Cancellation of the F-35 contract is now a necessity: when and how, not if

[Aristides]

22 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

it's naive to think that Washington would allow Canada to cancel its American contracts to switch to European,

there are many levers which Washington can pull both in Canada & Europe to prevent that,

We'll see. Of course that would make them even more unpopular and unreliable in the rest of the world as well.

[Dougie93]

15 hours ago, Army Guy said:

except in a knife fight....

it's not so much that the F-35 can't knife fight in a phone booth,

since the F-35 can execute very high angle of attack manoeuvres close in,

the problem is more that pulling those g's bleeds energy very rapidly, which slows you down to a crawl,

which is not so much of a problem if it is 1 v 1,

but that's not how air forces fight,

instead, you're going to be in a so called "fur ball" with fighters from both sides mixing in a much larger fight,

so at Red Flag and whatnot, the F-35's don't slow down to engage in dogfights,

rather the F-35 employs its stealth,  situational awareness and coordination in order to hit and run,

4 minutes ago, Aristides said:

We'll see. Of course that would make them even more unpopular and unreliable in the rest of the world as well.

but America will always have Canada as a vassal state caught in the American Sphere of Influence regardless

[Legato]

15 hours ago, Army Guy said:

except in a knife fight....

Then you need a Wartrhog A-10C

[Dougie93]

13 minutes ago, Legato said:

Then you need a Wartrhog A-10C

the war in Ukraine has proven low and slow flying attack aircraft & helicopters to be extremely vulnerable,

there's just too many SAMs, from long ranged down to MANPADs

that as soon as an attack aircraft pops up to do an attack run, it gets shot down

[Dougie93]

15 hours ago, xul said:

The concept of air superiority fighter was raised during the Vietnam War, when due to the limitations of radar and air-to-air missile technologies, the air combat usually took form of dogfight.

The concept has gradually faded away since late 1990s, duo to the high R/D and purchasing costs of 5G fighters. The improvement of air-to-air missile technology also makes BVR become the major form of air combats, and fighter jets are no longer required to point its nose at target for firing a missile in dogfight, so agility of fighter jets is no longer considered as major factor to win air combats to establish air superiority.

Nowadays, almost all fighter jets, include all 5G and later variants of 4g fighters are multirole. F-35 is also a multirole fighter jet which can be used for air superiority mission. This is why USAF throws in billions dollars to upgrade complex network software and hardware for it, which obviously are unnecessary If it was mainly used for strike mission.

what we've seen in Ukraine is that SAM's are now so integrated, accurate & reliable,

that neither side is able to fly their non stealth fighters over the other sides territory at all,

the Russians don't risk it anymore, they just drop glide bombs from inside Russian controlled SAM space

the Ukrainians mostly use their fighters to try to shoot down Russian cruise missiles,

there are no dogfights,

because without stealth, you can't even get that close to the enemy without getting shot down by SAMs

[Legato]

25 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

the war in Ukraine has proven low and slow flying attack aircraft & helicopters to be extremely vulnerable,

there's just too many SAMs, from long ranged down to MANPADs

that as soon as an attack aircraft pops up to do an attack run, it gets shot down

Air to air.

[Dougie93]

17 minutes ago, Legato said:

Air to air.

A-10 maximum AOA is 15 degrees, min speed is 450 knots, pulling 7g

F-16 maximum AOA is 25 degrees, min speed is 325 knots, pulling 9g

so in a knife fight in a phone booth, the F-16 dances circles around an A-10

F-16 pulls a high AOA manoeuvre, the A-10 ends up out in front ; boom, dead

the whole point of a dogfight is to get behind the other guy,

the A-10 stands no chance of doing that against a fighter

Edited March 23 by Dougie93

[Legato]

18 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

A-10 maximum AOA is 15 degrees, min speed is 450 knots, pulling 7g

F-16 maximum AOA is 25 degrees, min speed is 325 knots, pulling 9g

so in a knife fight in a phone booth, the F-16 dances circles around an A-10

F-16 pulls a high AOA manoeuvre, the A-10 ends up out in front ; boom, dead

Not designed for air to air, but don't write it off.

• Not an Air Superiority Fighter:

  The A-10 is not designed for air-to-air dominance, lacking features like high speed, radar, and long-range missiles that are crucial for air superiority fighters. 

   
• Strong in Close-In Dogfights:

  Despite its limitations, the A-10's tight turn radius and powerful 30mm GAU-8 Avenger cannon can make it a formidable opponent in close-quarters dogfights. 

   
• Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM) Training:

  The U.S. Air Force Weapons School at Nellis Air Force Base even teaches A-10 pilots Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM) in case they find themselves in a dogfight. 

   
• Historical Examples:

  During Operation Desert Storm, A-10s were credited with destroying two helicopters in air-to-air engagements, demonstrating their ability to defend themselves and engage enemy aircraft. 

   
• Durability:

  The A-10's design prioritizes durability, with a robust titanium tub protecting the cockpit, allowing it to withstand significant damage, which is crucial for surviving in the close air support role. 

   
• Gun Power:

  The A-10's 30mm GAU-8 Avenger cannon is a key strength, capable of destroying tanks and other armored vehicles, and also effective against aircraft in a dogfight. 

 

 

[Dougie93]

26 minutes ago, Legato said:

Not designed for air to air, but don't write it off.

• Not an Air Superiority Fighter:

  The A-10 is not designed for air-to-air dominance, lacking features like high speed, radar, and long-range missiles that are crucial for air superiority fighters. 

   
• Strong in Close-In Dogfights:

  Despite its limitations, the A-10's tight turn radius and powerful 30mm GAU-8 Avenger cannon can make it a formidable opponent in close-quarters dogfights. 

   
• Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM) Training:

  The U.S. Air Force Weapons School at Nellis Air Force Base even teaches A-10 pilots Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM) in case they find themselves in a dogfight. 

   
• Historical Examples:

  During Operation Desert Storm, A-10s were credited with destroying two helicopters in air-to-air engagements, demonstrating their ability to defend themselves and engage enemy aircraft. 

   
• Durability:

  The A-10's design prioritizes durability, with a robust titanium tub protecting the cockpit, allowing it to withstand significant damage, which is crucial for surviving in the close air support role. 

   
• Gun Power:

  The A-10's 30mm GAU-8 Avenger cannon is a key strength, capable of destroying tanks and other armored vehicles, and also effective against aircraft in a dogfight. 

 

the A-10 is not actually quick and nimble, it's not suited in any way to a dogfight,

shooting down helicopters is not a dogfight,

the A-10 is not durable enough to survive an A2A hit from either a Sidewinder or 20mm cannon,

the A-10 is never going to get a shot off with GAU-8 against a fighter,

since again, the A-10 is not particularly manoeuvrable in comparison,

it's actually the fighter which can fly slower, turn tighter and go high AOA in a dogfight,

F-35 can pull 50º AOA and practically stop on a dime; at low speed, F-35 is only second to the F-22

the A-10 wouldn't stand a chance as it shot out in front of the F-35 for an easy gun kill,

the F-35 could really just point its gun at the A-10 with impunity, like a cat toying with its prey

this is where Army Guy is wrong ; knife fight in a phone booth is an F-35 specialty

it's really only in a high speed turning fight at altitude, one circle rate fight,

against a dedicated air superiority fighter; where F-35 is lacking

Edited March 23 by Dougie93

[Legato]

12 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

the A-10 is not actually quick and nimble, it's not suited in any way to a dogfight,

shooting down helicopters is not a dogfight,

the A-10 is not durable enough to survive an A2A hit from either a Sidewinder or 20mm cannon,

the A-10 is never going to get a shot off with GAU-8 against a fighter,

since again, the A-10 is not particularly manoeuvrable in comparison,

it's actually the fighter which can fly slower, turn tighter and go high AOA in a dogfight,

F-35 can pull 50º AOA and practically stop on a dime, at low speed, F-35 is only second to the F-22

the A-10 wouldn't stand a chance as it shot out in front of the F-35 for an easy gun kill,

the F-35 could really just point its gun at the A-10 with impunity, like a cat toying with its prey

My opinion differs, just leave it at that.

[Dougie93]

Just now, Legato said:

My opinion differs, just leave it at that.

I've explained to you that the fighter can fly slower, turn tighter, and at higher angles of attack,

so your opinion is in contravention of the factors which determines who wins a knife fight in a phone booth A2A

[Dougie93]

just fyi ; there are basically two ways to dogfight

one circle rate fight,

two circle pitch fight,

in a one circle rate fight, both fighters are chasing each other around in a single circle,

the fighter which catches up first in that race wins,

fighters which are optimized for that include F-15, F-16, Eurofighter Typhoon

in a two circle pitch fight, the fighters go into the vertical for high angle of attack manoeuvre,

the fighter which points its nose at the other guy first wins,

fighters which excel at that include F/A-18, F-35, Dassault Rafale

then there is F-22 in a class of its own, dominating in both types of fight

[Dougie93]

On 3/21/2025 at 6:53 PM, Aristides said:

The F-47 is an air superiority fighter to replace the F-22, not a substitute for the F-35.

true enough,

but what this signals, politically, is that the USAF is moving away from F-35 as being the future,

first off all selecting Boeing ( McDonnell Douglas St Slouis )

indicates how the USAF is not satisfied as to how LockMart executed the F-35 program,

bearing in mind that F-35 still hasn't reached full rate production nor full operational capability, after 20 years

the USAF has also determined that much of what F-35 does could be done by drones instead,

thus the most important programs to the USAF are actually the B-21 Raider & the F-47 Trumper,

because those are the platforms which give America the edge,

so I could see this being a sign that America is actually moving on from F-35 sooner rather than later

[xul]

17 hours ago, Army Guy said:

It does matter alot when fighters come into close contact then it puts F-35 at a disadvantage, BVR weapons are not very effective at close range hence short range missiles.... BVR is great when you can positively identify enemy aircraft at distance and they are at war, but when pushing off Russia / Chinese aircraft out of your airspace...you need to do that wing tip to wing tip sort of speak...That's when the F-22, F-15, F-16, F-18 etc in the air dominance role....... have the advantage over F-35...  Think off the F-35 as the quarterback it can spot enemy aircraft at distance even control and direct other aircraft missile launches to target...The new F-15 EX is a missle truck Americans are planning to use it with F-35 for that very reason...But its speciality is strike missions...but is also very deadly at air to air, except in a knife fight....

The flight performance of F-35 was intentionally capped by USAF in hope that it would get more F-22 orders granted by US congress, but for some reasons things didn't go as USAF planned. So USAF had no choice but to upgrade F-35's avionics, software and weapon system to compensate its shortcomings on flight performance to make it the backbone of US air supremacy.

I think it is a proof that even a lackluster platform, if it is upgraded with most advanced avionics and weaponry,  can be very good for air superiority mission.

Quote

but when pushing off Russia / Chinese aircraft out of your airspace...you need to do that wing tip to wing tip sort of speak...

In such kind missions, flight performance matters the most over other performances. In certain circumstance, even old Soviet MIg-25 has an edge over F-22, for it can fly over 4km higher than a F-22.

I think this is why F-47 may kill the F-35 eventually. Obviously the air superiority mission of F-35 will be taken away by F-47, and the role on strike mission will be replaced by drones and unmanned aircrafts, so there will be no room left for more F-35.

---

For conduct this kind of mission, Russian SU-57 is probably the best option over other 5G fighters:

 

Edited March 23 by xul

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, xul said:

For conduct this kind of mission, Russian SU-57 is probably the best option over other 5G fighters:

that's odd, since the Russians won't even fly them against NATO air defences in Ukraine,

even when Russia is in a total war of annihilation therein,

[Dougie93]

5 minutes ago, xul said:

The flight performance of F-35 was intentionally capped by USAF in hope that it would get more F-22 orders granted by US congress,

that is not why F-35 performance was capped,

the performance was tailored to cost, the F-35 was supposed to be the low cost partner in the high-low mix,

same way F-16 is less capable than F-15, but at the half the price,

the problems were really having to meet the Marine Corps STOVL requirement in the same platform,

and then LockMart botched the development with the Concurrency concept ; fly before you buy

[xul]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

that's odd, since the Russians won't even fly them against NATO air defences in Ukraine,

even when Russia is in a total war of annihilation therein,

It is because no one would fire a missile at the SU-57 in an air show. Without advanced avionics, which obviously are the shortcoming of any Russian airplanes, SU-57 won't last long in Ukrainian airspace.

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, xul said:

It is because no one would fire a missile at the SU-57 in an air show. Without advanced avionics, which obviously are the shortcoming of any Russian airplanes, SU-57 won't last long in Ukrainian airspace.

so it's "the best 5G fighter" which is none the less totally useless to Russia in a war of existential survival ?

[xul]

8 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

so it's "the best 5G fighter" which is none the less totally useless to Russia in a war of existential survival ?

I said "For conduct this kind of mission, Russian SU-57 is probably the best option over other 5G fighters:"

and "this kind of mission" was referring the not-open-fire scenario in Army Guy's post:

Quote

but when pushing off Russia / Chinese aircraft out of your airspace...you need to do that wing tip to wing tip sort of speak..

Like this one:

 

Edited March 23 by xul

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, xul said:

I said "For conduct this kind of mission, Russian SU-57 is probably the best option over other 5G fighters:"

and "this kind of mission" was referring the not-open-fire scenario in Army Guy's post:

Like this one:

 

I would suggest that the Russians can deploy an AESA with Sensor Fusion Engine for the Su-57

it's not really about avionics, nor any sort of tactical performance metric,

the problem for the Russians is that they just cannot deploy all the strategic enablers available to America,

[Army Guy]

15 hours ago, Aristides said:

Agreed.I've always maintained the F-35 was the best choice. Unfortunately we can no longer trust the country selling it. We wouldn't be having this conversation if Mango Mussolini hadn't gone to the dark side. I don't see how buying off the shelf should put us back ten years.

Trump will not be in office when we receive our first F-35 aircraft...trump is a just a blip in history

I don't understand how it does either however if you look at our history , how long did it take to find a sea king replacement after chretien canceled it...same could be said with the F-18 , how long will it be before our first f-35 gets here, media sources say not until 2030...Justin canceled it in 2015....an entire new competition will have to be run, tested, lets remember that the typhoon and Rafale quit after our government was asking to much in the way of offsets...it would not be fair just to give the runner up the contract because they lasted the longest in the competition....when europe would be in a more Eager mood to sell us fighters, even though they would be more expensive...but it would put us in a better position to eventually buy a 6 gen aircraft some euro countries are working on right now...

[Dougie93]

7 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

.but it would put us in a better position to eventually buy a 6 gen aircraft some euro countries are working on right now...

or Canadians could just realize that the sole purpose of the air force is to fight wars for the Americans,

and so dial back the spending on that project,

to instead spend money on the army,

since ultimately, Canadian national security really just comes down to having boots on the ground in the end,

[xul]

7 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

I would suggest that the Russians can deploy an AESA with Sensor Fusion Engine for the Su-57

it's not really about avionics, nor any sort of tactical performance metric,

the problem for the Russians is that they just cannot deploy all the strategic enablers available to America,

I'm sure Russian engineers could build anything which US has if they got enough funds. 

But currently, Putin has to count on some makeshift turtle tanks and gas pipeline commandos instead of SU-57 and air assault brigade to win the war.

[Army Guy]

48 minutes ago, xul said:

The flight performance of F-35 was intentionally capped by USAF in hope that it would get more F-22 orders granted by US congress, but for some reasons things didn't go as USAF planned. So USAF had no choice but to upgrade F-35's avionics, software and weapon system to compensate its shortcomings on flight performance to make it the backbone of US air supremacy.

I think it is a proof that even a lackluster platform, if it is upgraded with most advanced avionics and weaponry,  can be very good for air superiority mission.

In such kind missions, flight performance matters the most over other performances. In certain circumstance, even old Soviet MIg-25 has an edge over F-22, for it can fly over 4km higher than a F-22.

I think this is why F-47 may kill the F-35 eventually. Obviously the air superiority mission of F-35 will be taken away by F-47, and the role on strike mission will be replaced by drones and unmanned aircrafts, so there will be no room left for more F-35.

---

For conduct this kind of mission, Russian SU-57 is probably the best option over other 5G fighters:

 

That may be true Rumors have it F-35 may be deemed to have more funding cut from the program....and while there is a chance that the F-47 may eventually take on a ground attack role much like the F-15 E, but the US still operated F-18,F-16, A-10 in ground roles as well depending on the targets...with the F-47 operating in early ground strikes when enemy radar/ air defence is a major threat, when these radars/ air defences are taken out you'll see them switch to all aircraft with ground capable mission sets...hit the rest of the targets...

Anything is possible, but with over 1000 examples already produced and in a lot of cases by countries that only are flying one type of aircraft they will be around for awhile...but no one knows for sure, and i don't have crystal balls to see into the future... 

[Aristides]

20 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Trump will not be in office when we receive our first F-35 aircraft...trump is a just a blip in history

I don't understand how it does either however if you look at our history , how long did it take to find a sea king replacement after chretien canceled it...same could be said with the F-18 , how long will it be before our first f-35 gets here, media sources say not until 2030...Justin canceled it in 2015....an entire new competition will have to be run, tested, lets remember that the typhoon and Rafale quit after our government was asking to much in the way of offsets...it would not be fair just to give the runner up the contract because they lasted the longest in the competition....when europe would be in a more Eager mood to sell us fighters, even though they would be more expensive...but it would put us in a better position to eventually buy a 6 gen aircraft some euro countries are working on right now...

The first 16 are scheduled to be delivered before Trump is gone. We don't know if Trump will be gone, I expect him to try and stay. Even if Trump is gone by then, can we trust Americans not to elect another Trump. If we do decide to add a second fighter I'm not qualified to determine which is the better choice. I think it would be a good idea for us to get involved in one of the European 6 Gen projects. Hopefully we would have something useful to contribute other than just money.