wrightwing“DAS is basically missile launch detectors, beesley said” 🙂
DAS is basically a spherical IIR system, providing FLIR type imagery in all sectors around the aircraft. It has the ability to detect/track ground and aerial targets/threats, perform IFF functions, and provide targeting information to A2A and A2G weapons(either on board or for a wingman). So yes, missile launch detection is one function, but hardly THE function.
wrightwingDidn’t you start off claiming that the F35 managed to outrun clean Bl50s? Now its comparable load? Is that a slight shift in the goal post I detect? 😀
You might want to check the context of my statement, before trying to make it seem as if I’m being inconsistent. The statement was in response to the notion that an F-16 had lower drag, which certainly isn’t the case once you load it with weapons, fuel, sensors.
wrightwingYou are the one putting up the posts with claims that it is as agile as a clean Viper.
You know what you can do with drop tanks or JDAMS in a dogfight? Shocker for you – you can jettison them. 😮
Imagine that – being able to instantly improve your maneuverability to a level beyond that of the JSF… better still, you can do it right when you need it most.
The F-35 can avoid the dogfight in the first place, and if forced to merge, will be able to tangle with an enemey fighter without getting mission killed(I.e. dropping ordinance before striking the intended target.)
wrightwingAnd that’s simply not entirely viable. With smaller control surfaces and higher wing loading, inferior TWR and most likely inferior TD as well. The F-35 is unlikely to match the F-22’s ITR and STR and climb performance. “Almost matches subsonic acceleration” is not exactly the same as…
Matches clean blk 50… Doesn’t sound like outrunning! It may outran older variants with drop tanks, but a generalised “outruns F-16” is hardly supportable.
-the comments from Beesley, etc.. said similar performance, not equal, and that’s the point I am making. As for wing loading, T/W, T/D-
-we don’t know what the body lift is, which is an important consideration
-with an A2A load out, and 50% fuel, the T/W ratio isn’t terribly dissimilar
-no one here knows the T/D on the 2 aircraft, though it’s obvious that the F-22 is clearly better optimised at higher mach numbers(and I’ve never said the F-35 comes anywhere close there)
As for outrunning F-16s, refer back to post 77(first link). I wasn’t quoting Beesley.
wrightwingOf course it flies well, virtually every modern FBW aircraft does! But some of the claims are simply not realistic (same performance as F-22 for example…). Flies like could also point to the general handling characteristics rather than performance figures! And outrunning what kind of F-16 with what payload…
-similar subsonic performance vs F-22(granted the F-22 will be far superior above M1, and in post stall maneuvers)
-outrunning clean F-16 chase planes w/ 5000lbs weapons load, in dry thrust
wrightwingIndeed, and with its much larger frontal area, the lift independent drag of the F-35 will be much higher… also detrimental to acceleration.
Than an F-16 with a comparable load? You all are smoking some good dope.
wrightwingactually, in acceleration, you should take also into consideration T/W, and a fully loaded F-35 should be nowhere near a clean f-16 en that area
What’s the T/D for a fully loaded F-16, 2 JDAMS, 2 AIM-120s, 2 fuel tanks, and a targeting pod I wonder?
wrightwingThe EODAS/EOTS is far more than MAWS, if that was what you were inferring.
wrightwingWrt the fixing of some of the issues, it still shows that not everything can be accurately simulated and predicted, though accuracy has improved greatly over time using simulation tools etc.
Which is the point behind validating the simulations.
The F-35 may match the F-22 in a few regimes of the envelope, but it will certainly not be up to the F-22’s performance level in general, not even at subsonic speeds. It doesn’t offer the F-22’s TWR and TDR, lack TVC, has smaller control surfaces and I could well imagine that the aircraft is less unstable either, given its primary mission.
I never said it was up to the F-22’s performance in general, but it’s in the supersonic/high alpha envelope where the F-22 really walks away from the competition.
It’s not really fair to compare a 2020 spec’d ac to a 2010 spec’d ac either… You HOPE that the F-35 will pose all these capabilities by that time, whether it will be the case remains yet to be seen.
We don’t even know if the T-50/J-20 will have those systems, much less a Flanker though, within that time frame.
wrightwingSo finally someone has come out, and called the senior test pilot for both the F-22 and F-35 a liar vs. merely omitting certain information.:rolleyes:
What about this guy?
Even when loaded internally with two 2,000lb GBU-31 Joint Direct Attack Munitions and two AIM-120 AMRAAMs, Griffith says the sheer power of the Pratt & Whitney F135 is evident. “The engine has a lot of thrust. It’s been fun to outrun the F-16 (chase aircraft). They can’t keep up. If we go to full military power the F-16 has to go to afterburner to keep up.”
Or this guy?
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/news/press_releases/2010/100127ae_f35bf-2_royal-airforce.html
RAF Squadron Leader Steve Long piloted BF-2, the second short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) F-35B, over Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md., logging the aircraft’s 18th mission. Long departed at 9:55 a.m. EST and flew the aircraft to 20,000 feet, before landing 1.3 hours later. Both the RAF and the Royal Navy plan to operate the F-35B.
“Flying the F-35 was exactly like the simulators that I’ve been flying for over 18 months now, which gives you a lot of confidence in all the modeling and simulation work that has been done in all the other areas of the flight envelope,”
Or this guy?
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/news/press_releases/2009/090319ae_f35b_marine-flight.html
“The plane performed wonderfully,” said Bachmann, a member of the F-35 Integrated Test Force and one of the team test pilots who will fly the F-35B Lightning II at the Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md., test site, beginning this summer. “The U.S. Marine Corps will be getting an aircraft with extraordinary capabilities that is very easy to fly.
Or this guy?
http://f135engine.blogspot.com/2010/01/f35-test-pilot-f135-has-lived-up-to-our.html
Graham Tomlinson: I hadn’t realized some of the limitations of motion simulators. When we make small acceleration requests the simulator gives a modest kick-in-the-pants. In flight, the kick-in-the-pants feels stronger (which all pilots will love!).
So….as you can see, either the plane flies pretty well, or every pilot is lying about it.
wrightwingF35: 4.95g at Mach 0.8 and 15,000 ft….
F-4E: 5.5 Gs at 0.8 Mach at 20,000 feet.
So basically you cherry pick one quote out of many, that supports your opinion, and then stop looking eh.
http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2009/July%202009/0709Fighter.aspx
With a full internal load of fuel and weapons, the F-35 is as agile as a “clean” F-16 carrying no weapons. In other words, in stealth mode, the F-35 gives up nothing in range or weaponry, but adds considerable ability to penetrate enemy air defenses.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34173#
So which of the two would win in a dogfight? Difficult to answer, says Beesley who states that “subsonically, the F-35 and F-22 are very much the same airplane.
I could keep reposting old posts that have already been posted numerous times, but you don’t seem to be interested in finding out the truth.
wrightwingExcept for:
“Flight testing so far has revealed problems with handling in the transonic and medium angle-of-attack regimes, and a problem with screech – destructive high-frequency combustion instability in the F135 afterburner – which is preventing the aircraft from achieving maximum power.”
Nose wander in transonic maneuvers has been tackled with changes to control-surface scheduling and air-data calibration, and updated flight-control software was released at the end of the year. This is expected to also correct discrepancies between predicted and measured sideslip angles and control-surface loads. Engines with design changes to reduce screech and allow use of full augmentor are being installed.
Wing roll off has been experienced during transonic maneuvering in the CTOL F-35A, but was expected and planned solutions have worked so far, McFarlan says, including scheduling of leading- and trailing-edge flap positions and rates.
The same might as well be true for the F-35 (being superior in certain regimes of the flight envelope under certain conditions). Beesley carefully talked about selected areas where he compared the F-35 to a clean F-16 blk 50 or F-22 for example and in fact stated matches the blk 50, not exceeding it!
Except the claim is that an F-35 with 2 JDAMs and 2 AIM-120, outperforms a clean F-16 Blk 50, which means that a similarly equipped F-16 would be even more disadvantaged. Beesley also says that in the subsonic regime, the F-35 performs like an F-22.
As of now the F-35 can’t deploy any weapons at all, has no DIRCM and a lot of other capabilities people like you like to hype on every possible occasion. It works both ways!
It’s not really fair to say that an airplane, not yet in service isn’t as mature as one that’s been around over 20yrs. The point is that by the time F-35s come online(or within a few years of IOC), WILL have those capabilities.
It’s not very likely that the VLO characteristics will help much at such short distances. Wrt the AIM-120D HOBS doesn’t automatically mean that the weapon can engage targets around the aircraft at all ranges! There might be some serious limitation for such a missile like the AIM-120.
But those VLO characteristics might just allow the F-35 to enter the merge on its own terms. The point I’m making though is that unless the foe has comparable signature reduction, and sensor capabilities, then the F-35 is still likely to have some advantages, even if small. As for the AIM-120, I never said all ranges. We’re talking WVR, not a long range BVR shot to the rear hemisphere. Once the JDRADM comes online, it’s effectiveness will only improve.
wrightwingWHAT!?!?
The damn thing had a worse sustained turn rate than a damn F-4 no time ago. Sure, some marginal weight savings have been made since, but that is only polishing a turd!
The F-35 has never had a worse turn rate than an F-4.
wrightwingWrightwing :
We ‘ll wait to see the end product for proofs .:cool:
It depends on what the other is flying :rolleyes:
A Flanker is more manoeuvrable than a Viper or a Superbug .
It also has an HMS and some good IR missiles …
This is true, but raw performance is a much easier task to achieve, than all of the systems integration, and I seriously doubt that the plane handles worse than they expected(which wouldn’t be backed up by pilot experiences). Just my $.02
A Flanker is more maneuverable in certain parts of the flight envelope, at certain weights, etc….than the Viper or Superbug, would be a more accurate statement. The question though, is IF the F-35 is also more maneuverable than those 2 planes, than how does the Flanker compare to the Lightning II?
The Flanker does have HMS and good IR missiles, but as of now, is limited to engaging targets in the frontal sector. The F-35 will be able to engage targets in all sectors, and will have DIRCM. Additionally, due to the F-35’s VLO signature, the likelihood of the F-35 setting itself up in an advantageous position relative to the Flanker is much higher, than the other way around.
True (but to be VLO is useless in dogfight) .
Tell me again , during a “discrete strike” how many sidewinders there are in the bays ? :rolleyes:
VLO can still reduce the effectiveness of a foe’s sensors/weapons in WVR. The F-35 doesn’t require Sidewinders, to engage HOBS targets. The AIM-120D can also accomplish this.
wrightwingSome F-135 Material –
Those numbers are very conservative, as the F-35 has demonstrated over 41,000lbs hover thrust, not to mention this story-
Sign In
