Thread: New Parliamentary report on the joint strike fighter, F35

One wonders if a Russian air-frame would have been better value. - At least they're in active service..so the worst bugs would be worked out of them.

Reminds me of an old Science Fiction story, about the R&D staff who over-ruled the Military, by constantly inventing 'better' / more complex/less reliable space ships and weapons systems to fight off a pending planetary invasion...

Guess who won the war ?


EDIT:- Read it in my schooldays, and was a favourite. Appeals to my black sense of humour...

I have that short story as an eBook! Stalin once remarked that quantity had a quality all of its own when discussing the T-34 tank - a really, really crap tank but available in staggering numbers.


Edit: I had a look at that report a couple of weeks ago as a person or two I know had input. Check out Appendix 4 if you want to know how the opposition aircraft stack up, re: 5th Gen Stealth characteristics. It ain't pretty....

Title / Author ???

- Please.


Edit:- That chart is ... sobering. Is this going to be another 'F-111', where the design/materials was stripped down by the Accountants... and Oz ended up doing a bit of the 'remedial' work to keep it in the air?

"...Stalin once remarked that quantity had a quality all of its own when discussing the T-34 tank - a really, really crap tank but available in staggering numbers.

Correct me if I'm rrong, but,-
the WWII Jap 'Zero' was a relatively cheap... not too robust, lightweight and agile (under-gunned too) aeroplane that fulfilled it's original specs. - Carrier based and long range.
It was, AFAIK, produced in annoyingly generous numbers for most of the Pacific War.

Another example of an average (?) weapon saved by large numbers and being very well-operated...

Will dig it out for you tonight and post it.

Edit: Found a link for it online. It is called Superiority by Arthur C. Clarke
http://www.mayofamily.com/RLM/txt_Cl...periority.html

The thing about the Zero, apart from the excellent handling and range due to light weight etc, was that the Japanese pilots were pretty much some of the best trained pilots in the world. Most of them had combat hours under their belts from China, Philippines, etc so gave the Allied pilots (who were flying inferior aircraft) one hell of a shock. The Brewster Buffalo's and P-39's were easily shot down and the F4F's had to develop much different tactics to what they were used to trying to best the Zero's (ie. don't get into a turning dogfight). The F4F's held the line until better aircraft came later.

I remember reading about the Japanese carrier pilot training where they went into the ocean en-masse at 6am and swam with their instructors till nightfall. If you didn't make it, well then you didn't make it! In their pilots they preferred quality over quantity (although they had plenty of pilots) which cost them later in the war when they couldn't replace their combat losses with the same skill sets of the pre-war pilots. Another thing that didn't help was not keeping up materiel-wise either as the Allies gradually got on top with tougher, faster aircraft (F6F and Corsair etc), hence the Mariana's Turkey Shoot. Japanese engine power didn't keep up enough during the war, for instance. It's an interesting topic!

The F-35's unfortunately won't get to test their pilots superior skills when they meet large numbers of the enemy (even with their sensor suite) as they don't carry enough fuel OR weapons, can't maneuver well enough, and then can't run away because they are too slow. Without F-22's as fighter escorts they are in a vulnerable position. Think F-4 Phantom and F-105 Thud from the Vietnam era as a comparison. It's been covered elsewhere but we pretty much picked the wrong bird for the RAAF.