You're right, this can go on forever, but still one point I would like to make (here we go again... ).
I know about the four phases of the air campaign, but those first few days are crucial. If you loose too many aircraft then, you'll have the media and public against you. Stealth is still crucial then, something the Typhoon has (too) little off. The JSF can and will employ underwing stores after the first few days, making it almost as capable in the air-ground arena as the Typhoon. Especially for smaller countries like mine (I'm Dutch, in case you hadn't noticed ) we need that multi-role capability of the JSF.
The F-16 is a fantastic aircraft, and has proved itself in air-air as well. But by 2020 the airframe will simply be to old, you cannot afford to fall behind the competitors (who, I agree, are a long way off now). The US too, in my opinion, cannot rely on simply the F/A-22 and the B-2. We still need the adaptability a manned aircraft can offer, especially in air-air and CAS/AI roles.
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.”
Mark Twain
Hey cool. I am sure you guys will make a good decision either way. IMHO I still like the Typhoon, stealth UCAV combo. Typhoon would be at low rise from large SAMs that were beaten down by other methods.
Here is a list of first night of the war stuff ( for us ) that shows that ( for us ) JSF is a waste of time on the first few nights of a war beat down-
-F-22 ( 8x SDB or 2x JDAM-32, 35 or 38 ) The JDAM-35 is highly under-rated- It it is a cousin to the JDAM-32 ( 1,000lb Mk83 ). JDAM-35 is the 1000lb BLU-110 forged pointy tip. Not to be confused with a "bunker buster", it has good penetration to better manage concrete buildings. This has much more force than any cruise missile ( of which we use a lot of ).
SDB is also under-rated. While it can't take out every target profile, it can take out 75-80% of existing targets we would hit in the initial beat down. The F-22 will drive by the double digit SAMs and press on and take out either MEZ targets or other special targets. Yup. It doesn't carry a 2,000lb class weapon. Well, most targets don't require a 2,000lb solution. F-117 and B-2 can take care of that. This jet btw will sortie gen the JSF right off the known map of reality because it is faster with excellent fuel economy, longer range and will spend less time going to and from work.
-B-2 Some of the weapons it can carry---
--16 JDAM-31 ( either Mk-84 or the BLU-109 forged pointy tip )
-- 80x JDAM-38 ( 500lb Mk-82 with a JDAM kit )
--SDB- Small Diameter Bomb. Depending on what kind of smart rack is used, up to 120+ SDBs
-- 6-8 Northrop GBU-37 GPS/INS "GAMs" 4,500lb deep penetration bomb
-F-117 The important 2 -- Enhanced Paveway and Soon JDAM in the 2,000lb class
Those are the manned airframes-
-X-45 UCAV either by land or by sea. Up to a 1,300 mile radius of action. In the strike role 2 2,000lb class JDAMs or 6-8 SDBs.
as an EA-45, it provides sensor and jamming support. Combined with other net-centric UAVs there will be a 24/7 coverage over MEZ areas making it very hazardous for large SAMs and sensors to stay alive.
-Standoff
-B-1 and B-52 with JASSM, JASSM-ER, JASSM-XR.
-F-18E/F with JASSM and SLAM-ER, TALD decoys.
-4 converted Ohio class "boomer" submarines with 145 Tomahawk cruise missiles. Thats 145 x 4. This project is already funded and in progress.
-Any other Tomahawks from the fleet.
Certainly I have left a few things out. But consider the low number of air crew risk there. More so, consider the wave of weapons in the air that will saturate any air defense. Once you work your way through 2000-3000 targets consisting of, important MEZ, command and control, disposal of the enemy air force, using weapons with sub 4 meter accuracy in near any weather, most if not all of the beat down is done. The need for a stealth airframe to do remaining bomb truck work isn't needed much if at all. All that and JSF is not needed.
-Canceling JSF at $245 Billion + for us would allow for more important non-sexy projects to get funded and completed much faster:
-The cockpit and engine upgrade for the C-5
-E10 sensor aircraft replacement for E-8 JSTARs
-A sensible Tanker replacement program
-Common cockpit upgrade by Boeing for the whole C-130 fleet.
-X-45 UCAV fielding
-Low rate purchase of F-16 Block 60
-Smart bused racks for B-52 for it to carry hundreds of SDB ( Speed this project up )
-B-1 ( speed up the complete replacement of the flight controls, cockpit, and smart racks for the carry of 150 plus SDB. If we are going to use it for 20 years, speed up the upgrades.
-Funding and R&D for FB-22 ( 20 years from now retire all F-15E, F117 and B-1 )
-Funding and accelerated R&D for B3
The fact is ( for us ) we don't need thousands of JSF. USAF is downsizing now knowing we don't need as many small fast mover airframes. Many more targets can be hit with less airframes, a horrific amount.
The problem is ELP is that we have sunk a lot of money into this joint project, and what I can see this goverment doing is cancelling the order for the new carriers if this plane [JSF] does not come along.
Here is some additional reading. Be interesting to see if there even is a JSF someday.
RAF cuts leave 'Too Few' for new planes
The gap between the number of crews authorised and the expected number of jets, laid bare in further details slipped out by the MoD days later, has inevitably raised questions about the UK’s commitment to the JSF and, particularly, the ill-fated Typhoon project.
).
) we need that multi-role capability of the JSF.
