Its official: F-35 can not supercruise

[QUOTE=Sintra;2362237]Couldnt this topic be merged with the “normal” F

Please don’t merge! This is a beaten dead horse.

Couldnt this topic be merged with the “normal” F-35 one?

Yes, and?
In the sense, where is really the new there?
The fact that F-35 is actually the slowest of all fighters actually in production, bar maybe the JF-17, is something that would have been clear from the beginning.
So why you have discovered it only now and decided to dedicate it a thread?

yep nothing new. most of us viewed it as an a2g aircraft with good but secondary a2a. not the other way around.

let me guess, flynn was referring to the proverbial “warload” TM, aka 2*2000 lbs bombs,
but even so, EF has the torque to fly well even then

ed: just read it, thats a lot of hyperbole & superlatives even for a pilot instructed to praise F-35

here is the immediate reaction from another pilot
But others are skeptical. “Forty-three seconds tells me there is a massive decrease in the expected performance because of some serious shortcomings,” the Super Hornet pilot says. “How that’s parlayed into ‘we’re better than the rest of the world combined’ on every measure, I don’t know, and I don’t believe it.”

The quote from the F-35 pilot regarding supercruise is:

The F-35 should have had that kind of setting, all the more that its TTW ratio is not that great and it can’t supercruise.

Let’s say the F135 has 5 AB settings. If the first level is enough to maintain supersonic speed, that means an extra 10% total thrust ( 20% * 50% of AB thrust ) would be needed to supercruise. The F135 block 1 could maybe be sufficient. It wouldn’t be really impressive but it’s better than nothing.

It doesn’t work that way. Even if you go from mil power to minimal AB, the increase in fuel consumption is monumental. Different physics at play.
If you want higher mil thrust, an increase in forward cold fan diamanter is in order.
See AL -31F => AL-31FM1 => 117S

Edit:
The F135 dry thrust have never really been an issue. It is indeed impressive in every regard.
The problem is the F-35 draggy airframe.
Never forget that.
So in light of the time and cost it took for F-35 program and F135 P/W to get sorted out(the length and diameter of F135 was designed after the overall design length of F-35 and not the other way around!), its a bit arrogant to “demand” even higher engine thrust to fix another problem, namely the F-35 short stubby carrier design airframe.

The quote from the F-35 pilot regarding supercruise is:

Great news. Everything an F-35 pilot says is true…

Therefore you have no problem accepting what Billy Flynn said?

In terms of instantaneous and sustained turn rates and just about every other performance metric, the F-35 variants match or considerably exceed the capabilities of every fourth-generation fighter

http://www.jsf.mil/contact/con_faqs.htm

Just so we are clear, your source is a quote from 2006, before any of the F-35 variants flew?

Given that you have taken this as 100%, does that mean we can take every other statement that is/was ever made by the JSF program Office and LM as 100% accurate too?

It seems me that the ability to supercruise how is descripted by the F-35 pilot above is something without any connection to a real significance.
You could in the same manner take a Mig-31 speed it up until it reach mach 2.8, after that close AB and keep it flying at full military power for a long time before it get back under the speed of sound.
Better also, it can just go down to minimum AB and still it can keep on going at a greater distance and velocity of an F-22a in supercruise before to reach bingo.
First one procedure has no any operative meaning when compared to the second, so what would it be something significant to the F-35 instead?

The quote from the F-35 pilot regarding supercruise is:

“What we can do in our airplane is get above the Mach with afterburner, and once you get it going … you can definitely pull the throttle back quite a bit and still maintain supersonic, so technically you’re pretty much at very, very min[imum] afterburner while you’re cruising,”

The F-35 should have had that kind of setting, all the more that its TTW ratio is not that great and it can’t supercruise.

Let’s say the F135 has 5 AB settings. If the first level is enough to maintain supersonic speed, that means an extra 10% total thrust ( 20% * 50% of AB thrust ) would be needed to supercruise. The F135 block 1 could maybe be sufficient. It wouldn’t be really impressive but it’s better than nothing.

Su-35s does have the extra 2*500kgf thrust by a nob on the thrust handle.
Call it emergency thrust setting.
It is just the last AB step that are not used in normal operations.

AL-31F and F100 might have 5-6(might be higher) AB settings.
Hope that answer your Q.
You might search TEG post on F-16.net for clues.

https://youtu.be/df3vW5HsPlc

Here^^ u can see the different AB threshold clearly.

Obviously going full AB raise temperatur on the engine, thus increase tear nd wear.
Which do no favor for engine life hours.

lol ok I shouldn’t have used the word supercruise. I was wondering about how much AB it needed for that to have an idea if a wartime engine setting could get the same speed without AB. If the F-35 right now needs 10% AB to stay in supersonic, a wartime engine setting might be able to increase mil thrust to be able to do it. If it’s 25% probably not.

Anyways I think a wartime setting should have been a requirement from the start in order to help the F-35 for the a2a role. The typhoon and F-22 are said to have had such a setting from the start. It should at least have been an upgrade for the F135 that have already been built. For 60 billion R&D, I think it’s not too much to ask for.

supercruise is “supersonic flight without the use of the AB”, thus, it is not about “AB settings”.. if it has to use AB (and it does) it does not supercruise. it flies supersonically with the use of AB, which has been done for over 60 years by now.

The F-35A is said to be able to supercruise at min AB. How many AB settings does it have?

The F135 block 1 upgrade seems to focus of fuel consumption, but increasing the thrust is another possibility. They should implement a wartime setting for more thrust, maybe it could supercruise with it. That kind of configuration could be set before a sortie depending on whether the mission requires more range or more thrust. Or even maybe in flight. If the F-35 has to intercept an enemy fighter it can chose the extra thrust. Wartime settings for engines are kind of common these days.

Yes, and?
In the sense, where is really the new there?
The fact that F-35 is actually the slowest of all fighters actually in production, bar maybe the JF-17, is something that would have been clear from the beginning.

Doesn’t mean anything, top speed is often dictated by pressure recovery performer of the intake at high speed.A slower aircraft doesn’t necessarily incapable of supercruising. Ex: Mig-29, F-15, Mig-31 are much faster than Typhoon. But the Typhoon can supercruise while these others 3 cant.

i decided to dispel the myth because its being spread, repeated ad nauseam and should be thwarted.
i’ve seen topics on aviation forums & wiki alike claiming F-35 can supercruise,
-hence its time to clear out a few rotten eggs

true, but supercruise can still be achieved if the fighter has low drag, just look at gripen 😉

Yes, and?
In the sense, where is really the new there?
The fact that F-35 is actually the slowest of all fighters actually in production, bar maybe the JF-17, is something that would have been clear from the beginning.
So why you have discovered it only now and decided to dedicate it a thread?

Funny.. the F-16XL was said to SC without an engine “designed” to SC.