(Luft) Lockheed Martin F-35 - Lightning II

[WideMasta]

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Busi...ubmissions

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=6bea818e-e2a7-4ad3-9c0e-109348f93be9&subId=409097">http://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ash ... bId=409097</a><!-- m -->

We also simulated Joint Strike Fighter against Russian fighter aircraft where we flew two against two. In the forenoon I and the Danish test pilot was flying Joint Strike Fighters against two Russian fighters. Inthe afternoon we swapped, so we flew Russian fighter aircraft against the Joint Strike Fighter.

In the afternoon the first thing the test pilot and I noticed was that the Russian fighters was not loaded with the best air-to-air missiles as the Russians have in real life. We therefore asked about getting some better. It was denied us. We two pilots complained but it was not changed.

My test pilot and I decided in our simulated Russian combat aircraft to fly “line abreast”, but with 25 nautical miles distance. Then at least one of us could with radar look into the side of the Joint Strike Fighter and thus view it at long distance. The one who “saw” the Joint Strike Fighter could then link the radar image to the other. Then missiles could be fired at long distance at the Joint Strike Fighter.
It was also denied us, although we protested this incomprehensible disposition.

It was now quite clear to us that with the directives and emotional limitations simulations would in no waygive a true and fair view of anything. On the other hand, it would show that the Joint Strike Fighter was a good air defense fighter, which in no way can be inferred from the simulations. We spoke loudly and clearly that this way was manipulating with the Joint Strike Fighter air defence capability.

Because of these circumstances, I would not let the Danish Air Force be included as part of the totally misleading/non-transparent results, which alone would show Joint Strike Fighters superiority in the air defence role, which it would not have been against an opponent with missiles with a performance than those who we were g iven permission to. Also there was given major obstacles in the way flying tactically against the Joint Strike Fighter. We therefore left simulations, returned to Denmark and complained to the Chief of Staff Tactical Air Command and technical manager Air Material Command.

Desweiteren:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.australiandefence.com.au/news/white-paper-commits-to-urgent-30b-spend-over-ten-years">http://www.australiandefence.com.au/new ... -ten-years</a><!-- m -->

Some of the announcements include $30 billion being spent over the next ten years with the percentage of GDP expenditure on Defence to increase to 2 per cent by 2020-21. The government has committed to a continuous rolling acquisition program for 12 submarines and new previously unforeseen acquisitions and plans such as a review process to replace the last 25 F-35s planned for acquisition with a sixth generation fighter that will be an option in the late 2020s.

Stück für Stück reduziert sich die Stückzahl der F-35 und nähert sich damit diese Zahl einem kritischen Wert.

Ich möchte nur eines zu anstehenden Stückzahlreduzierungen sagen. Wir haben es mit der F22 gesehen und erlebt und wir werden es mit der F35 sehen und erleben. So einfach wird es sich verhalten, nur das es bei der F22 wirklich ein Dilemma ist und bei der F35 ein Segen wenn es so kommt. Wenn in den nächsten Jahren vollkommen neue hochwertige Radare rauskommen, wird die F35 eine immer geringere Rolle spielen. Die Amerikaner werden sich noch wünschen die F22 nicht gecanceled zu haben (Stückzahlen und adäquate Weiterentwicklung zur Mehrrollenfähigkeit, inkl. Abbau der Produktionsstrasse)