Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Boagrius

  1. I note that the Redback with cage armor seems to be sporting the mooted exhaust management system..? EDIT: Kal beat me to it!
  2. F35A soon to sport Swiss roundels..?
  3. Another good overview
  4. Great post, thanks for the overview. I suspect the real test of Pantsir would be how it performed as part of a modern IADS - for example when acting as point defense for a HIMAD asset like S400. So far we only seem to see it used in isolation, leaving it more vulnerable to being picked off peacemeal...
  5. There definitely seems to be a pattern here. Is it just that top heavy? I find it really hard to get a balanced take on Pantsir - Russian sources seem to sell it as the greatest thing ever to happen to SHORAD, while Western sources portray it as cannon fodder for lowly Turkish TB2's...
  6. Odd that the number of dismounts seems to have dropped on both vehicles from 8-9 to 6. Is there something I'm missing here?
  7. Another one from F35 pilot, Hasard Lee:
  8. Looks like it is now official: Tiger is out and Apache (Guardian) is in for the Australian Army. https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/lreynolds/media-releases/future-ready-strengthening-armys-armed-reconnaissance-capability
  9. Thanks for the correction. Please feel free to refer to my main post on the topic (and any subsequent posts). I compiled it (and having been subsequently using it) as something of a repository for debunking common myths about the F35.
  10. Thanks for the detailed response. I believe NASAMs was tested with ESSM Blk I back in 2012 so I had assumed a move to ESSM Blk II should be possible - this may not have been a safe assumption. That said, given that Australia's CEATAC/MOUNT radars are derived from those used in the ANZAC Class ASMD upgrade (IIRC), I am still left wondering whether they may yet be able to provide the needed datalink to ESSM Blk II. This strikes me as desirable since - as you alluded to yourself - it is likely to be the most sophisticated missile of the bunch, while still being relatively affordable.
  11. Right, which speaks to why AMRAAM-ER or ESSM Blk II is probably a preferable effector for NASAMS users going forward - it gives the system proper medium range reach with a TVC equipped missile.
  12. The RAAF has declared IOC with its F35A fleet: https://adbr.com.au/raaf-f-35a-capability-achieves-ioc/
  13. I agree although given that NASAMS is not as inherently mobile as an independent system like Tor or Roland, I think it really needs AMRAAM-ER or ESSM Blk II to keep it relevant going forward. It's also not ideally suited to C-RAM or C-UAS, hence why something like the 30mm Skyranger strikes me as an attractive complementary system, especially if the two can be datalinked together to share the same targeting information.
  14. What of a system like NASAMS? I get that it's not a true independent battlefield SAM but it seems to cover a similar range envelope (with Sidewinder and AMRAAM). In Australia we seem destined to use it roughly in this niche, albeit hopefully with AMRAAM-ER/ESSM alongside something like the Skyranger 30mm above.
  15. On the topic of the dreaded Mk30-2, this popped up: https://mobile.twitter.com/i/web/status/1339154663741001734 Am guessing it will get pitched to Army as a VSHORAD solution if it hasn't already. If the gun isn't seen as a problem it looks decent.
  16. Great, thanks for the input. I guess we will know more once they have both been properly put through their paces (or shot to pieces?).
  17. Do we have a sense of which vehicle is likely to be the better protected one? I would have expected the Lynx to have the upper hand here if only based on it being the heavier vehicle. I do wonder if domestic production of the 30mm ammunition plus superior protection levels might yet get it over the line. IIRC there was some mention of the Ph 3 vehicle needing comparable protection levels to the Abrams. Now while that may be a tad ambitious for either candidate, it speaks to the emphasis placed on that particular category. EDIT: According to DTR, the MSV variant is now out due largely to the purchase of M1150 under Land 8160 Ph1, and an Armoured Mortar vehicle (AMV), Mortar Ammunition Vehicle (MAV) and Armoured Logistics Vehicle (ALV) are now in.
  18. A good overview from a current F35A driver
  19. An update from earlier: "Pratt & Whitney has received a contract from the F-35 Joint Program Office to carry out the F135 modernisation study and operational assessment. The assessment is expected to determine the requirements for the propulsion system growth for Block 4.2 F-35 aircraft and later models. As per the $1.5m contract, the study will be completed in March. Pratt & Whitney Military Engines president Matthew Bromberg said: “This award is a significant milestone for the programme and the warfighter, as we look to ensure the F135 propulsion system continues to provide the foundation for all air vehicle capability requirements over the full lifecycle of the F-35. “As we look to the future, growth in aircraft capability must be met with matched propulsion modernization. Fortunately, the F135 has ample design margin to support agile and affordable upgrades that will enable all F-35 operators to keep pace with evolving threat environments.” The company will carry out the assessment for the F135 engine enhancements that are needed for the weapon system capability requirements of the future for all the F-35 variants. The evaluation will focus on enhancements to boost powered lift thrust, the up and away thrust, power and thermal management capacity and fuel burn reduction. In a statement, Pratt & Whitney said: “Designed with the knowledge that operational environments will evolve and threats will advance, the F135 is postured to meet future F-35 capability requirements.” https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/pratt-whitney-contracted-to-carry-out-f135-engine-modernisation-study/
  20. Then again if it's going to be optionally manned, I suppose it will need to be able to "command" itself (?)
  21. Guessing this is the R77M? Looks pretty slick, and not unlike the PL-15: It will be interesting to see if JATM follows a similar geometry as well.
  22. You came here pushing a tired & long-since debunked narrative on a topic you admit to having a poor understanding of, spammed the thread with crappy links to APA and POGO, and have now doubled down on the absolute nonsense with War is Boring and Foxtrot Alpha (after I warned you about them no less). Your comments about the Sidekick mod clearly demonstrate your ignorance, since there is nothing unusual about a 4 x AAM loadout, especially for a mid-sized, stealthy (ref FC-31) multirole fighter that needs fewer weapons to achieve its kills. By way of example, the F35's that ripped through the modern IADS at Red Flag 2017 did so with a max of just 2 AMRAAMs each due to the limitations of their early Block 3i software load. Releasing incremental tranches of additional capability - like the growth to 6 internal AAMs - has been standard practice in all new combat aircraft for many decades. Meanwhile, the fact that you had the audacity (and mind-boggling hypocrisy) to turn your nose up at the plethora of (vastly superior) other sources you were gifted is farcical. Literally none of them "lead to nowhere" and all of them address precisely what was claimed in the context of the relevant arguments - none of which you provided a cogent rebuttal to or demonstrated even a basic understanding of. Your inability to grasp the comparison between VLO and TVC as an example of the flawed weighting system in the ZOCT is a good case in point, as is your bizarre and inept response to the Hornet/Flanker BFM video. I was particularly entertained by your own-goal of a link about a rookie F35 unit that out performed highly experienced, air-to-air specialist F15 crews in Japan during BFM drills. The sources you try to dismiss as "tabloids" are direct quotes from actual fighter pilots with relevant experience and input on the exact matter(s) being discussed (apparently this is only a problem for you when you don't think they suit your narrative). Again, given the fact that most of the relevant data on the F35's kinematic performance is classified, I will take their input along with that of the other service members I have spoken to (from various air forces) over yours every. single. time. The earlier gripe about me not adequately "quoting" APA is hilarious, because the source material in question (the APA ZOCT table you posted upthread) is literally the first thing I referenced in my rebuttal to it. It is also... just a table, and high school Science class will tell you that one does not "quote" a table. In reality, I clearly laid out my rebuttal in massive, bolded bullet points (can't make it much easier for you than that). All you had to do was refer to your own bloody source while reading it(!). That you have been either too inept or too obstinate to grasp any of the above is, frankly, not my problem. If you want more information you can find it yourself - I am done spoon feeding you for free (apparently you need me to "chew" for you now too) and I doubt anyone else here has the patience either. Frankly, I think mine has been saintly up to this point, but it has well and truly run out.
  23. Not an expert but if the Israelis were happy with it I can't see why not. AFAIK the F35I is no different to an ordinary F35A apart from the installation of custom Israeli EW widgets. Happy to be corrected if I am wrong here.
  • Create New...