ETA: Coremelt, have you ever been found guilty of turtling the Hive by spamming spore colonies against Banshees?
I didn’t know that, however I suspect it’s cheaper to build a mass grid of networked optical and near visible spectrum spherical cameras than a network of radars every 20 km. I could be totally wrong, it’s just the obvious solution that strikes me as a computer vision / visual effects guy to detect stealth planes.
You’re saying that we aren’t likely to fight either one of those countries? Seriously, man, get your story straight. In one post you’re saying we’re never going to fight Russia and China, so the F-35 is useless. In the next you’re saying that Iran is getting the S-400 so the F-35 is useless. And now you’re saying that the F-35 may be useful in a war against Iran or North Korea, but I guess that position may only apply if an Israeli or Korean is in the cockpit.
You mean the submariner?
It’s pretty clear his comments are referring to the Navy’s strong position in favor of additional tactical EW capabilities. For the last few years, the Navy has basically been saying it needs F-35 plus more Growlers to fight a high-end opponent. The idea that Greenert is saying stealth is useless - which you are generally arguing - is belied by the words that came out of his mouth.
No I’m not saying stealth is useless, I’m saying it’s over-rated which is exactly what Greenert said. And I’m also saying expecting stealth to still be useful against near peer states for 30 years is foolish. Sure we may or may not see Iran get the S-400 but China doesn’t seem to be in any hurry to arm North Korea, they seem as frustrated by the Nork’s as we are.
If Iran does get the S-400 then we’re likely sooner or later to see F-35 vs S-400 since Israel won’t sit back and do nothing if they believe that Iran is breaking the commitments it made in the nuclear agreement.
That could indeed turn Israel against the agreement. Oh, wait… 
Probably depends more on boring ol’ mission planning than any specific operating concept. For example, a jet’s range is obviously a lot better at higher altitudes, and weapons range is improved by dropping a JDAM/JSOW from medium altitudes. But there may be specific instances when going low is the obvious choice due to threats, even given the trade-offs.
What sort of SAM, exactly? Radar-guided SAMs will presumably have a hard time getting a lock, if they can at all, and the F-35 and F-22 are supposedly stealthed against IR threats as well.
That’s kind of the point of the F-35 stealth; not so much to prevent detection, but prevent a successful targeting lock.
In my hypothetical setup, the optical sensor grid is creating a 3D map of air space and sends the information directly to the SAM while it’s in the air. Remember a SAM doesn’t have to directly strike the aircraft, it explodes nearby and shreds wings and control surfaces with a cloud of debris.
Terminal missile guidance via optical sensor grid? I’d be shocked if it could be done timely or accurately. A stealth jet moving at Mach 1 and a SAM moving at (just guessing) Mach 5 or so are going to close awfully quickly. You’re going to take pictures from 10-20 km away, from several sources, process those images to locate the jet and build a 3D map of the airspace, and then send that information back to the SAM in time to tell it which way to turn to get close enough to kill the juking jet? <Ron Burgundy>I don’t believe you</Ron Burgundy>
And just how will it communicate with the outgoing missile? For that matter how will the sensors communicate with each other?
I can pretty much guarantee that if you are being shot at by the USAF or USN that not only will you have to deal with not only their F-35s coming in but their B-52s and Growlers shutting down your RF spectrum, not to mention some tailor made Stuxnet type viruses and trojans, courtesy of the USAF Cybercommand, in your network effectively killing your telecoms. If you are thinking laser, that can also be countered by a Growler with a JDAM. If you emit, you can be detected and if you’re stationary you’re dead.