toanWith that technology at hand, even a F-35 with the flying performance of a F-5E will be a winner most of the time as the SH is already. 😎
Most military are aware about that, when he does still point to flying performances for unknown reasons. It does seem that cold logic is overruled by emotions sometimes. 😮
It seems that the flight performance of F-35A in A2A configuration shall be the combination of clean F-16C Block50 and F/A-18E:
1. Acceleration, climbing rate, T/W ratio, G-loading, turning rate, and flight-envelope: similar to clean F-16C Block50.
2. High AoA flight performance and Post-stall manoeuvrability: similar to F/A-18E.
Although not as invincible as F-22A, this kind of combination should still be a very respectable dog-fighting machine in WVR engagement, especially when it includes the most unique and advancing Cockpit + HMD + IIRST/MAW + Datalink + IEWS systems in the world.
toanF-35:
1. The frontal RCS of Golf-ball size.
2. American AESA fighter’s radar only second to APG-77 in Air-to-air combat modes.
3. The most unique and advancing Cockpit + HMD + IIRST/MAW + Datalink + IEWS systems in the world.
Complementing the radar, the F-35’s airframe is also lined with antennas that gather vast amounts of electronic information from the jets surroundings. The system allows the fighter to target and identify the electronic emissions of hostile radars in the air or on the ground with startling precision, Beesley said. The data gathered from these sensors allows the aircraft to track, identify and attack the sources of these signals without giving away the F-35s’ position.
Furthermore, the F-35 has two separate types of infrared sensors that allow the jet to track targets passively. The Distributed Aperture System (DAS) is a system of cameras that feeds an infrared image of the planes’ surrounding to the pilots’ helmet, Beesley explained. The computer fuses the images from the six cameras and merges the images into a single seamless picture that allows the pilot to see 360 degrees around the aircraft, including through the cockpit floor and indeed the pilots’ own body. The DAS also acts as a missile warning system (MWS) that alerts the pilot to incoming missiles. The second infrared sensor, called the electro-optical targeting system (EOTS), allows the aircraft to target, track, and identify object in the air or on the ground at long ranges and high resolutions, Beesley said.
The F-35 is able to transmit the wealth of data that the warplane gathers to other aircraft and to ground forces. Not only does the F-35 carry the standard Link-16 data-link to transmit information to over 100 other types of NATO platforms, the jet will carry data-links to communicate with ground forces and other stealth aircraft. A next-generation data-link called the Multifunction Advanced Data-Link (MADL) which will be carried by the F-35, will allow the plane to stealthily share data with the F-22 air dominance fighter and B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, enhancing the capabilities of all the aircraft involved.
4. Capable of flying to Mach 1.6 with 6 to 8 tons internal fuel, two 2,000 Ib JDAMs, and two AIM-120.
With the possible exception of MIG-25/31, any other fighter in the world today with the similar fuel and weapon loads can hardly surpass Mach 0.9…….
5. Subsonic acceleration and maneuverability: as good as a clean F-16C Block 50, and very close to Raptor.
6. Post-stall manoeuvrability: The F-35 will be able match most of the same high AOA manoeuvres as the Raptor, although it will not be able to do so as quickly as the more powerful jet in some cases.
toanhttp://www.livescience.com/technology/081107-f-35-fighter-jets.html
Major General Charles Davis, USAF, the Program Executive Officer of the JSF program, explained that critics of the F-35 simply do not understand the fundamental requirements and technologies behind the aircraft, nor have these critics been briefed about the true capabilities of the new warplane. The F-35 is “not designed for an air-show in Paris,” Davis said referring to the thrust vectoring Russian Su-35 aircraft which regularly performs spectacular routines at air-shows around the world. Davis said that while the F-35 was not designed as a pure air superiority machine, the program has a requirement to defeat any threat aircraft today- or any projected threat aircraft in the future.
The JSF accomplishes this feat by relying on its incredible suite of sensors, its stealthy airframe, and a surprising level of agility. The F-35 is not only equipped with the APG-81 active electronically scanned array radar (AESA), which according to Lockheed Martin F-35 Chief Test Pilot Jon Beesley, is the most advanced fighter radar system in the world, but also a host of other sensors. The radar can track an enormous numbers of targets in the air at phenomenal ranges while simultaneously operating air to ground modes, Beesley said.
Complementing the radar, the F-35’s airframe is also lined with antennas that gather vast amounts of electronic information from the jets surroundings. The system allows the fighter to target and identify the electronic emissions of hostile radars in the air or on the ground with startling precision, Beesley said. The data gathered from these sensors allows the aircraft to track, identify and attack the sources of these signals without giving away the F-35s’ position.
Furthermore, the F-35 has two separate types of infrared sensors that allow the jet to track targets passively. The Distributed Aperture System (DAS) is a system of cameras that feeds an infrared image of the planes’ surrounding to the pilots’ helmet, Beesley explained. The computer fuses the images from the six cameras and merges the images into a single seamless picture that allows the pilot to see 360 degrees around the aircraft, including through the cockpit floor and indeed the pilots’ own body. The DAS also acts as a missile warning system (MWS) that alerts the pilot to incoming missiles. The second infrared sensor, called the electro-optical targeting system (EOTS), allows the aircraft to target, track, and identify object in the air or on the ground at long ranges and high resolutions, Beesley said.
In a pure stealth air to air configuration, the F-35 currently carries four AIM-120 AMRAAM missiles internally in its weapons bays, Davis said. While this configuration gives the jet a significant punch, Davis said studies have been undertaken that would increase the stealth air to air war load to six to possibly as many as eight air to air missiles which would be carried internally. The jet can also carry air to air missiles externally should the need arise and stealth is no longer a concern, Davis said.
In terms of aerodynamic performance, the F-35 is an excellent machine, Beesley said. Having previously been only the second man ever to have flown the F-22 Raptor, Beesley became the first pilot ever to fly the F-35 in late 2006. As such, Beesley is intimately familiar with both programs. According to Beesley, the four current test pilots for F-35 have been most impressed by the aircraft’s thrust and acceleration. In the subsonic flight regime, the F-35 very nearly matches the performance of its’ larger, more powerful cousin, the F-22 Raptor, Beesley explained. The “subsonic acceleration is about as good as a clean Block 50 F-16 or a Raptor- which is about as good as you can get.” Beesley said.
What Beesley expects will surprise future F-35 pilots is the jets’ superb low speed handling characteristics and post-stall manoeuvrability. While the F-22 with its thrust vectored controls performs better at the slow speeds and high angle of attack (AOA) flight regime, the F-35 will be able match most of the same high AOA manoeuvres as the Raptor, although it will not be able to do so as quickly as the more powerful jet in some cases. Turning at the higher Gs and higher speed portions of the flight envelope, the F-35 will “almost exactly match a clean Block 50 F-16 and comes very close to the Raptor”, Beesley said.
While supersonically the F-35 is limited to a seemingly unimpressive Mach 1.6 in level flight, Davis explains that the JSF is optimized for exceptional subsonic to supersonic acceleration. Transonic acceleration is much more relevant to a fighter pilot than the absolute max speed of the jet, Davis said. Davis, who was previously the program manager for the F-15 Eagle, explains that while the Eagle is a Mach 2 class fighter, it has rarely exceed the threshold of Mach 1.2 to Mach 1.3 during it’s entire 30 year life span. Additionally, the time the aircraft has spent in the supersonic flight regime can be measured in minutes rather than hours- most of the supersonic flights were in fact during specialized flights such as Functional Check Flights (FCF). “I don’t see how that gets you an advantage” Davis said, referring to the Mach 2+ capability. Beesley said that in terms of supersonic flight that the F-35 is still more than competitive with existing designs.
Comparisons to the F-22 Raptor are unfair as “supersonically, the Raptor is in a class by itself. It lives there,” Beesley explained. “In many ways the Raptor is the first true supersonic fighter,” Beesley added, referring to that aircrafts’ much publicized and unique supersonic cruise capability.
The most challenging mission for the JSF is where the F-35s will have to penetrate deep into a dense integrated air defense system reinforced by enemy fighters and strike a target with no support, Davis said. This is the most difficult mission for the F-35, but it is also one that is near suicidal for current aircraft such as the F-16. Modern Russian built surface to air missile systems such as the SA-20 are deadly to conventional aircraft, Davis explained. A package of four, six, or even eight F-35s would have to divide up the responsibilities for the suppression of enemy air defenses, mapping out the target, clearing the skies, and striking the target, Davis said. The larger number of aircraft is necessary since the F-35 “doesn’t have the kinematics of the F-22”, Davis explained, “we’re a slightly fatter, slower aircraft, so it takes a few more planes to get the job done.”
“The F-35 transitioned from subsonic to supersonic just as our engineers and our computer modeling had predicted,” said Jon Beesley, Lockheed Martin’s chief F-35 test pilot. “I continue to be impressed with the aircraft’s power and strong acceleration, and I’m pleased that its precise handling qualities are retained in supersonic flight, even with a payload of 5,400 pounds (2,450 kilograms) in the weapons bays.”
Beesley said it was also a significant achievement for a test aircraft to fly supersonic for the first time with the weight of a full internal load of weapons. The milestone was achieved on the 69th flight of F-35 aircraft AA-1. Beesley climbed to 30,000 feet (9,144 meters) and accelerated to Mach 1.05, or about 680 miles per hour, over a rural area in north Texas.
The F-35 accomplished four transitions through the sound barrier, spending a total of eight minutes in supersonic flight. The flight was preceded by a high-subsonic mission earlier in the day. Future testing will gradually expand the flight envelope out to the aircraft’s top speed of Mach 1.6, which the F-35 is designed to achieve with a full internal load of weapons.
toan1. Personally, I think it is pointless to use the F-X projects of Singaporean AF, Southern Korean AF, and UAE AF as the examples for proving which one (Eurofighter or Rafale) is the better one. If these kinds of evidence are acceptable, then F-15K/SG and F-16E should be the best of best:D
2. Southern Korean AF wanted a long range striking fighter with a striking radius of 1,000 NM class and the capability for destroying Northern Korean BM bases. It should be very natural that both F-15K and Rafale had much better score than Eurofighter, since at that time (2001-2003), the A to G capability of Eurofighter is near zero.
toanhttp://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=102
See official empty equipped weight.
I guess this weight should include the weight of empty CFTs…….
toanhttp://aero-enthusiast.com/AC%20data/Boeing%20F-15E.html
F-15E：
A. Dimension and Weight：
1. Length：19.43 m
2. Wing Span：13.06 m
3. Wing Area：56.49 m2
4. Empty weight of fighter：
a. 15,196 kg（Early F-15E with F100-PW-220）
b. 15,695 kg（Late F-15E with F100-PW-229）
5. Empty weight of the two CFTs：
a. 1,981 kg（Early F-15E with F100-PW-220）
b. 1,990 kg（Late F-15E with F100-PW-229）
6. Fuel capacity：
a. Internal fuel loading：6,129 kg (JP-8)
b. CFTs’ fuel loading：
* 4,436 kg（Early F-15E with F100-PW-220）
* 4,439 kg（Late F-15E with F100-PW-229）
c. External fuel loading：5,645 kg（610 US gallons tanks*3）
d. Maximal fuel loading：
* 16,209 kg（Early F-15E with F100-PW-220）
* 16,212 kg（Late F-15E with F100-PW-229）
7. Maximal external loading：11,113 kg
8. MTOW：36,742 kg
B. Flight performance（Late F-15E with F100-PW-229）：
1. Maximal speed：2.5 Mach.
2. Acceleration from 0.6 Mach (360 kts) to 0.95 Mach (570 kts) in clean configuration：8 seconds.
3. From braking-off to the altitude of 30,000fts in clean configuration：80 seconds.
4. Loiter time：2.5 hours at the area 250 nm away from the base（AIM-120*6, AIM-9*2, Maximal fuel loading, subsonic cruising at 30,000 fts, 20 mins reserve fuel）
5. Striking radius：1,370 km／740 nm（AIM-120*2, AIM-9*2, 2,000 Ib LGBs*2, LANTIRN pods, Maximal fuel loading, Hi-Hi-Hi flight path）
6. Maximal ferry range：4,445 km／2,400 nm
toanWhich radar absorbing material?
Are the leading edges of the wings and canards, and also the nose, covered by RAM?
It is said that Eurofighter has done these ~ Covering the leading edges of the wings and canards with RAM, and its nose is also made by the materials that allows only the certain wavelength of EM waves to come in and out.
toanOr the later two didn’t pay so much attention for reducing RCS of the little components of airframe ~ This may be reasonable, if the fighters didn’t have any thought about reducing RCS at the designing stage and have to carry so many unstealthy weapons and equipments outsides, the meaning of trying to reduce the RCS of the little components of airframe may be too small to do it.
“Saw-tooth” ridges have been used by every stealthy fighters and many fighters who declare they do care about reducing RCS in the world today, such as F-117, B-2, F-22A, F-35A/B/C, PAK-FA/T-50, Su-47, F/A-18E/F, EA-18G, and Rafale.
toanhttp://www.airpower.at/news07/0715_iris-t/index.html
IRIS-T, another AAM with similar weight and diameter as AIM-9M, but great improvement in seekers, guiding systems, and aerodynamics just like AIM-9X:
(The differences of effective range of all directions among AIM-9P, AIM-9P5, AIM-9L, and IRIS-T)
http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/iris-t/aim-9p.gif
http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/iris-t/aim-9-p5.gif
http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/iris-t/aim-9l.gif
http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/iris-t/iris-t.gif
(The comparision of effective range between AIM-9L and IRIS-T in head-on-engagement)
http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/iris-t/head-on-engagement-aim-9l.gif
http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/iris-t/head-on-engagement-irist-a.gif
http://www.airpower.at/flugzeuge/eurofighter/iris-t/head-on-engagement-irist-d.gif
toanNo because INS and data link come into play to optimize the course.
1. ASRAAM, Python-4/-5, AIM-9X and so on also have INS.
2. It is said that MICA IR won’t equipped fighter to missile datalink formally until the time after Rafale F3 enters service.
3. AIM-120 also has INS and data link to come into play to optimize its flight course, then why MICA EM can still have a comparable effective range with this 40% bigger and heavier AAM according to French declaration ??
toanYes, a better seekers and guiding system are very helpful for increasing effective range. AIM-9X uses the same missile body & propulsion system as AIM-9M, while Python-5’s warhead, missile body, propulsion system, design of control surfaces and so on are all the same as Python-4, but because of their new seekers and guiding systems, both AIM-9X and Python-5 are declared to have almost doubled effective range comparing with their seniors (AIM-9M and Python-4).
Comparing with AIM-9M, ASRAAM also has the new seeker with the same origin of AIM-9X’s seeker and improvement in guiding system. In addition, it gets a much bigger rocket propulsion system with the same class as Python-4/-5 and R-73, and its control surfaces are much simple and lighter comparing with the later. Therefore, I think it is reasonable that ASRAAM should at least have a similar effective range as Python-5…….
toanhttp://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3800907&c=AIR&s=TOP
Thales Starts Low-Rate Output of AESA Radar
Paris – A new active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar from Thales has entered low-rate initial production, with a delivery for the Rafale fighter aircraft scheduled for 2010, said Pierre-Yves Chaltiel, senior vice president in the Airborne Systems Division.
“This capability has ended the development phase and has entered production,” Chaltiel told journalists Nov. 3. A follow-on contract for full-scale production of the AESA RBE2 radar is due to be signed in 2009 as part of the fourth tranche order of 60 Rafales, he said.
The Rafale currently uses a passive array antenna for air-to-air and air-to-ground use. Once equipped with the active antenna, the Rafale would have a five-year technology lead over European competition aircraft, Chaltiel said.
toanR-73:
2.9 m in length, 170 mm diameter, 7.4 kg warhead, and 105 kg in total weight.
Python IV/V:
3.1 m in length, 160 mm in diameter, 11 kg warhead, and 103.6 kg in total weight.
ASRAAM:
2.9 m in length, 166 mm in diameter, 10 kg warhead, 88 kg in total weight.
AIM-9M:
2.9 m in length, 127 mm in diameter, 10 kg warhead, 86 kg in total weight.
Actually, the missile body of ASRAAM has the same class diameter as MICA, R-73, and Python-4/5, which is much larger than AIM-9M (166 mm v.s 127 mm). This means that ASRAAM can carry bigger rocket engine and more fuel comparing with AIM-9M.
I think the main reason that ASRAAM can still maintain a similar weight as AIM-9M is because of its Lift-body design: only four tiny tail-wing, no TVC, and no any other complex control surfaces (Python-5, on the other hand, has 18 control surfaces in total……..)
toanThere can’t be such a difference providing both missiles have almost the same size and weight. You’re talking apples and oranges here, sorry.
Well, MICA EM/IR, Python-4/5, and R-73 also have almost the same level of size and weight, so in your opinion, their effective range should be similar, right ??
MICA: 3.1 m in length, 160 mm in diameter, 12 kg warhead, and 112 kg in total weight.
R-73: 2.9 m in length, 170 mm diameter, 7.4 kg warhead, and 105 kg in total weight.
Python IV/V: 3.1 m in length, 160 mm in diameter, 11 kg warhead, and 103.6 kg in total weight.
However, according to French declaration, the maximal effective range for MICA is 60 to 80 km, which is 2 to 4 times longer than R-73 and Python (Early R-73: 20 km, Late R-73 and Python: 30 to 40 km), and in the same class as AMRAAM, a BVRAAM that is 40% heavier than MICA…..
toanIt is an official claim, not a rumor, after all. On the other hand it might be a marketing BS. Choose your pick.
The similar declarations from Russia, France, and Boeing are also the official claims of the manufacturers, but what are the evidence and basis for such official declaration. Has any manufacturer provided the evidence that its IRST can do the tracking, identifying, and range measuring works almost as good as modern fighter’s radars ??
1. Detection: PIRATE/FSO may detect the target at the range of 70 to 80 nm (130 to 148 km) in ideal weather, but when the weather is not so ideal, its effective range will shrink to 30 to 50 nm (55 to 93 km).
2. Tracking and Image identification: In this mode, PIRATE/FSO today can still only handle single target in one time within the range of 16 to 30 nm (30 to 55 km).
3. Range measuring: PIRATE doesn’t have Laser Ranger, while the effective range of the Laser ranger for FSO is said to be around 22 nm (40 km).
The APG-77 radar for F-22A, on the other hand, is said to be able to track the target of RCS = 1m2 at range of more than 200 km away and handle 100 targets at the same time……
Sign In
