Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Remember the F-35?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Remember the F-35?

    Well despite not having yet appeared in our skies, and costly a paltry trillion to develop, the hunt is already on to find its successor!

    Get Ready For The Next Generation Fighter Jet

    The Pentagon imagines a post-F35 future

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]177184[/ATTACH]
    A concept picture of something sexy that won't look anything like the final plane

    Since the dawn of the jet age, military planners and industrialists have grouped the fighters borne forth from their iron loins into generations. Borrowing the term from biology, each generation is grouped by a series of improvements that make the successor distinct from the predecessor. Now, as the fifth generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter slowly eases its way into American military service, and the fourth generation A-10s and F-16s that preceded it are phased out, the Pentagon is looking further into the future, ready to start the long and pricey conception of a sixth generation.

    The gestational period of a fighter is sometimes decades. The F-35, which is expected to enter service in 2019, first started development in 1997. Airplane generations don’t always take as long as human ones. The F-18, a major success by Pentagon acquisition standards, took just a decade to go from an existing prototype in the 1970s to a working fighter in the 1980s, but that’s an outlier. For the sixth generation, the Department of Defense hopes to split the difference and get them flying and ready to go by the 2030s.

    DARPA is already working on this future. Sixth-generation fighters could include the planned hunting packs of drones that may very well fight alongside manned fighters. But in their “Air Dominance Initiative,” the agency notes that it's looking not just at specific technologies, like stealth or vectored engines, but at systems that work together to make a better fighter. "Systems", of course, is a super vague term. Here's how DARPA Director Arati Prabhakar described it in 2013:

    We're seeking, as well, ideas that can invert the cost equation, ways to use innovation not just to nibble at the cost of systems, but really to fundamentally change the cost equation and to inflict much more costs on our adversaries to respond to the solutions that we come up with.

    Here's something more concrete: One of those systems might be onboard artificial intelligence.

    America is hardly alone in deciding the shape of future warplanes. For decades, Russian and American innovation competed, first in the skies above Korea and then later Vietnam. Straight-wing first-generation fighters were outmaneuvered by swept-wing competitors. The early gunfighting second-generation jets manufactured right after the Korean war found themselves in missile fights against the more advanced third generation. While air-to-air combat is increasingly rare, the same cycle of design and competition continues. In future aerial battlefields, America’s F-22s and F-35s might have to contend with China’s own fifth-generation J31 fighter or Russia’s T-50. These planes are all expected to serve for decades until the sixth generation arrives, screaming and kicking afterburner, to dominate the skies.
    http://www.popsci.com/pentagon-budge...r-generation-0

    Remember folks, if we don't do it, those crafty Chinese and Russkies will!
    Attached Files

  • #2
    We should have built more F-22s.

    Regardless, the appropriate time to start developing the next version of something is right as you finish that thing, or maybe just before you finish and start discovering ways it can be improved. In the case of the F-35, that's right now.
    If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
    ){ :|:& };:

    Comment


    • #3
      Also, the T-50 is a joke. It is literally body work on top of an Su-27.
      If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
      ){ :|:& };:

      Comment


      • #4
        The F-35 began development in 1993. This is possibly an appropriate time to start.

        Comment


        • #5
          22 years to develop a plane that hasn't ever flown. what a tremendous waste and time, money, and resources.
          "The Christian way has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found to be hard and left untried" - GK Chesterton.

          "The most obvious predicition about the future is that it will be mostly like the past" - Alain de Botton

          Comment


          • #6
            Hasn't ever flown?

            Would you care to explain exactly what I am looking at in this picture?

            If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
            ){ :|:& };:

            Comment


            • #7
              Currently the hardware of the airplane is basically complete and they are rolling them off the assembly line right now. What remains to be finished is the software for stuff like electronic warfare, ground attack, air-to-air combat, etc. It takes a lot of code to run a radar, track targets, fire a guided missile or bomb, run fly-by-wire flight controls, avionics, and so on.

              The F-35 program has been a bit of a ****show but in the end the airplane that gets built is going to be vastly more capable than what it replaces. Although at a much higher cost than it should have been, to be sure.
              If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
              ){ :|:& };:

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
                Hasn't ever flown?

                Would you care to explain exactly what I am looking at in this picture?
                I think he clearly meant 'hasn't entered active service'. Let's not be pedants now.

                Comment


                • #9
                  It enters active service, that is, initial operating capability with the Marines in a few months.

                  It is in "active service" in the sense that the pilot training program is already up and running with ordinary non-test pilots flying it.

                  Originally posted by C0ckney View Post
                  22 years to develop a plane that hasn't ever flown. what a tremendous waste and time, money, and resources.
                  That's par for the course with modern fighter aircraft, so I guess unless you think we shouldn't have fighter jets at all, which you possibly do, knowing you, then that's the price of admission. The Typhoon and Rafale both took that long or longer.

                  Also, I'm measuring the time it took from the start of the JAST program in '93. The actual F-35 itself started getting designed after the X-35 was selected in 2001. So that's 14 years.

                  edit: The article pins the start date at '97 which is probably when design work began on the X-35.
                  Last edited by regexcellent; February 3, 2015, 15:54.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by regexcellent View Post
                    It enters active service, that is, initial operating capability with the Marines in a few months.

                    It is in "active service" in the sense that the pilot training program is already up and running with ordinary non-test pilots flying it.
                    Until they're ready to actively take part in combat operations, they aren't in active service.

                    Originally posted by regexcellent View Post
                    That's par for the course with modern fighter aircraft, so I guess unless you think we shouldn't have fighter jets at all, which you possibly do, knowing you, then that's the price of admission. The Typhoon and Rafale both took that long or longer.

                    Also, I'm measuring the time it took from the start of the JAST program in '93. The actual F-35 itself started getting designed after the X-35 was selected in 2001. So that's 14 years.
                    Here's a thought, how about when you have a commanding lead in the modern jet fighter 'race', with the only other people with a comparable capability being your own allies, oh and when no-ones actually doing any air-to-air combat with jet fighters, how about slow the feck down and don't waste a trillion every couple of decades on hardware that will be made obsolete BY YOU just a few years later?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The F-35 isn't driven by development in jet fighters; it's driven by development in surface to air missiles which have had a huge leap in capability over the last 20 years. And I assure you it hasn't been us building and selling the fancy new SAMs.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Which threat is the 6th generation in response to?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          the threat of being caught unprepared, obviously.

                          That, and aliens.
                          Indifference is Bliss

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by kentonio View Post
                            Until they're ready to actively take part in combat operations, they aren't in active service.



                            Here's a thought, how about when you have a commanding lead in the modern jet fighter 'race', with the only other people with a comparable capability being your own allies, oh and when no-ones actually doing any air-to-air combat with jet fighters, how about slow the feck down and don't waste a trillion every couple of decades on hardware that will be made obsolete BY YOU just a few years later?
                            No one does air-to-air combat with jet fighters because our jet fighters are so awesome. If they stop being awesome, people will do air-to-air combat again.

                            Incidentally the F-35 is not an air-to-air fighter, it's intended for air-to-ground, primarily. The F-22, which robert gates so foolishly cancelled, is AA.
                            If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
                            ){ :|:& };:

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
                              No one does air-to-air combat with jet fighters because our jet fighters are so awesome. If they stop being awesome, people will do air-to-air combat again.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X