Gates in 2009 placed the full weight of his reputation behind his push for the Obama scalebacks.. He was backed by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who called ending production of the F-22 a “major step in the right direction.”... Gates, McCain and other foes of relying on the F-22 have placed their faith in Lockheed’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter... The F-35, however, lacks the F-22’s “supercruise” propulsion abilities... “Any notion that an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter or F/A-18E/F Super Hornet will be capable of competing against this Chengdu design in air combat, let alone penetrate airspace defended by this fighter, would be simply absurd.”
Saturday, August 27, 2011
Terminating the Raptor
Gates in 2009 placed the full weight of his reputation behind his push for the Obama scalebacks.. He was backed by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who called ending production of the F-22 a “major step in the right direction.”... Gates, McCain and other foes of relying on the F-22 have placed their faith in Lockheed’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter... The F-35, however, lacks the F-22’s “supercruise” propulsion abilities... “Any notion that an F-35 Joint Strike Fighter or F/A-18E/F Super Hornet will be capable of competing against this Chengdu design in air combat, let alone penetrate airspace defended by this fighter, would be simply absurd.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
14 comments:
Chinese aerospace tech is in the 70s.
Very perspicacious, Herr Rott. The stealth fighter Chengdu 20 does look like a vintage Mirage III. Not.
In the 70s, French aerospace was in the 50s.
A serious (i.e., non-Rotter) analysis of the strategic threat.
Internal Chengdu plans found.
Bottom line of the report--I know you can not be bothered to read something serious, so let me give you the executive summary:
The only US design with the kinematic performance, stealth performance and sensor capability to be able to confront the J-20 [J-XX] with viable combat lethality and survivability is the F-22A Raptor, or rather, evolved and enhanced variants of the existing configuration of this aircraft.
The US Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is outclassed in every respect, and would be as ineffective against a mature J-XX [J-20] as it is against the F-22A Raptor.
All variants of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter would be equally so outclassed, assuming this failed project even progresses to any kind of actual production.
All US Air Force, US Navy and allied legacy fighters are outclassed in much the same manner, and are ineffective kinematically and in sensor capability against this class of threat system.
The extant IADS technology base of the US Army and Navy and their sister services in Pacific Rim allied nations will be largely ineffective, requiring the replacement of most if not all acquisition radars with VHF-band AESA technology replacements designed to defeat S/X/Ku-band stealth capabilities.
From the perspectives of both technological strategy and military grand strategy, the J-XX [J-20] is the final nail in the coffin of the utterly failed “Gates recapitalisation plan” for United States and allied tactical fighter fleets. Apologists for the “Gates fighter recapitalisation plan” will no doubt concoct a plethora of reasons as to why the J-XX [J-20] should be ignored, as they did exactly one year ago when the Russians unveiled the T-50 PAK-FA stealth fighter.
The material reality is simple. If the United States does not reverse course in its tactical air fleet and air defence recapitalisation planning, the United States will lose the Pacific Rim to China, with all of the practical and grand strategic consequences which follow from that.
It's BS.
Yeah, sure--as the author of the report says, the apologists for disarming America will find all sorts of (specious) reasons for pooh-poohing the threat. So no surprise there.
On the other hand, if you had bothered to click on the link to the main story, you'll see that there is someone who disagrees with the standard Rotter position:
“We made some huge errors in the course of the last three-to-five years from the standpoint of militarily not continuing to fund R&D with our military,” Perry charged during an appearance on Laura Ingraham’s talk radio program on Thursday. “For instance, we had a next-generation fighter aircraft that was on the books to be developed. And the then-secretary of Defense – through, I suppose, direction by this president, Obama – said, you know, we’re gonna cut back. And that’s gonna be one of the cutbacks.”
Perry's stock went up with me after this. And not for the usual bs reasons you like to highlight (which don't play well with me), but for a substantive reason. Namely, he seems to be the first candidate to realize the strategic threat posed by this policy of unilateral disarmament that you cheer on so heartily (along with Gates and McCain, of course).
Yeah, Gates is a pinko.
What do you have against Perry? You like Romneycare?
Gates is not a pinko. But he presided (willingly or unwillingly, that's not the issue), over a huge cutback of our military might, particularly gutting our air power by his decision to terminate the Raptor.
As for Perry, I don't particularly appreciate the empty-of-content swagger, that's all. But, in this particular interview, as I said, he comes out with something resembling substance.
Of course, we still the money to build back up our forces. And the way to get the money is to get back to producing things, instead of just shuffling the money around with empty "stimuli" (the way Pepe likes to do things). Perry seems better than others at encouraging this, though he needs to prove he can do it at the national scale, not just in Texas.
Perry's angle.
According to the Pentagon, there already are 38,000 employees working on the next-generation stealth fighter jet, known as the F-35. That number is anticipated to jump to 82,000 in fiscal 2011.
Still, Bethesda, Md.-based Lockheed has said almost 95,000 jobs — mostly in California, Texas, Georgia and Connecticut — could be at risk if the Pentagon didn't buy more F-22 jets.
Perry doesn't swagger emptily. The loudest he's spoken is in reference to Bernanke printing more dollars.
He was goddamned right to accuse those creeps of political shenanigans and very dangerous ones at that.
If he would have soft-pedaled the thing, Obama and Bernanke might have gone ahead.
What have you got then?
Why can't a Perry or a Palin talk with a proper Boston accent?
Palin would rather not go for a swim with your former senator...
Post a Comment