Military Review

US Air Force will consider replacing the F-16 Fighting Falcon with a new fighter

135
US Air Force will consider replacing the F-16 Fighting Falcon with a new fighter

The U.S. Air Force is considering replacing the F-16 Fighting Falcon with a new fighter jet. As NPlus1 reports with reference to Aviation Week, the Air Force command intends to assess the feasibility of such a replacement.


The US Air Force has launched a research program, within which it intends to assess the feasibility of replacing F-16 Fighting Falcon fighters with new combat aircraft. The study should be completed by early FY2023.

Earlier, the Air Force was considering replacing the F-16 with a new fighter, said US Air Force Chief of Staff Charles Brown. He explained that if such a decision is made, the new aircraft will be of the "four and a half" generation. The fighter will have to have an open architecture, the ability to quickly update the software and surpass the old fighter in some characteristics. At the same time, it must perform the same tasks as the F-16.

The F-16 is a fourth-generation multi-functional lightweight fighter. He entered service with the U.S. Air Force in 1979 and is today one of the most advanced combat vehicles. According to the World Air Forces 2020 handbook, the U.S. Air Force has 790 fighters of this type in service.

With a maximum take-off weight of 21,8 tons, the F-16 is capable of carrying up to 7,7 tons of aerial bombs and missiles at 9 points of suspension. Combat radius - 1,7 thousand km, maximum speed - 2200 km / h. The fighter is armed with a 20 mm cannon.
135 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 18 February 2021 16: 41
    -7
    The flightless penguin is modestly silent. Yes, and for the 5th generation, something is not aimed. Only 4,5, which have been flying in Russia for several decades laughing
    1. Orange bigg
      Orange bigg 18 February 2021 17: 04
      -4
      How about the variant with the MiG-29M2 like the Egyptians? Video on the link below.
      A short video has appeared on the Web showing the launch of the Kh-35 air-to-surface cruise missile (GRAU index - 3M24, NATO codification - AS-20 Kayak) from the Egyptian Air Force MiG-29M2 multipurpose fighter. Perhaps the Egyptians once again decided to hint at the Turks about their groundless claims in Libya by publishing really rare footage.
      It should be noted that the video recorded the moment the target was hit by a variant of a subsonic low-altitude anti-ship ammunition of an aircraft-based missile system "Uran".

      https://topcor.ru/18675-egipet-opublikoval-redkie-kadry-puskov-rossijskih-raket-h-35.html
    2. RealPilot
      RealPilot 18 February 2021 17: 31
      +16
      Yes, the F-35 was just positioned as a replacement for the F-16, including due to one engine.
      So opponents always said at the AO, that heavy and twin-engine F-15s are the kingdom of the Raptors, that “this is different”. And what exactly the F-16s are being replaced by flocks of war penguins, and nothing else.

      And now they are talking about generation 4,5.
      It seems to me that the 5th generation, in principle, did not work. What determines the generation of aircraft and who stated these criteria? The answer is clear: what the first did, they named it. That is, they were blinded from what was. And the rest rushed to praise and catch up.

      As a result, some criteria, such as stealth in specific wave ranges, were elevated to absolute. And for the sake of this, other important parameters were buried, for example, maneuverability. Even some versions of the cannon were removed ... Etc.

      And then it turned out that competitors took into account their developments, but created more balanced machines.

      Yes, the "penguin" turned out to be a good scout, but by no means a universal soldier!
      1. hirurg
        hirurg 18 February 2021 18: 28
        +1
        Well, what a Penguin scout .. turn on the radar and that's me! For me, the drone is more useful, and it costs less.
      2. The eye of the crying
        The eye of the crying 18 February 2021 19: 29
        -1
        Quote: RealPilot
        And then it turned out that competitors took into account their developments, but created more balanced machines.


        It was not found out. It turned out that in order to increase the number of aircraft, it would be profitable to purchase new F-16s, which are already being produced (but for export).

        Quote: RealPilot
        from the "penguin" turned out to be a good scout


        Where was he successfully used as a scout?
    3. Krasnoyarsk
      Krasnoyarsk 18 February 2021 19: 01
      +1
      Quote: stock buildbat
      Yes, and for the 5th generation, something is not aimed.

      Why do they need it? They have both the 22nd and 35th. The niche is full. Now we need to fill the niche of the possibly outgoing 16th. Everything is logical.
      1. Reserve buildbat
        Reserve buildbat 18 February 2021 19: 12
        +4
        And nothing that "the niche of possibly the outgoing 16th" was planned to be plugged by penguins? A bummer in full growth. Even they realized that if they replace the f-16 with the f-35 in a ratio of 1 to 1, then the combat effectiveness of the Air Force would drop by half, and if 1 f-35 to 5 f-16, then, you know ...
  2. Avior
    Avior 18 February 2021 16: 43
    +12
    Isn't the F-16 in the US Air Force changing for the F-35?
    1. Magic archer
      Magic archer 18 February 2021 16: 53
      +6
      Most interesting! Apparently the F-35 does not suit the military. Not so long ago, they published how much an hour of flight of a penguin costs. And this is expensive even for Americans. Plus the complexity of service. Plus childhood illnesses Link to the cost of the flight 20 fight.
      1. El Chuvachino
        El Chuvachino 18 February 2021 16: 55
        +10
        For the foreseeable future, the most dangerous US fighter will be the F-15EX. This is the right car.
    2. El Chuvachino
      El Chuvachino 18 February 2021 16: 53
      +1
      They change for him. Only the replacement turned out to be bad.
    3. Observer2014
      Observer2014 18 February 2021 16: 58
      +1
      Quote: Avior
      Isn't the F-16 in the US Air Force changing for the F-35?

      yes Exactly. They are already replacing F16 with F35. What is the intrigue? Yes, nothing. The main material of the article is correct and intriguing to present. laughing Well, what's wrong with that? But there is a reason to talk.
    4. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 16: 59
      +8
      In the news, a maximum of a third of the information is usually written and misinterpreted. Straight 2 worlds are on VO news and weapons.
      They do not have time to produce F-35s and train pilots with technicians, F-16s develop their resource faster. Some of them are simply not capable of relearning already. Therefore, several options are being considered to accelerate the production of the F-35, accelerate and initialize new UAV programs and launch the production of the F-16 block 70/72 (which is here called the 4,5 generation fighter) and other options
      This information is probably already a month.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 18 February 2021 17: 01
        +1
        Is there a link to the original article? Interesting ...
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 17: 09
          +7
          Of course
          https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/38847/air-force-eyes-drones-for-adversary-and-light-attack-roles-as-it-mulls-buying-new-f-16s
          Original interview
          https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/us-air-force-talks-new-f-16-orders-latest-acquisition-shake
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 18 February 2021 17: 10
            +1
            Thank you! hi
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 17: 18
              +2
              Yes, not at all.
              They also bought 3 pieces of AT-6 Wolverine. They want to buy even more, the Senate has not yet allowed. For use against guerrillas and transfer to allies.
              1. Intruder
                Intruder 18 February 2021 19: 08
                0
                AT-6 Wolverine
                excellent light and cheap striker (attack aircraft) and anti-guerrilla aircraft, the same as the A-29 "Super Tucano" ...
                1. OgnennyiKotik
                  OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 19: 10
                  0
                  Quote: Intruder
                  A-29 "Super Tucano"

                  This is its main competitor. Fully equivalent aircraft.
                  The news itself:
                  https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39302/the-air-force-finally-has-its-first-new-at-6e-wolverine-light-attack-aircraft
                  1. Intruder
                    Intruder 18 February 2021 19: 17
                    0
                    This is its main competitor. Fully equivalent aircraft.
                    I know... wink although more optimal, in my opinion, I consider the veteran OV-1
                    Mohawk .., a great car to disperse dissenting barmalekas in forests / jungles and deserts!
                    1. URAL72
                      URAL72 18 February 2021 21: 31
                      0
                      The OV-1 is a very easy target. If there is even such (no) air defense as we have, the DPR, but well organized, then the UAV has a better chance of surviving. Just because less is an argument for memory. And if, like the Taliban, "by eye", mountains, then yes. But all the same, without a good electronic warfare, - a suicide bomber.
                      1. Intruder
                        Intruder 18 February 2021 22: 47
                        0
                        Just because less is an argument for memory. And if, like the Taliban, "by eye", mountains, then yes. But all the same, without a good electronic warfare, - a suicide bomber.
                        Well, in Vietnam, he showed himself quite successfully, and not only in reconnaissance, but also as an attack aircraft and guarding a convoy of military transport turntables for the landing, plus those comrades had enough ZUshek and other small things ... not to mention the air defense system! wink
            2. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 18: 45
              -1
              The news itself referred to by VO. As I understand, in '23 it is planned to seriously drink the Air Force budgets, the number of programs ending this year is off the charts.
              https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/us-air-force-entertains-new-design-replace-f-16
      2. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 18 February 2021 17: 45
        +1
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        They do not have time to produce F-35s and train pilots with technicians,

        So you decided to get into service with a completely new aircraft for which you also need to train new pilots and new technicians?
        1. SovAr238A
          SovAr238A 19 February 2021 10: 50
          +3
          Quote: Bad_gr
          Quote: OgnennyiKotik
          They do not have time to produce F-35s and train pilots with technicians,

          So you decided to get into service with a completely new aircraft for which you also need to train new pilots and new technicians?


          there will be no new plane.

          They are going to order a new modification of the F-16.
          Similar to the F-15EX.

          This is discussed in the original article, and not completely "turned upside down" translation ...
      3. ironic
        ironic 18 February 2021 19: 29
        0
        Well, to release some number of Vipers where it did not go. And then, according to the article, you might think that the States are considering the development of a new 4th generation aircraft if the originals are not read.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 19: 34
          +2
          They were not going to do anything at all, they were going to develop options for what they can do. Then these options will lay out to the president, Congress and the Senate. Only then will they be going to do something.
          Overall, upgrading the F-16 to the Hornet / Super Hornet might be a good idea.
          1. ironic
            ironic 18 February 2021 20: 09
            -1
            So Viper already answers almost all the questions of such modernization, and it can still be released in a limited batch, although I do not see much sense in this if there is also no significant export batch. Which has not yet been observed.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 20: 13
              -2
              Quote: ironic
              at the same time, there will not be a significant export consignment either. Which has not yet been observed.

              It doesn't matter, the plant is standing still and ready for production. According to the principle: money in the morning, chairs in the evening. Ordering a batch of several dozen vipers will be enough.
              1. ironic
                ironic 19 February 2021 19: 51
                +1
                But as it turns out, the goal is not to produce an upgraded F-16 at all. I immediately doubted the advisability of such.
                1. OgnennyiKotik
                  OgnennyiKotik 19 February 2021 20: 12
                  0
                  With this reasoning, Congress will thrust this goal into the minister's inappropriate place.
                  They just consider different possibilities, this is correct, you should always critically evaluate your plans and subject them to analysis. While all their Wishlist are being solved by the modernization of the F-16, I have not seen anything super complicated.
                  Again, we do not own all the information, maybe NGAD is really an unprecedented breakthrough and its Simplified version will be the best option.
                  So far, I see that it will take 16 years to replace all F-35s with F-11A, only in the Air Force. And then there is the ILC, the Navy, the National Guard, reserve units and something else on the little things. At the same time, it makes no sense to keep the F-35 in different Africa and Latin America. It is also necessary to arm the allies.
                  So it makes sense:
                  1. To release 100-150 new F-16 block 70/72. You can make another block if they want the system to be open. Taking some of the technology from the F-35 and NGAD. Hornet / Super Hornet example.
                  2. Purchase a batch of light propeller-driven attack aircraft. For yourself and your allies.
                  3. Launch programs of jet UAVs

                  I really don't see any sense in creating a completely new car. It will not solve problems, but simply create new expenses, so what is described in the first sentence will be.
            2. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 23: 09
              -2
              This is a good job, they collected all the information, compiled a related text, made the right accents, it’s just a pleasure to read.
              https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39316/air-force-boss-wants-clean-sheet-fighter-thats-less-advanced-than-f-35-to-replace-f-16
              1. ironic
                ironic 19 February 2021 20: 01
                0
                Thank you, informative. As for the essence, the Americans decided to do some masturbation.
    5. yehat2
      yehat2 18 February 2021 17: 26
      +3
      f-16 mainly performs not shock, but patrol functions
      and the F-35 is primarily a strike aircraft. There are about 16-400 specialized percussion modifications f-450 in the USA and about the same number of strike needles. Here is their F-35 and had to replace.
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 18: 03
        +1
        Quote: yehat2
        f-16 mainly performs not shock, but patrol functions

        This is another of the main reasons. In principle, the F-15/16 will surpass the F-4/5 in terms of service life. There is no substitute for them for many tasks. F-35, NGAD, UAVs will not replace them completely. It will be about the same as with propeller driven aircraft.
        1. ironic
          ironic 18 February 2021 19: 30
          -4
          The F-35A is capable of replacing the F-16 completely.
          1. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 19: 39
            0
            Yes, it is, but it is expensive (the price of the aircraft itself is a maximum of a third of the total costs), and most importantly it does not make sense. For simple tasks, the F-35 is redundant. Do not forget that most pilots and technicians are not able to retrain the 5th generation principle.
            1. ironic
              ironic 18 February 2021 19: 55
              0
              For simple tasks and the F-16 is redundant. The more the F-35 infrastructure develops, the cheaper the maintenance costs will be in terms of the aircraft. I agree that some pilots no longer make sense to retrain, but technicians ???
              1. OgnennyiKotik
                OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 20: 06
                -1
                Quote: ironic
                but technicians ???

                What's surprising? It's like retraining from a carburetor engine to an injection engine. Previously, everything was determined by ear, now nothing can be done without a computer, except for changing the oil. Over time, of course, it will retrain, or rather the generation will change, but the aircraft fleet is aging. The maximum production capacity of 140-160 F-35s of all modifications is for the Air Force, Navy, KMP and foreign customers. It is very expensive to build another production, only the price of the F-35A was dropped to $ 78 million.
                On the other hand, NGAD is already on its way, what it is, what information it is not much.
                It will probably have the XA100 / 101 engine Putting it in NGAD, F-35 and F-16 option 2 might also make sense.
                1. ironic
                  ironic 18 February 2021 20: 13
                  -2
                  Yes, it is surprising. They have, of course, many more planes, but here they are retraining. True, our planes are only young people and have always served. And they have long lived with computers, even under the pad.
                  1. OgnennyiKotik
                    OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 20: 21
                    -3


                    This is another question. Rearmament requires an integrated approach; it is not an easy matter. Sometimes it's easier to build a new army than to rearm an old one. The example of France and Germany in the 30s.
                    1. ironic
                      ironic 18 February 2021 20: 32
                      -1
                      But they actually have no choice, they must change the generation of aircraft, modernize tanks, change the generation of aircrafts, change the generation of ICBMs, change the generation of SSBNs. In the meantime, you can extend the resource to some units and upgrade with anything new than building a new old one for temporary use. Vaughn, again, we received from the States 9 F-15Ds with a relatively small airframe plaque as a gift. They took them apart to the skeleton, turned them over and freaked them out to a screw, assembled them with new avionics and put them into operation. I'm sure the States still have more than one of them.
                    2. ironic
                      ironic 19 February 2021 18: 26
                      +2
                      Point-blank, why did you get three minuses here? Do people do not know?
                      1. OgnennyiKotik
                        OgnennyiKotik 19 February 2021 18: 30
                        -2
                        And what did it affect? laughing Someone is enraged by my comments, so they deliberately minus, I can only wish these people happiness smile
                    3. yehat2
                      yehat2 20 February 2021 09: 50
                      +1
                      the Indians reported during negotiations on the supply of the F-35 that the preparation of the infrastructure for it would cost no less than the batch of aircraft itself.
          2. yehat2
            yehat2 18 February 2021 21: 17
            +1
            not able to. preparation time for departure is 4 times longer, the complexity of the service is also high.
            it's a stupid plane that shitty goes up the alarm
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 19 February 2021 07: 00
              -1
              We can say then that the MiG-21 is the best fighter for urgent missions. Better or simpler?
              The question is, after all, in the most efficient way to complete the task with minimal losses (or better without them at all).
              1. yehat2
                yehat2 19 February 2021 09: 28
                +2
                no, the question is not only about the effectiveness of one mission
                no less important is how many combat-ready aircraft can be contained, what are the requirements for logistics and many other non-combat parameters at all, which, oddly enough, affect the battle by the banal amount of active equipment.
                never 1 f-35 will replace 3 combat-ready f-16
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 19 February 2021 10: 09
                  -1
                  Ok, use more personnel, modern maintenance equipment (for example, for moving and installing explosive missiles) and have a pair of combat-ready F-35s. Which will confidently "disassemble" 3 F-16.
                  1. yehat2
                    yehat2 19 February 2021 10: 14
                    +2
                    you really don’t understand that even the Americans with their superlogistics shit to contain the F-35. It is difficult and gemorno and very expensive.
                    1. 3danimal
                      3danimal 19 February 2021 10: 26
                      0
                      crap contain f-35

                      Seriously? The grounds for such statements?
                      So the F-22 they are not about ... were they?
                      1. yehat2
                        yehat2 19 February 2021 10: 27
                        +1
                        reports to the senate. Read, finally, not stupid advertising, but the official reports of boring senators about the F-35 program.
                        Read why Australia is abandoning the F-35.
                      2. 3danimal
                        3danimal 19 February 2021 10: 46
                        0
                        Australia has refused for 10 years. Has the right to. But many people buy.
                        Read, finally, not a stupid advertisement, but the official reports of boring senators about the F-35 program

                        Link please.
                      3. yehat2
                        yehat2 19 February 2021 10: 49
                        +1
                        you will find it yourself.
                        best of all in the archive of White House speeches, if you understand English.
                        thank goodness senators have much better pronunciation than ordinary Americans
                      4. 3danimal
                        3danimal 19 February 2021 14: 40
                        0
                        Here's what I found:
                        https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/documents/rates/fy2014/2014_f_h.pdf

                        The cost of one hour of flight:
                        F-16S: 8982 $
                        F-18E: $ 10837
                        AV-8b (Harrier 2): $ 13382
                        F-35A: $ 17148
                        F-15S: 20178 $
                        F-22A: $ 21464

                        Following your logic, the United States has long ago dealt with the maintenance of the F-15, F-22, but continues to operate without problems about 700 aircraft of these two types smile
                      5. yehat2
                        yehat2 19 February 2021 15: 09
                        +1
                        Quote: 3danimal
                        Following your logic

                        Quote: 3danimal
                        F-15S: 20178 $

                        Quote: 3danimal
                        F-35A: $ 17148


                        first, do not substitute your logic for mine
                        secondly, the cost of an F-35 flight hour is more than 67k and this is not complete data -
                        the latest clarifications in the Senate voiced figures of about 80, from which they regularly bomb those who cut the budget.
                        in addition, there are 2 f-15s. C and E. are worth an hour. respectively 22 and 16k
                        Therefore, giving the cost for C and summarizing this f-15, you introduce an error, because f-35 can only replace model E.
                        And the last thing, almost a f-35 costs like 10 f-16
                        summary - crap. And there are direct facts to this - the allies either refuse or significantly reduce pre-orders (Australia, Belgium, Canada, Germany does not order at all). The US itself has cut its original plans for the purchase of the F-35 by three times. Stupidly expensive, even if you don't talk about the problems of the F-35 project. Wealthy Japan has bought as many as 4 cars (and 1 has already drowned) and continues to exploit ancient phantoms.
                        About the cost of an hour f-22 is also nonsense. (why write this at all ???)
                        an hour costs 33.5k, and without including other items of expenditure - for example, f-22 requires a hangar with climate control ALWAYS. But it is still half the price of the F-35.
                      6. 3danimal
                        3danimal 19 February 2021 15: 49
                        0
                        Link to official document (in English).
                        Too lazy to open?
                      7. yehat2
                        yehat2 19 February 2021 15: 55
                        +1
                        figures from table in independent log
                        Where is your data from?
                        in addition, f-16 mass of modifications
                        there is a clean fighter (viper line) and it is expensive
                        there are universal drums (block 72 for example)
                        which one did you bring?
                    2. 3danimal
                      3danimal 19 February 2021 16: 37
                      0
                      From here:




                      (For those who do not know how to follow the link)
                    3. yehat2
                      yehat2 19 February 2021 16: 56
                      0
                      but this is 2014! F-35 simply could not have sane statistics
                      does this document reflect real costs?
                      As recently as the fall of 2020, there was a commission that analyzed the costs of the F-35 program
                      2018g
                      At the same time, the Accounts Chamber recommends the US Air Force and other branches of the military, including the US Marine Corps, to postpone the purchase of a fighter until the key problems associated with machine defects are resolved.
                      Representatives of the Accounts Chamber noted that for a number of improvements related to the F-35, the Pentagon is requesting additional funds and this request cannot be satisfied until the critical flaws of the machine are completely eliminated by the developer. At the same time, a commission specially formed to study the features of the F-35 demanded the development of a special program aimed at reducing the cost of maintenance and modernization of machines in the future

                      Christopher Miller Jan 14, 2020 Secretary of Defense Quote
                      f-35 piece of shit
                      , in the same interview
                      44 thousand dollars per hour

                      another source claims that in 2020 the average price per flight increased to 70k (I don’t remember the source), this is due to the purchase of wearing equipment, primarily the engine and its spare parts. At the same time, someone in the Pentagon said that every year the operating prices are going down - from the beginning of the program by 35%.
                      so your 20k just absolutely doesn't match up with what's going on.
                      At the same time, there is a lot of manipulations to exclude from expenses such items as fixing stocks, additional R&D, infrastructure modernization, etc.
                      well, let's not forget about the horse price tag of the plane itself
                    4. 3danimal
                      3danimal 19 February 2021 17: 27
                      0
                      but this is 2014! F-35 simply could not have sane statistics
                      does this document reflect real costs?

                      But full of statistics on the F-22.
                      Let me remind you that the F-35A has 1 engine, which is easier to maintain (it was planned this way).
                      Christopher Miller Jan 14, 2020 Secretary of Defense Quote

                      Link to original English?
                      The fact is that in January 2020, Mark Esper was the Secretary of Defense.
                      K. Miller only acted as minister from 9.09.20 to 20.01.21.
                      How correct is the source if there are such inaccuracies?
                    5. yehat2
                      yehat2 19 February 2021 20: 07
                      0
                      the f-35 has an engine from the f-22, adjusted for several years for improvement.
                    6. 3danimal
                      3danimal 19 February 2021 20: 22
                      +1
                      There is no OBT on this engine.
                    7. yehat2
                      yehat2 19 February 2021 20: 26
                      +1
                      but you were talking about reliability, not a single-plane swivel nozzle.
                      although the design there is more reminiscent of the curtains from the German prototype - Sukhoi has much more perfect OVT.
                    8. 3danimal
                      3danimal 19 February 2021 20: 54
                      0
                      It's not about perfection, the presence of OVT complicates maintenance and cost of the engine. Of which two.
                      And the type of OBT was chosen deliberately to create a “flat jet”. (Less IR signature)
                    9. yehat2
                      yehat2 19 February 2021 21: 45
                      +1
                      Quote: 3danimal
                      And the type of OBT was chosen deliberately to create a “flat jet”. (Less IR signature)

                      you would not be disgraced by inventing this nonsense, but watched the film of the manufacturer, which says why OVT is in the same plane. Google it, it is on YouTube.
            2. yehat2
              yehat2 19 February 2021 20: 08
              0
              what's the difference io or not - they equally owned the information.
            3. 3danimal
              3danimal 19 February 2021 20: 23
              0
              In January 2020, Miller was not yet acting.
              So do you have a link to the article?
            4. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 19 February 2021 20: 36
              -1
              Your interlocutor, to put it mildly, manipulates the facts, while knowing the original source.
              Here is the transcript https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/2473893/press-gaggle-with-acting-secretary-miller-en-route-to-washington-dc/
              In a private conversation, I.O. The secretary of defense (an infantry colonel in the past) told a lieutenant colonel or an air force colonel that "F-35 piece ..." to this, the pilot who started his career in the F-16 openly laughed in the face of the secretary of defense, said "Seriously? Are you telling me that? " and that he is piloting an F-35 fighter and added that "this is an incredible plane."
              It is not clear further, it seems about the 6th generation:
              "I think it's funny, you know, right now, you know," well, we need to invest in the sixth generation, "I think we created a monster, but you know that."
              The text itself from the transcript:
              ... A / SEC. MILLER: I so ... I mean, I cannot wait to leave this job, believe me. But part of me is like, I would have loved to have gotten involved in the acquisition process and try ... and you know, talk about wicked problem. I wanted to take that one on… .F-35s, the case study. Although, I gotta tell you, yesterday we were talking to some guy, some lieutenant colonel, or colonel, said 'what are you flying?' Said 'F-35,' I was like that's a piece of ... and he was like ... and he laughed, and I was like, 'no seriously, tell me about it,' and he was ... an F-16 guy, F -35, he said ... 'unbelievable aircraft,' I'm not ... I ... that investment, for ... that capability, that we're never supposed to use, 'well, we have to deter, blah blah bluh blah ... Are we fifth generation? You know we ... I think it's hilarious, you know, right now, you know, 'well we need to invest in the sixth generation,' I'm like, we have created a monster, but you know that.
            5. 3danimal
              3danimal 19 February 2021 20: 52
              +1
              thanks, very interesting hi
            6. yehat2
              yehat2 19 February 2021 21: 31
              -2
              and where did I manipulate? everything is just like that. Ordinary pilots who were not victims of the new machine, and who were not bothered by a constant string of technical problems, praise it very much, there are a lot of new products, there are already pilots who cannot complain because they died, but there are boring logisticians for whom the F-35 - this is a continuous hemorrhoid.
              no fraud, you just don't need to consider the project from one side.
              It is not discussed here how steep the F-35 is - only the hemorrhoid side, so the words of the pilot you quoted are completely inappropriate. No matter how pleased the pilot is, with the same money the United States can fly so many F-16s that the question will arise squarely - and what for is this suffering and what was the huge money spent on?
            7. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 19 February 2021 21: 42
              -1
              The words of a retired infantry colonel, who quite by accident served as minister of defense for 2,5 months, who cannot speak in a coherent manner, are important, but a colonel or lieutenant colonel of the Air Force who served his entire adult life, who has access to information for the 6th generation, who laughs in the face the minister is not important. It's funny. Moreover, calling him "an ordinary pilot". Everything is clear with you.
            8. 3danimal
              3danimal 20 February 2021 03: 08
              0
              Year 2019 (and all in the public domain):



            9. yehat2
              yehat2 20 February 2021 03: 51
              +1
              I don’t understand one thing - do you really hope to deceive with this link?
              Initially, they discussed service in a combat situation, but here 99% are training and other purely rear missions, a completely different cost structure.
              but how convincing it looks if you don't read the headline. But how much pathos - this is the PRIMARY SOURCE! That's why you impudently slip THIS ??? That "remnant infantry" who was still the io commander of the army, despite your epithets, also talked about expenses in a combat situation,
              and that's what I was talking about. What is the point of considering only deep rear storage metrics per se?
              why not show Israeli data - this is the only country that actually operates the car.
              And the news in Israel is as follows - they REFUSE, based on the results of operation, to buy the 3rd squadron of f-35 and replace it with f-15i (small modification f15E)
              How so? After all, according to you, the f-35 is not more expensive and cooler? It turns out not.
              Gantz's quote (some bump)
              maintenance and upkeep of the F-35 is significantly more expensive than the fourth-generation F-16 fighters in service with the IDF

              a curtain.
              continuing the quotes of this pepper
              an obstacle to the acquisition of American fighters is called the F-35's unreadiness for high-intensity combat operations, as well as a short range

              what I'm saying here and you refuse to listen.
              I spoke with several soldiers from Israel, they are using an improved version of the f-35 adir.
              And absolutely delighted with the plane. But at the same time, despite all the advantages, there is a clear understanding that the plane is only capable of supporting service.
              There are too many restrictions - not to hang heavy ammunition, range, cruising speed, combat readiness, very expensive pilot training, the inability to fully conduct a maneuverable battle due to the specifics of displaying information, and a bunch of other annoying moments. And like the icing on the cake - the program eats up so much money that you have to constantly look back at the budget, including saving on the latest guided munitions and other weapons. They do not say specific numbers, since This is corny secret information, but the conclusions, and from completely different sources (infantryman, technician, pilot, analyst, defense minister), are the same for everyone. The technician, for example, is enraged by the construction of the built-in ladder - he was too tired to repair it, once even a combat flight fell off because of it - the pilot fell down and damaged his helmet, and this thing costs a lot of money.
            10. 3danimal
              3danimal 20 February 2021 04: 52
              0
              Are there any links to this data?
              All Israelis who are on the forum are vying to praise the F-35.
              But how much pathos - this is the PRIMARY SOURCE!

              Yes, this is the original source.
              That's why you impudently slip THIS ???

              Better to quote someone's conversations and stories, without links, even ??
            11. yehat2
              yehat2 20 February 2021 09: 49
              +1
              at least I am sure that these are real people with real experience in organizing combat missions, as opposed to "pilot commanders" or advertising leaflets of lobbyists.
              By the way, in the United States there is a restriction on the disclosure of information related to hostilities and pilots who can speak on the case are in no hurry with this.
              And the last thing - how to trust an aircraft, where incidents related to the failure of departure readiness or fears of the serviceability of equipment number in the hundreds, the reasons are also hundreds, and the unexplained reasons also go into the hundreds?
  • hirurg
    hirurg 18 February 2021 18: 22
    0
    In my opinion, they were going to change the F-35.
    But, in this case, the states are signing for the failure of the F-35 project ...
    1. ironic
      ironic 18 February 2021 19: 31
      -2
      Quote the additions, which for some reason were not translated into Russian.
    2. Redfox3k
      Redfox3k 19 February 2021 12: 48
      0
      Duc grandmother was spent ... mastered. It is possible to stir up the new Air Force rearmament program.
  • EDWARD
    EDWARD 18 February 2021 18: 50
    +8
    now vice versa .. f-35 to f-16. )
    1. ironic
      ironic 18 February 2021 19: 32
      -1
      Where does this happen?
      1. yehat2
        yehat2 19 February 2021 20: 28
        +1
        Quote: ironic
        Where does this happen?

        in Australia they hope to replace the f-15x with a new version
        if it doesn't work, they will replace the hole after canceling the order for the f-35 at the expense of the f-16
        1. ironic
          ironic 20 February 2021 20: 39
          -1
          So far, there is nothing of the kind in real orders, even in preliminary reading. Due to delays in the delivery of the F-35, an additional 12 Super Hornets were ordered. It's all. The F-16 cannot replace the F-18.
  • Sidor Amenpodestovich
    Sidor Amenpodestovich 18 February 2021 16: 59
    +1
    Stop! Voyaka Ukh and Aleksandr Privalov, in their numerous comments, assured that the F-35 is an example of the position of the end of the assortment, they created a single fighter, and everyone should take it as a model.
    Don't need it anymore? New technologies dictate new conditions?
    Well, of course. This is completely different.
    1. ironic
      ironic 18 February 2021 19: 31
      -4
      So it is, nothing has changed.
  • tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 18 February 2021 17: 04
    +4
    So Penguin is no longer the main fighter, or am I missing something in this show? New president, new plane; so what?
    1. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 18 February 2021 18: 38
      0
      Quote: tralflot1832
      So Penguin is no longer the main fighter, or am I missing something in this show?


      Still basic. And they are not going to either curtail or cut the program.
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 18 February 2021 17: 08
    +1
    They have some kind of mania, invent a horror story for themselves, and begin to "sculpt" some kind of military product to combat their phobia, although a psychiatrist is needed there.
  • Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 18 February 2021 17: 21
    -1
    Apparently F36 was not for all occasions.
    A simpler plane will perform many tasks no worse, but much cheaper.
    In principle, he just did not stealth, and so all the attachments can be inserted the same. Yes, and maybe more speed and carrying capacity.
    1. ironic
      ironic 18 February 2021 19: 33
      -1
      Who? the F-16? From what? And the speed is more on afterburner on which a couple of times you can escape from the battle and all the fuel is ek.
  • The eye of the crying
    The eye of the crying 18 February 2021 17: 46
    +2
    I wonder who messed up the news - nplus1 or VO.
  • Thorvlobnor IV
    Thorvlobnor IV 18 February 2021 18: 05
    0
    Better than such a cool aircraft can only be an optionally piloted aircraft. Cheap to maintain and operate, sharpened for high-precision weapons, and even one pilot for 5-6 cars - beauty!
    1. Ros 56
      Ros 56 18 February 2021 18: 41
      0
      Have you ever taxied at least one plane?
      1. Thorvlobnor IV
        Thorvlobnor IV 18 February 2021 19: 06
        0
        Yeah. Yak-18T. Do you always get personal when discussing abstract topics?
        1. Ros 56
          Ros 56 19 February 2021 08: 25
          +1
          What I mean is that you have an idea of ​​what the pilot is doing during the flight, flying one plane and estimate all this for your 5-6. Moreover, there are somewhat different speeds, plus they must be aimed at different goals, well, the cherry on the cake, your Yak is just nothing, a car, only with wings. and there you also need a choice of weapons for each target. Even on a two-seater plane with an operator, your eyes will sweat to accept all the information, analyze and make the right decisions, notice not one, but many. Now add up the time and speeds and get the desired result. Good luck.
          And I didn't get personal, I just asked a question. fellow
          1. Thorvlobnor IV
            Thorvlobnor IV 19 February 2021 10: 02
            0
            I mean, an "optionally piloted aircraft" is a drone that has a cockpit with controls. As a drone, the plane plays the role of a wingman, performing high-level commands such as "follow me", "attack this target", "attack any enemy target", "watch the air situation while I'm busy with the ground." AI elements take over everything related to piloting, navigation, finding targets, refueling in the air, etc. These technologies already exist and are being finalized. For the flight commander, everything looks as if he has not 9 points of suspension of weapons, but 45. The convenience of optional piloting is that it is not necessary to maintain two different types of aircraft: drones and aircraft, but you can, depending on the characteristics of the combat mission, risk more lives or fewer pilots. This is especially noticeable when you consider that attack aircraft are often two-seater. Another bonus: the enemy cannot distinguish a manned aircraft from a drone either on the radar or visually.
  • rocket757
    rocket757 18 February 2021 18: 17
    0
    Old War Horse!
    So it’s interesting that they’ll come up with a replacement ...
    1. ironic
      ironic 18 February 2021 19: 34
      -2
      They won't think of anything. The F-35 will remain.
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 19 February 2021 08: 37
        0
        Maybe so, or maybe that way .... a screw attack aircraft is being adopted, or not?
        1. ironic
          ironic 19 February 2021 19: 47
          0
          As for me, such an attack aircraft should be a drone.
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 20 February 2021 06: 07
            0
            It is clear that there will be more drones ... but, not always and not everywhere.
            1. ironic
              ironic 20 February 2021 20: 13
              0
              The point in a manned attack aircraft tends to zero today, and even more so tomorrow.
              1. rocket757
                rocket757 20 February 2021 20: 18
                0
                Man proposes, but life disposes.
                1. ironic
                  ironic 20 February 2021 20: 45
                  -1
                  Well, we have all observed the disposition of life in Karabakh quite recently.
                  1. rocket757
                    rocket757 20 February 2021 23: 28
                    0
                    Life sprang up, stupidity, greed, betrayal and so on ... it also happens.
                    1. ironic
                      ironic 20 February 2021 23: 55
                      -1
                      This is vizde. But the main location turned out to be behind the new concept, and it was he who played the main chord, and the rest of the audience and the chorus of accompaniment.
                      1. rocket757
                        rocket757 21 February 2021 00: 44
                        0
                        What is there to consider, stupidity on the one hand, foresight, proper preparation on the other.
                        It happens, it is instructive, but there is nothing new.
                        Now, if two properly prepared opponents met, each in his own way and one won the other due to new tactics, the use of new technology, there would be something to talk about, and so ... a natural, predictable result.
                      2. ironic
                        ironic 21 February 2021 00: 56
                        0
                        This would be the case even if the rivals were equally well prepared, although it cannot be said that the Armenian Sothorna did not prepare for a second battle for Karabakh and there were no border incidents indicating the readiness of both sides to wage a new battle. But even if we accept the thesis that only Azerbaijanis were preparing, and the Armenians did not, it was the new technology and the new strategy corresponding to it that won to a greater extent than all other indicators, because if the Azerbaijanis had relied purely on numerical superiority or firepower, the fighting would have continued and now and would hardly be over soon.
                      3. rocket757
                        rocket757 21 February 2021 08: 11
                        0
                        If only, if only ... then there are only fantasies, not interesting.
                      4. ironic
                        ironic 21 February 2021 12: 25
                        -1
                        So you started with if yes. Why are you blaming me now. If it was not interesting, then it was not worth starting.
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 18 February 2021 18: 39
    0
    It is a pity that we never heard the head of the transport department (aviation) striped, so what kind of new plane is this. Did you decide to start with the center line in the drawing? fellow laughing
    1. Avior
      Avior 18 February 2021 18: 49
      +1
      The problem is that the author of this idea no longer works in his place.
      Will Roper, former Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Purchasing, Technology and Logistics

      He resigned a day after the interview, when he voiced these ideas, on January 20, for obvious reasons - the US president has changed.
      above gave a link to the interview where this information was taken from
      https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/us-air-force-talks-new-f-16-orders-latest-acquisition-shake
      And whether this will be implemented now is a big question.
      1. OgnennyiKotik
        OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 18: 54
        -1
        It doesn't depend on personalities. In general, these are all calculations by the year 23, what options are there, what they have ± how much it costs.
        The news itself to which the VO refers, but it's all within one procedure.
        https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/us-air-force-entertains-new-design-replace-f-16
        1. The eye of the crying
          The eye of the crying 18 February 2021 19: 14
          -1
          Quote: OgnennyiKotik
          It doesn't depend on personalities.


          This can only be said when his replacement confirms his commitment to this idea.
          1. OgnennyiKotik
            OgnennyiKotik 18 February 2021 19: 22
            -2
            Nothing depends on one person there, any minister, all the more a deputy can say and want anything, but the final decision is up to the Senate. However, this also applies to the president.
            1. The eye of the crying
              The eye of the crying 18 February 2021 19: 27
              -1
              Quote: OgnennyiKotik
              Nothing depends on one person there


              So more than one person changed.

              Quote: OgnennyiKotik
              final decision of the Senate


              Not certainly in that way. Typically, the Senate (and House of Representatives) agree or reject the _proposed_ options, but what options are proposed is largely up to the MOE.
            2. Sergej1972
              Sergej1972 19 February 2021 09: 36
              0
              In the area of ​​spending and budgeting, the priority is not the Senate, but the House of Representatives. It is this chamber that primarily controls the federal wallet.
        2. Avior
          Avior 18 February 2021 19: 23
          +1
          there are a lot of all sorts of plans, including quite dramatic
          https://aviationweek.com/aerospace-defense-2021/defense-space/three-generations-fighters-compete-limited-resources
          but how will it be, we'll see
          the team at the Pentagon will still change under Biden
          1. Sergej1972
            Sergej1972 19 February 2021 09: 41
            0
            The team of the leadership of the Ministry of Defense and three other military ministries will change. Most of the officials will remain in their places. And the change of administration does not affect the actual command of the armed forces. Generals and admirals become chiefs of staff of the Armed Forces, chairmen of the Committee of Chiefs of Staff, regardless of the outcome of the presidential election.
            1. Avior
              Avior 19 February 2021 10: 51
              0
              there is a link at the top, with the departure of Trump on January 20, a key official on these issues left.
              maybe the new person will continue everything, or maybe they will correct something
    2. The eye of the crying
      The eye of the crying 18 February 2021 19: 44
      -1
      Quote: Ros 56
      It is a pity that we never heard the head of the transport department (aviation) striped, so what kind of new plane is this.


      We heard something: “son of [Next Generation Air Dominance]".
  • ironic
    ironic 18 February 2021 19: 16
    -2
    Doubtful and impractical. Some kind of yellowness this news gives.
  • Sasha from Uralmash
    Sasha from Uralmash 18 February 2021 19: 27
    0
    The title and the first two views are duplicated, duplicated, duplicated, duplicating each other, each other! Two times! Two times about the same thing! Two times!
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Postum
    Postum 18 February 2021 19: 37
    +1
    But in fact we are talking about the purchase of F-21
    1. ironic
      ironic 18 February 2021 20: 34
      0
      Ie F-16 Block 70/72, which is also called Viper.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 18 February 2021 19: 47
    0
    They have a new TCB ..... together with the Swedes, and the Swedes have experience with GrippenNG. They may well create something to replace.
  • Sergey985
    Sergey985 18 February 2021 21: 20
    +1
    So we came to the main point - there are no "invisibles" in reality, and in the near future it is not expected (yeah, strictly in full face - class stealth). Common sense prevailed - functionality and cost (the aircraft and its maintenance) come to the fore. Hence the conversation about 4+ ...
  • Lesorub
    Lesorub 18 February 2021 21: 56
    +2
    US Air Force thinks about replacing F-16 Fighting Falcon with a new fighter

    So I remember the F 35 was supposed to replace the F 16 !? or something has changed.
    1. yehat2
      yehat2 19 February 2021 20: 24
      +1
      there were hopes for this, but they were quickly buried by the high cost of the aircraft.
  • gvozdan
    gvozdan 18 February 2021 22: 48
    0
    9 tons of its weight 9 tons of load and 3 tons of fuel, 3400 km range? It happens?
    1. Redfox3k
      Redfox3k 19 February 2021 12: 43
      0
      Can not be. At the maximum range, they will take 2x500 kg of bombs, 2-4 V-V missiles, the rest - PTB.
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 19 February 2021 13: 28
      0
      In Western countries, when the data is given - weight and range, they mean an airplane with empty tanks and a maximum load ... then take off and refueling in the air to the lid and fly 10000m in a straight line.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 19 February 2021 21: 41
    +1
    Quote: 3danimal
    But many people buy

    a significant part of the F-35 purchases is carried out within the framework of loans from the United States, and the United States itself determines which weapons will be supplied. In general, the history of orders for this aircraft is very murky.
    At least 300 cars got into the order without any special desire from customers - they were simply pressed.
    I can only name Israel - the only country that fully supports the program.
    Well, it's understandable - they need stealth strike machines every day, they constantly bomb Syria.
    Those countries where it is not the United States who decide, mostly think and do not buy - Switzerland, Germany, Australia, Finland. One of the problems is the remote uncontrolled access from the United States to the software and the complete dependence of the aircraft on the will of the Pentagon. With one button, all imported aircraft can be turned into useless junk.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 19 February 2021 21: 43
    +1
    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
    who has access to information on the 6th generation

    it's not even funny.
    you are already talking fierce nonsense
  • Dmitry Izmalkov
    Dmitry Izmalkov 19 February 2021 22: 28
    +1
    So, in fact, the F-16 Block 70/72 is the 4,5 fighter (4 ++)