A new day has come, and the US military is still anxious about the F-35C fighter they crashed in the South China Sea; although according to the US Navy, the special operations vessels and special submersibles needed for salvage work in the South China Sea have already set off on the road, but it is still half a month before they arrive; and the longer salvage work is likely to bring many hidden dangers to the sensitive advanced equipment of the US military.
Yes, many of us in the country ridiculed as a joke, we also want to go to the South China Sea to fish for the wreckage of the aircraft, it is best to drag up the remarks of packing and taking away, the Americans are serious, they are really worried about the precautions we really go to the sea of the incident to fish the plane away, although the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has clearly expressed its dare not to be interested, but the Americans still dare not take such a big risk, so the mess is still to be scorched. But everyone jokes when we also have to go to the wreckage, not only the Americans seriously, but also many netizens have begun to make all kinds of confusing remarks, what crash is a conspiracy, is the US Navy to do big things; or a broken F-35 only, in addition to the engine has the value of learning imitation, other comprehensive things are not as good as the J-20.
In the front, why does the United States rely on a trench that is close to the Philippines, with a water depth of 4,000 meters, and is ready to start building a base to maintain a long-term existence, I am in the dark; what is the use of mapping the seabed at a depth that is obviously impossible for this combat submarine to reach at 4,000 meters, I am not clear, in short, it is not something that normal people can come up with. But the latter can be casually talked about, and the research on the wreckage of an F-35 can be of some value.
Many people have a misunderstanding, salvaging the wreckage to study that is to find advanced technology, in order to reverse imitation to learn the design, thus producing two far-fetched conclusions, one is that the F-35 has nothing to study, in addition to the engine is worth dismantling and building; the other is that the United States is still the big brother of the military aircraft design and manufacturing industry after all, APG-81 radar and stealth coating should be learned to improve the performance of our military equipment. These two lines of thought are two sides of the same coin in themselves, and belong to no one to laugh at.
The Americans also said very clearly, in order to prevent technical leaks, this leak is of course not a copy of the leak, but a detailed technical design details, as well as subsystems are controlled after the analysis, so as to obtain the most detailed performance parameters of the F-35, targeted development of supporting coping methods.
A simplest example is that the F-35 stealth ability announced by the United States has always been how many squares within the front XX degree angle, but the detailed details have never been, and we can not get accurate results from the modeling and analysis of the photos, but it is different to get the real thing, you can completely restore the details of one-to-one modeling, and then enter the microwave darkroom to carry out detail measurements at every angle; this darkroom data is top secret in which country, through this darkroom test, We can find out in detail which angles the F-35 is well designed for stealth and which angles are poorly designed, and we can make targeted adjustments when writing combat methods.
Another example is the APG-81 radar, of course, it does not mean that the mainland's current radar level is not as good as the United States, but the public information of any country's radar is also the same as the stealth design, there are many details that do not say, what are the common frequencies of APG-81 radar, which have never been used in actual combat frequencies, how to do the shortcut frequency design, these parameters can make our military targeted design of electronic warfare equipment, in actual combat to play the greatest electronic warfare effectiveness.
Of course, if you are really lucky, it is even better to catch the airborne computer with the highest value on the F-35, the most important thing is the memory that stores its system programming code and other data, through his interpretation, we can see where the F-35's flight envelope limit is under the condition of flight control restrictions, how much is the maximum available overload in each speed band, so as to completely map out its performance insurance; the same can be interpreted as well as the relevant performance of its airborne weapons, the design of its data link system, and so on. All of this can help us develop the corresponding tactics, the corresponding means of restraint, and can also guide the pilots in how to fight when they encounter the F-35 in actual combat.
These are the key values of our army's salvage of the F-35, and they are also the real hidden dangers that the US military is worried about after the F-35 is fished, not that we are going to copy the technology on the F-35; what age is it, why does the aviation industry have to obtain a new aircraft from an opponent in order to copy the operation? Is there no confidence in AVIC? Even if it is the US military, if our army drops a J-10A or J-11B and the body is relatively complete off the coast of Japan, it will also want to fish him up for research and study at the first time. Is it the AL-31 or Taihang engine that the US military needs to learn from the technical level of the 80s, or the ancient flat slit phased array radar That the Americans cannot do now? Or is there any black tech material on both planes that Americans want? Obviously, there will be none, but the Americans will still pay attention to it and salvage it at the first time.
Since if something similar happens, the U.S. military will definitely do the wreckage thing, then if we really want to do it, there is nothing inappropriate, to say that we ourselves are sure to support, even if it is an F-15 that has been in service in the U.S. military for decades and has reached the end of its lifespan, it also has the value of serious research, who stipulates that research must only be learning to imitate?
Isn't the first place in studying the equipment of rivals between great powers always be a means of finding weaknesses and finding restraint? From this point of view, whether the F-35 has stronger technical details than our army, its wreckage as the absolute main tactical fighter of the US three armed forces in the next few decades has a lot of energy to obtain value; there is no need to question.