Future Fighter-Bomber 2015-2020

[Hunt3r]

IMHO, I think the F-35 JSF is simply a bad idea. I think that it is a relic of the past, requiring too much support in order to be able to do the job it needs to do, and it simply is not good enough to serve those buying it.

First, it's range is far too low. It is very much akin to the F-105, requiring a Phantom (F-22A) escort it when the fighter should be trying to maintain air superiority. The F-35 simply cannot beat Soviet and Chinese fighters coming into service in the near future, and in a high-intensity modern conflict, will be annihilated by aircraft such as the modern Flanker series.

My proposal is to change this. Instead of sinking costs into a brand new airframe, instead, you take the existing F-22A, add capability to mount a targeting pod that does not compromise stealth, with a laser rangefinder/designator. Include the capability to fit external pylons to carry greater ordnance, at the sacrifice of stealth.

In the end, you have a jet that can be a tactical interdictor with the range to take out primary targets and targets of opportunity, and the aerodynamic capability to kinematically evade all SAM missiles in existence, and to out-turn, out-climb, and out-accelerate all but the latest and greatest Flankers.

Ideas?

[Sidewinder Zulu]

To me, it seems likely that the next generation of fighter bombers developed by major military powers will be primarily unmanned.

While having autonomous robots on the ground with weapons is difficult, due to problems of them accidentally firing on civilians or whatever, the rules of air combat are fairly straightforward.

Put plainly, robotic aircraft are superior to humans in almost every way.

They have much faster reflexes, they are able to withstand G-forces that would incapacitate a human, they can remain airborne for days on end, they do not require cockpits or life-support, leaving more room for weapons, and, obviously, if they are destroyed nobody is killed.

Anyway, that's an interesting idea you had about the F-22, but I'm not proficient with the technical aspects of most modern aircraft, so I'll leave that debate up to other people.

Regardless, we will definitely see a great deal of innovation and new design elements within the Air Forces of the world in the coming decades. It will be an interesting series of developments.

[Spartan10k]

well the whole reason they designed the F-35 in the first place is because it incorporates stealth techonology into an "affordable" 5th generation fighter (the F-35 costs around $83 million as opposed to around $143 million for the F-22). also, it was specifically designed to not be as good as the F-22 so they could sell it to our allies. the range doesn't matter, as everything we have now is capable of being refueled in mid-air, what does matter is the combat radius. which is actually better in the F-35. the listed combat radius of the F-35 varries from 450-600 n. mi depending on which varient you're talking about (http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/a...6AF-35Broc.pdf), while the tested combat radius of the F-22 is anywhere from 300-400 n. mi (http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/a...6AF-35Broc.pdf). i do like how the F-22 has 2 engines instead of 1 since i'm a fan of redundancy, and the F-22 engines are awesome because they are the first to allow supersonic cruise

Originally Posted by Sidewinder Zulu

To me, it seems likely that the next generation of fighter bombers developed by major military powers will be primarily unmanned.

agree 100%

[[R-MOD]Cp]

Originally Posted by Hunt3r

My proposal is to change this. Instead of sinking costs into a brand new airframe, instead, you take the existing F-22A, add capability to mount a targeting pod that does not compromise stealth, with a laser rangefinder/designator. Include the capability to fit external pylons to carry greater ordnance, at the sacrifice of stealth.

Well, First of all, how do you propose to land an F-22 on a carrier? the entire aircraft would need to be redesigned, strengthened and you'd possibly need to increase the wing area to allow for slower speeds.

Getting an f-22 onto a carrier is easy tough, when compared to getting it onto a wasp class assault ships deck and then off of it again, this would need a complete redesign of the aircraft and in the end you'd probably end up manufacturing three very different planes each one with an price tag far above the F-35s.


The f-35 will replace the F-16s, F-18s and the harriers, not the F-15s.

[[R-MOD]Bob_Marley]

Originally Posted by Cp

The f-35 will replace the F-16s, F-18s and the harriers, not the F-15s.

And A-10s, don't forget the A-10s. Because we all know how well replacing a low and slow dedicated ground attack aircraft that can stay on station and provide ground troops with immediate support with a fast mover that drinks fuel like a fish and needs to return to base after a single attack run works (see A-16 & F/A-16 for details.)

[[R-DEV]Dunehunter]

Yes, but they're updating the A10s, so they won't be going anywhere for a while

[Spartan10k]

Originally Posted by [R-MOD]Bob_Marley

And A-10s, don't forget the A-10s

if they intend on replacing the A-10's, then why the hell did we just spend $4.4 billion uprading the ENTIRE A-10 fleet?

[[R-MOD]Cp]

Originally Posted by [R-MOD]Bob_Marley

And A-10s, don't forget the A-10s. Because we all know how well replacing a low and slow dedicated ground attack aircraft that can stay on station and provide ground troops with immediate support with a fast mover that drinks fuel like a fish and needs to return to base after a single attack run works (see A-16 & F/A-16 for details.)

I predict that the A-10 will be around for at least another 20 years, especially as they are looking for even slower aircrafts already.
The Light Attack Aircraft

[Sniper77shot]

Originally Posted by [R-MOD]Bob_Marley

And A-10s, don't forget the A-10s. Because we all know how well replacing a low and slow dedicated ground attack aircraft that can stay on station and provide ground troops with immediate support with a fast mover that drinks fuel like a fish and needs to return to base after a single attack run works (see A-16 & F/A-16 for details.)

Pleast take to account that the A-10 replaces the Bronco in Forward air control. So the A-10 will remain in service.

[lucidrians]

I'd like them to keep the A-10, even if it doesn't do it's role aswell as other aircraft. It's just too awesome.