The issue of the F-35B or really any of the variants performing CAS missions is not definitive. Truly, the issue is one of speed, fast or slow, and altitude. Given danger close of say 250m, can a fast moving F-35 deliver the goods on target, including guns, if necessary, close enough without friendly fire casualties is a question that even the "experts" are divided upon.
So, enter the Air Force, pinned to deliver F-35's in CAS missions, now beginning to develop CAS tactics with the F-35 platform. They can't certainly use the A-10 tactics for obvious reasons, it's just "slow and low," while not "fast and high."
Obviously, then, if the Air Force will use CAS, and the Navy too, they will develop the tactics necessary, but if they rely on external stores and not guns, this is similar to the Phantom in Viet Nam: missiles but no guns. Then, where does one find advantage in the F-35B?
Admittedly, I am not an expert, nor do i suppose to be one, and I suspect most of us in this forum are not experts on the F-35 either. However, we are literate, participate in democratic processes while remaining civil even when disagreeing.
Although, the F-35 is brand spanking new technologies, and as such requires maturation, I'm not so certain an amphibious assault ship is the place for it, while the nearby big boat has them, and maybe could have had better versions if not for the principle of shared design.
And the debate goes on:
http://intercepts.defensenews.com/20...t/?sf6244571=1.
I'm confident they will get it done, after all that is what we do, just not sold on "fast and high" CAS platforms like the F-35.
Now, where's my drink!
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Re: Jets & Planes but no UAV's here.
Hybrid Mode
