Derek 2.0

Says an unconfirmed media report........

Hacked/Cracked what? The Chinese, if they did actually do so, only gained access to limited information (as speculated the maintenance software) via sub contractors computers........sensitive military data is not accessible via the commercial internet. Now back up your statement that the F-35 is no longer "stealthy".

Performance specs associated with development for an allowance of next years IOC........what don't you understand? Now, explain how the F-35 is no longer "stealthy"?

I did read it......and no, it speaks to current issues in development.......... Now, you suggested the F-35 is no longer "stealthy", by all means explain.

No, it speaks to delays associated with development, not to a degradation in end product capabilities......Now please explain how you feel the F-35 is no longer "stealthy"......

How do advanced western weapons like tank shells and guided missiles get smuggled into the country? A combat loadout for a single tank equates to the weight of a small car.........start there.

Perhaps not rocket science, but you've yet to explain it further.......for that I await.

Please go on and expand on these issues and how they won't be addressed once development is complete.....Likewise, by all means expand on the F-35 being "not even stealthy".......I'd love to hear you knowledge, knowledge that the JSF partners are not fearful of, so as to dissuade them from selecting the F-35......

What capabilities have been reduced? None, when actually further capabilities and technology growth has led to both increased costs and IOCs pushed back. Evolution.........The Chinese and Russians (like the "West") have continually developed new technology......halting ones own progress is not a cure-all, with this being a truism since the dawn of man.......you throw a rock at me, I develop the sling to throw the rock back with greater force etc........

The Chinese have yet to build their own domestic military turbofan, even with the benefit of reverse engineering 70s era Soviet examples........none the less, you've suggested Canada purchasing the Super Hornet, how do you feel the Super Hornet would contend against next generation Chinese and Russian offerings........and of course, if the Chinese/Russians have developed technology that can defeat stealth, why are they building their own stealth aircraft?

Why wouldn't they believe Lockheed? They will start receiving their aircraft after the USAF IOC of the F-35A, and even with continual software updates, the F-35A will be a stark improvement over the 60s era F-4 Phantoms that they will replace........ As to the additional "20", both the F-15 Silent Eagle and Eurofighter tranche 3B are not currently in service, with the F-15SE still in development. Of course, said "20" additional aircraft could be used by the Koreans to sweeten the pot in a program to retrofit the South Koreans already existing F-15 Eagles to a near Silent Eagle status to remain viable in the decades ahead....or they could just purchase more F-35s.... I don't know why you'd feel the US Government would refuse the technology transfer........as to China, do we actually know the extent of China's "liberation" of technology? None the less, why would the Chinese (and Russians) seek F-35 secrets if it's such a turkey? Don't they have access to the same blogs as we do?

By all means, expand upon how Qatar would both finance and deliver advanced Western munitions to ISIS in central/Northern Iraq.........

But, both Boeing and the Eurofighter consortium offered such offsets........of course the Koreans went with the more advanced F-35, coupled with Lockheed's experience with all things "stealth", which the Koreans deem a requirement for their own domestic build..........Nearly the same such process can be found also in the Japanese selection......which is why I was able to "predict" both the Japanese and South Korean fighter outcomes several years ago...... With the South Koreans though, it's further compounded due to not only the Lockheed/KAI partnership on the F-16 and Korea's future domestic fighter, but more so, their partnership on the T-50 trainer, which both companies will enter in the USAF's T-38 trainer replacement program, which will be worth upwards of 500+ aircraft........one can surmise that said offered version of the T-50 lead-in trainer, will encompass a cockpit similar to that of the F-35A....

Funny that they would not only purchase the "flying butter ball", but get Lockheed to aide in developing their own It's not uncommon for countries to work out such "side deals"...........Canada is notorious for such offsets. For example, during the 90s & early 2000s, the then Liberal Government, well looking at options for replacing the Sea King and ageing C-130E transports, was looking toward European (namely French) offerings (NH-90 & Airbus A400M) but sought "industrial cooperation" with the allowance of our domestic aircraft engine maker (P&W Canada) to enter these programs.....the Europeans, mindful of their own industries, told us to pound sand. Another current example is the, very basic, replacement of both our current issued Arctic Ranger rifle (WWI & WWII era Lee-Enfields ) and the current Canadian Forces sidearm (1930s circa Browning Hi-Power 9mm). Such replacements shouldn't be difficult with many current options, but the Canadian Government requires a current firearms maker to hand-over their intellectual property rights to Colt Canada/Diemaco for local, Canadian production.....suffice to say no current firearms maker has jumped at the offer.........

Which success is that? Local production of Western designs? Japan has similar terms with their F-35 purchase..........In my view, the far more interesting "incentive offerings", saw Lockheed purchase a European produced satellite for the South Koreans, after US Government export laws precluded Lockheed (one of the main suppliers for the US Government) from selling one of theirs to the South Koreans.

Applies and oranges......its far easier to sell a commodity like oil, than it is to procure on the blackmarket specific heavy western munitions like guided missiles or tank shells.......and then, bring them into the center of Iraq......Even the Americans, with all their resources, had to strain to bring both forces and supplies to Northern Iraq during the '03 invasion.

Largely the difference between the past US and future Iraqi counter-insurgency efforts can be found within it's forces birthright.......

Another on the pile:

Munitions are a very bulky commodity, which rely heavily upon a working transportation and supply infrastructure.....something that ISIS doesn't have and won't gain as a result of allied air power.

I don't doubt a portion of the Sunni population is supportive of ISIS, this is evident by the increase of ISIS alone......Some people love a winner, but the real ultimate test of local support will be when there is no longer power, fuel, food and water.

What is the alternative for the local Sunni population? Its rather easy for civil authorities, combined with the general populace, to "support" ISIS when their families are under threat........

As I said: This is directly a result of modern air power...........ISIS ditching their tanks, MRAPS and uparmored Humvees for sub-compacts and scooters, well blending into the civilian population is a reduction in their ability to fight conventionally. Well signalling that airstrikes are having a result, a result that will see ISIS revert to a lightly armed insurgency, of which the Iraqi army and police services will contend with.

ISIS has no outside source of supply, granted they captured tons upon tons of munitions from both the Syrian and Iraqi armies......as to who will run out first? The intent is to ensure that it is ISIS, as made evident by Allied airstrikes on ISIS munitions dumps, coupled with targeting ISIS supply convoys on Iraqi and Syrian highways............I wouldn't be surprised if ISIS is already experiencing shortages of heavier US supplied munitions (like tank and artillery shells and anti-tank missiles), captured off the Iraqis.

They won't re-emerge, just like they didn't re-emerge as a conventional force during the US occupation........As to providing the "means", we are, both in terms or arms/munitions and further training......

And why does ISIS flee into villages, towns and cities? Simple, air strikes........As I said many times, once ISIS reverts back into the urban areas when their heavy arms are destroyed, it will be up to both the Kurds and Iraqi army to retake these populated urban areas house to house......The air strikes are reducing the ability of ISIS to deploy a conventional force (what they used to achieve in many of their Iraqi victories), forcing it to revert back to a guerrilla force.....