I’ve tested with the pilot skill level turned right down on the blue side which lowers its kinematics significantly. Makes no difference as the f-35 rarely has to evade. The delay this causes to the ooda loop also doesn’t matter as the flankers are identified early.

Dropped the missiles down to 120b. Still the same result when keeping the front aspect pointed at the red jets and keeping ir signature low.

In all scenarios and configs where the f-35s can launch before the flankers see them, they win. With ability for stealth aircraft to position themselves early the advantages are just unfair.

The f-35s ability to show the pilot exactly how close they can get to the enemy undetected just adds to that.

Whoosh.

Jessmo23 had no trouble grasping my point. It flew straight over your head though.

The Germans f**ked up badly when they bought the F-104 rather than indigenous designs such as the Fokker DR.1e which had 4 missile mounts per half wing for a total loadout of 24 missiles, go-faster stripes down the side and the latest in lightweight helmet & goggle technology. Killed the European fighter aerospace industry so it did.

Hence why knowledgeable men like Erich Hartmann protested so much…. no doubt the dodgy bribery dealings didn’t help either.

Pardon me
i dont necessary disagree with your other comments, but how do we know you are an actual marine engineer officer?, i saw people claim they are involved with military all the times, sometimes they tell the truth, sometimes they lie so that other stop questioning their point of view

Well, if you want something more meaty to chew on – the game supposedly ranks aircraft maneuverability by generation. No further fidelity involved.

Which would mean the F-35 has kinematics as good as an F-22. Anyone willing to defend that assumption?

Ah, lick of paint and she’ll be grand. We’ve more important things to worry about than a wee fire… like beating them welsh-uns tomorrow in Lansdowne Rd.

That photo looks like an A320 (or family) to me.

that rule is wrong though

That rule of thumb is from NATO for low RCS aircraft.

it not a high school report though

according to graph the difference in signatures between 10 Ghz and 1 Ghz is around 10 dBsm, which mean 10 times different , i dont see how that remotely similar, at all

Your right. Its undergrad… Which is not vastly different as far as accuracy goes.

I know from experience just how hashed together such projects are. They’d one guy doing control, verification of control using flight sim and then RCS.

according to graph the difference in signatures between 10 Ghz and 1 Ghz is around 10 dBsm, which mean 10 times different , i dont see how that remotely similar, at all

I would expect variation on the order of 50 dB.

And you believe the figures floating around for the F-35’s RCS (0.001-0.01 sq.m) are vastly overstated?

Well.. perhaps you and Andraxxus are both right and the average RCS is actually north of 0.1 sq.m meaning the aircraft is not really VLO and can be tracked at ranges well exceeding 100 km. In which case they’re probably better of with an upgraded F-15E re-engined with the F119. (The Russians in turn ought to scrap the PAK FA in favour of a Su-35Z.)

You need to understand that RCS varies with radar wavelength.

Will the F-35 have an RCS of 0.001-0.01? Yes, absolutely, I’m sure from certain angles as seen by certain radar it will be better than 0.001 m2. But, from other angles with other radar, it’ll be orders of magnitude higher.

As for why it’d be better than an F-15E, the better RCS averages will focus around the Ku and X band which are of course fire control radar and seeker heads.

But I’m not convinced its standalone* good enough to operate in an environment with long wavelength GCI and opposing fighters armed with medium-to-long ranged heat seeking missiles.

*By this I mean without F-22 support. So, for the USAF it’ll be grand, for the UK, it will do in a pinch, for the likes of the Dutch…. unconvinced.

[I’m paying scant regard to the high school simulation someone showed on here the other day]