of bank in level flight at 195 ktas? Or am I missing something? TLAR They didn't mention LO characteristics that could help keep the price down (maybe) but a price tag at $20 million or below and $15K per hour to fly seems very hopeful. Just my opinion, if a dedicated attack platform is ever going to happen again it will have to happen in conjunction with another acquisition or a serious foreign military sales. Maybe selecting the KA-50 Golden Eagle as the T-38 replacement then trying to get the TA-50 Light Attack variant is a possibility but remote at best. Hate to be so pessimistic but so many GOs, Cols, and their brothers have sold the F-35 as the solution to replacing aging 10s & 16s that admitting to needing a dedicated CAS platform is admitting that either they lied or made a mistake. The bureaucracy is not known for issuing mea culpas. Edited December 26, 2014 by Clark Griswold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted December 26, 2014 Share Posted December 26, 2014 A super hornet for CAS is a bad comparison - between the two, the F-35 will do much better (standard caveat: in a few years). You're not going to "truly replace" the A-10 with anything that's not a specific CAS/CSAR aircraft. Problem is we're not in any financial position to afford niche aircraft; as shitty as it is, that's the truth. I hope that changes in the future, but it's going to be a while, if it ever happens. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark Griswold Posted December 26, 2014 Share Posted December 26, 2014 Problem is we're not in any financial position to afford niche aircraft; as shitty as it is, that's the truth. I hope that changes in the future, but it's going to be a while, if it ever happens. No disagreement there, I don't see our rich uncle cutting the USAF a bigger check anytime soon so a good solution aircraft to a lot of missions is better than a perfect solution aircraft to just one or a couple. But I should like a candle and not just hate all over the F-35. From BreakingDefence.com : New F-35 Prices: A: $95M; B: $102M; C: $116M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark Griswold Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 (edited) So no VDL, no IR pointer and it may need to carry a pod to do this as there are no plans to add this. Nice. Is The F-35's Targeting System Really 10 Years Behind Current Systems? Newest U.S. Stealth Fighter ‘10 Years Behind’ Older Jets Edited December 31, 2014 by Clark Griswold Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Who gives a shit. This is NOT a designed-for-CAS aircraft and this factor really is almost a moot point. Any EO/IR advancement we make that can hang on a Viper, Strike Eagle, Hornet, etc. can be done with the F-35. These articles praise the SNIPER and lament the F-35's inability to match with EOTS. Big deal, we could make a SNIPER SE work on an F-35 with a bit of effort if we really wanted/needed it. It will not replace the A-10 when it comes to CAS, ever...but it will surpass what other 4th gen aircraft can do. These specifically mentioned ATP/"10 years behind" arguments are merely red herings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurelySerious Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 So no VDL, no IR pointer and it may need to carry a pod to do this as there are no plans to add this. Nice. Is The F-35's Targeting System Really 10 Years Behind Current Systems? Newest U.S. Stealth Fighter ‘10 Years Behind’ Older Jets None of those "older jets" have any built in pod capes, everything is strap on sts, so it's not behind...it's ahead from the baseline airframe standpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB Stacker Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Who gives a shit. This is NOT a designed-for-CAS aircraft While I don't necessarily disagree with you, it's worth pointing out that per the official IOC document released by the JPO on behalf of the Service Secretaries last year, in order to the F-35 to declare IOC one of the mission sets it is required to be capable of conducting is CAS. That is true for all three services/all three variants. I guess this isn't really to disagree with anything you said so much as it is to point out the idiocy and straight out lying inherent from anyone who works in a SPO/JPO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HU&W Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 While I don't necessarily disagree with you, it's worth pointing out that per the official IOC document released by the JPO on behalf of the Service Secretaries last year, in order to the F-35 to declare IOC one of the mission sets it is required to be capable of conducing is CAS. That is true for all three services/all three variants. I guess this isn't really to disagree with anything you said so much as it is to point out the idiocy and straight out lying inherent from anyone who works in a SPO/JPO. The document you linked says "conduct basic CAS." 3-09.3 definition of CAS is pretty inclusive and doesn't require all the capes of a CAS specific aircraft like the A-10. In fact, it's inclusive enough that pretty much any aircraft with bombs or bullets and a radio could "conduct basic CAS." I don't see it as a barrier to their IOC. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoleIt Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 One would think...or hope...that since so many features of the F-35 are literally built into the air-frame so as to not compromise it's stealth that they would have made those sensors and computers easily upgrade-able... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HossHarris Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Ha! When is anything internal "easily upgradable"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeA10 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Nothing like buying a brand new ten year old airplane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xcraftllc Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Apparently the F-35 won't be firing its gun until Block 3F software is installed in 2019. According to this anyway: https://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/31/new-u-s-stealth-jet-can-t-fire-its-gun-until-2019.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark Griswold Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Apparently the F-35 won't be firing its gun until Block 3F software is installed in 2019. According to this anyway: https://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/31/new-u-s-stealth-jet-can-t-fire-its-gun-until-2019.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tac airlifter Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 So no VDL, no IR pointer and it may need to carry a pod to do this as there are no plans to add this. Nice. Is The F-35's Targeting System Really 10 Years Behind Current Systems? Newest U.S. Stealth Fighter ‘10 Years Behind’ Older Jets Lack of sparkle & VDL is a big deal for some mission sets due to GFC requirements. Can the -35 push/receive CoT? Also, if it doesn't have a pod I assume no LST? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestik Møøse Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 "It doesnt carry any short-range, dogfighting missiles like the Raytheon AIM-9X Sidewinder when its in a stealthy configuration." Wait, what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champ Kind Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 What a mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawman Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 (edited) The more and more these articles get posted all over facebook the more I'm reminded of the early 2000s stupidity with the Tomcat retirement. Admirals writing op eds, people calling out the Hornet for not being able to carry the Pheonix when the last few years it was in service neither could the Tomcat... Just nonsense. It's the aviation equivalent of "the sky is falling!" Edited January 1, 2015 by Lawman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uhhello Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 The more and more these articles get posted all over facebook the more I'm reminded of the early 2000s stupidity with the Tomcat retirement. Admirals writing op eds, people calling out the Hornet for not being able to carry the Pheonix when the last few years it was in service neither could the Tomcat... Just nonsense. It's the aviation equivalent of "the sky is falling!" So the gun is able to be used currently with current production models? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clark Griswold Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Who gives a shit. This is NOT a designed-for-CAS aircraft and this factor really is almost a moot point. Any EO/IR advancement we make that can hang on a Viper, Strike Eagle, Hornet, etc. can be done with the F-35. These articles praise the SNIPER and lament the F-35's inability to match with EOTS. Big deal, we could make a SNIPER SE work on an F-35 with a bit of effort if we really wanted/needed it. It will not replace the A-10 when it comes to CAS, ever...but it will surpass what other 4th gen aircraft can do. These specifically mentioned ATP/"10 years behind" arguments are merely red herings. None of those "older jets" have any built in pod capes, everything is strap on sts, so it's not behind...it's ahead from the baseline airframe standpoint. Lack of sparkle & VDL is a big deal for some mission sets due to GFC requirements. Can the -35 push/receive CoT? Also, if it doesn't have a pod I assume no LST? The answer/work around may eventually be an LO Sniper Pod like the weapons pod on an International Roadmap Hornet or an LO UAV wingman who gets to carry ATP & VDL making himself more of a target instead of the manned platform. Who knows and it may be as Brabus said a non-issue as it will just have to be accepted as the way it is since it was not a specifically CAS designed aircraft, just like 16s, 15Es, etc... What keeps fueling criticism, doubt and general distrust of the whole thing is the constant dribble of all these pesky details. Makes me think that there are bigger limitations that no one wants to admit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now