Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

British F-35Bs to bring vertical landing abilities to highways

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 332 posts

Re: British F-35Bs to bring vertical landing abilities to highways

#271

Post by linuxftw »

dotnet00 wrote: post #262
linuxftw wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Russians aren't risking their planes. They use cruise missiles and drones for behind the lines targets. I don't think the Russians lack guided weapons, they are launching dozens of cruise missiles each week. I think it's quite likely they're rationing their sophisticated weapons in case the conflict escalates. From what I've seen, the drones have been very effective. A $10k drone taking out a $2M tank seems like…

The Russians aren't risking their planes because they have very few pilots, who are under trained and their planes are very vulnerable to air defense without having as good of an ability to counter air defense radars. Their guided weapons have also been shown to not be as accurate as expected, considering that despite all those cruise missiles, drone and satellite surveillance, they haven't really hit many critical t…

I think all countries have few pilots. Russia is the #2 Airforce in the world, behind the US. If you compare them to the US, sure, they look under prepared. Against literally any other individual country, they look fairly competent. I don't think any conflict will feature overwhelming air superiority between two comparable powers.

As far as accuracy, it's tough to really say. The Russians have claimed to have hit all sorts of things, including a Patriot complex. Of course, the Ukrainians deny that.

As far as drones vs similar costing items, there's a different tool for a different job. I think the drones have proven quite efficient.

Re: British F-35Bs to bring vertical landing abilities to highways

#272

Post by [deleted] »

sillywalk wrote: post #55
chinathrow wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder about FOD. i.e. all the crap in and around a highway that could damage the engines.. They would send out personal to remove FOD (foreign object debris) before any operations and before laying those mats, I assume.

Just some musing on the logistics and difficulties etc. of theoretical "distributed" highway F-35b operations.. [Numbers found by google search :_) ] 30 ISO containers for just the runway, = 30+ vehicles, + munitions, spare parts, maintenance personnel, that computerized logistics thing - ODIN/ALIS, food and water, security for the personnel, generators to power all the computers to support the aircraft, . would ther…

[deleted]

Re: British F-35Bs to bring vertical landing abilities to highways

#273

Post by fsloth »

pessimizer wrote: post #258
fsloth wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither was this war about NATO. NATO was an excuse. The war in ukraine is colonial and genocidal war with the intent of eradicating Ukrainian language and statehood and subvert the fee will of Ukrainian people under Russian yoke.

It's strange that they go ahead with making this excuse when everyone could have just consulted you.

Russian state makes publicly whatever statements they feel are judicious. Don't trust anything the Kremlin says.

Note they accepted Finlands entry to NATO alliance without so much as a whimper.

While complete calculus behind the reasons for the invasion may never surface, these offer excellent commentary why more countries joining NATO was not really the real reason for the war.

'Moreover, this is not even primarily about NATO. ... The larger objective is to re-establish Russian political and cultural dominance over a nation that Putin sees as one with Russia, and then follow up by undoing the European rules-based order and security architecture established in the aftermath of World War II. ... If Russia’s main concern had been NATO enlargement, it would have reacted with rhetoric and/or hostile actions in its neighborhood after each step in the NATO expansion process. The largest wave of NATO’s eastward expansion took place in March 2004, when seven Eastern European countries joined, including the formerly Soviet Baltic states. Russia “grumbled,” as the New York Times put it then, by adopting a Duma resolution criticizing the expansion, but no hostile and sustained rhetoric followed about NATO enlargement as a Western plot against Russian interests.'[0]

'Some claim Russia was goaded into acting by the threat of NATO expansion. But Putin himself said in 2004 that 'Russia has no concerns about the expansion of NATO from the standpoint of ensuring security'. Russia, after all, has a massive nuclear arsenal and has no reason to fear any adversary. What is the purpose of nuclear weapons then? In addition, several countries bordering Russia, including Finland and the Baltic States are already entering the alliance, with not a murmur from Moscow.'[1]

[0] https://www.justsecurity.org/80343/russias-new-assault-on-uk...

[1] https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2023-02-21-expert-comment-no-proxy...

Re: British F-35Bs to bring vertical landing abilities to highways

#274

Post by nradov »

wonderwonder wrote: post #209

I still have no idea what to expect from the F35. I'm not someone that knows a lot about fighter aircraft. The F22 was quickly hailed as the pinnacle of what it was designed to do, essentially unmatched today. Then they just stopped making them. Reviews of the F35 are vague. Israel is buying them but it's essentially getting them for free. So why not? Anyone have a true read on if the F35 is actually a dominant platf…

That's not even the right question to ask. The F-35 is the only survivable, 5th generation tactical aircraft available for purchase today. So whether it's "dominant" or not is kind of moot since there are effectively no other options.

Sure, there are a few 4th generation airframes still in production and they are useful for certain limited missions like homeland defense and counterinsurgency. But those are dying platforms with little capacity to take upgrades and poor survivability against peer threats so it doesn't make sense for countries like the UK to buy more.

Re: British F-35Bs to bring vertical landing abilities to highways

#275

Post by fsloth »

pessimizer wrote: post #256
smcl wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has only fought with the countries who sought to join a military alliance to protect themselves ... from Russia? Incredible.

You don't think I might have a problem if my roommate joined the anti-pessimizer alliance? Shocking.

NATO is not an anti-Russian league.

Russia has nukes to protect its sovereignty. It has absolutely nothing to fear from NATO.

What Russia does not like, is to be denied the capability to invade and threaten it's neighbours (because they joined NATO).

Re: British F-35Bs to bring vertical landing abilities to highways

#276

Post by 7952 »

pessimizer wrote: post #255
7952 wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the west did make some mistakes in its dealing with Russia. But that does not justify Russian aggression or negate the need to repel that agression.

West: mistakes Russia: aggression

Western agression (if you want to put it like that) does not justify the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Nor would it reduce the threat Russia poses. Surely it would increase it!

Re: British F-35Bs to bring vertical landing abilities to highways

#277

Post by Thoeu388 »

luuurker wrote: post #191
Thoeu388 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right now that is not verifiable. It is a clasiffied information, only supported by claims from manufacturer. And maintaince cost is already dispuded at court in Switzerland. >It would be completely impractical to operate if you needed to completely overhaul it every flight. And? Maybe it is every 2nd or 10th flight, that does not make it much more practical. Cost for operating F35 is astronomical. Old Soviet airplan…

What's your source for "it also needs extensive overhaul after every flight to maintain stealth coating"?

Different stealth airplanes. Some documentaries that celebrate Raptor and F35 as technical marvel (highly complex). I have not really observed any maintenance difference or break throughout between F22 and F35.

And nobody really provided any solid numbers. If numbers are good, it would be easy to prove.

There is a lawsuit going in Switzerland. Swiss do not believe official maintenance cost.

Other countries (Japan and South Korea) have stealth program that has similar issues. Some disagreements with F35. South Korea fighter should cost 30% of F35 maintenance. But that goes into spare parts and features, not coating...

And frankly Russian program ran into a lot of troubles and cost overruns with stealth fighters. I believe Russians have better science and technical knowledge to deliver such airplane cheaply (without software integration). And they did not made any breakthrough that would magically reduce maintenance costs.

Re: British F-35Bs to bring vertical landing abilities to highways

#278

Post by Thoeu388 »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #204
Thoeu388 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If F35 gets grounded again for some software error, or virtual helmet reality problem, that will be our only air defense :(

At least you guys have a backup. If the Eurofighter gets grounded Austria has no airforce, because we retired the Saab 105 without buying L39s or Grippens as replacement.

Honestly, I would just prefer good S300 system. At Ukraine it covered sky for almost a year. Jet fighters for air superiority are obsolete.

Re: British F-35Bs to bring vertical landing abilities to highways

#279

Post by smcl »

pessimizer wrote: post #256
smcl wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has only fought with the countries who sought to join a military alliance to protect themselves ... from Russia? Incredible.

You don't think I might have a problem if my roommate joined the anti-pessimizer alliance? Shocking.

That's a poor analogy. It's more like you're threatening your neighbours, fucking around with their apartments and they join the local neighbourhood watch. And as a response your reaction is to break into their apartments and cry about their "aggression" against you.

Re: British F-35Bs to bring vertical landing abilities to highways

#280

Post by hajile »

kcb wrote: post #270
hajile wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lancet is so powerful in this war that I'd be shocked if we aren't currently working on our own version as fast as we can. CAS is critical to advances. It is somewhat stopped by MANPADS, but stopped very hard by SAMs. When flying close to the trees, physics make it so that a SAM radar can't detect a plane until they are within 5-8 miles. This means intercepting a plane or helicopter attacking the front lines (launchi…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroVironment_Switchblade https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aevex_Phoenix_Ghost

Switchblade is in Ukraine, but has performed quite badly.

A new design is needed IMO.

Post reply on HN