Yes it is . You do not know what you are talking about djcross , you should do a bit of homework before posting nonsense . :rolleyes:

Come on blue, you’ve got to do better then simply telling people to do their homework. I want to hear why he’s wrong.

But how will the F-35 fair on a low level penetration mission? Will it be able to avoid the SAMs that djcross so fears and if it were to operate down low could it perhaps be more effective in that area than say the Rafale or F-15?

I would think perhaps it could be as its EODAS would alert it to bandits approaching from the side and rear quaters – much harder to for air defense to bounce

actually, that’s kind of the whole selling point of the F-35: it can, and it will 😀

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fm5vfGW5RY
at 2:51

That’s as much a product of the F-35’s CNI suite as much as it is the actual veiwing sensors. It’s not all down to the EODAS.

Obligatory got me thinking when he referred to the six missile dodging F-16 as it was a classic medium altitude SAM vs aircraft engagement. It’s also the very type of engagement many of us assume the F-35 will have to go through when dealing with the superb double didgit SAM systems that are out there.

What I don’t ever see discussed on various forums is how the F-35 could perhaps adapt to avoid the above type of engagement by employing the same sort of tactics more often employed, or perviously employed, by some of the classics such as the Rafale, Jaguar, GR-1, F-111 and F-15E. Low level penetration is of course what i’m referring to.

How would the F-35 be suited?
Are terrain following modes available?
Could EODAS help in such a role?
Are plans in place to use the F-35 in this role?
Will its (seemingly) excellent stealth properties give it a big advantage?

Anyone like to throw in their thoughts..?

(The Package Q vid is up on youtube btw and well worth a watch but I i’m not sure if it’s good forum etiquette or not to link to combat footage)

i think IRST system on aircraft can auto tracking just like radar are’t they
EX : pirate irst on EF-2000 can track over 200 targets

Correct me if i’m wrong but isn’t Pirates FOV somewhat obscured by the location its positioned on the airframe? To my eye it looks far from ideal for scanning for ground/maritime targets.

Any non-stealthy fighter jet is stealthier than any stealthy ship, has this query solved?

I’m not so sure that is accurate. For example the Kirov class battle cruisers were said to the show up as well on radar as very small fishing vessel.

“If you saw a big wake with nothing in front of it,” British marine LO expert Peter Varnish has said, “you knew you’d found the Kirov.”

Hurray, we have one more RCS Expert whom sees sawthooth every where…

Seriously we been through this a zillion times before.. I can easily put up close in pics of both F-22 and F-35 where the cracks between the different panels goes to show. Or the bubble shapes of the fat shorty F-35..

Slap some Sawthooth on the nozzles and they misteriously become very stealthy and cool the jet plume by a 1000 deg..:rolleyes:

Cost and performance trade-offs were made when it came to designing the F-35’s exhaust system, O’Bryan said. Lockheed Martin chose not to employ a two-dimensional thrust-vectoring nozzle, as it had on the F-22 Raptor.

For one thing, the decision reduced cost. For another, it eliminated one of the larger practical challenges to maintaining the stealth characteristics of the F-35.

The classified “sawtooth” features that ring the nozzle help consolidate the exhaust into a so-called “spike” signature, while other secret techniques have been employed to combat and minimize the engine heat signature.

“We had to deal with that, and we dealt with that,” O’Bryan said, declining to offer details.

The F-35 meets or exceeds the services’ infrared signature specifications. Many of the standard fighter engine features such as a big afterburner spray bar assembly and related piping are missing from the F-35.

http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2012/November%202012/1112fighter.aspx

When it comes to low observables these LM guys clearly have no idea whatsoever, not a clue. Nearly half a century of experience with reducing RCS doesn’t mean squat :rolleyes:

And now back to the subject at hand. The PAK-FA