Back on track… 🙂

Also you need to add into account the newer generation of solid propellant.

US is usually making public a very conservative parameter for their weapons.

hate to spoil the fun for you but solid rocket fuel has barely evolved for 40 years.

The biggest “revolution” is CL-20 which is currently undergoing testing. That is the biggest step we have seen in performance and the gain is a staggering 20% when counted in energy per volume or 14% in energy per weight.

Ramjets OTOH is a more substantial boost of performance and the only AA missile built with that is the Meteor. (other projects exist but Meteor will be the only one in service)

You have no quote from an F-35 Pilot. If, you do then post it………

I have the actual figures from LM and US DoD as well as a basic understanding of math.

The F35A with 50% fuel is faster than an F16C with full internal fuel + 2 drop tanks. But without the drop tanks and with a light load the F16C is faster. But the F16C isn’t that impressive. It’s just the benchmark for decent kinematic performance. And that’s the mark the F35 struggles with. The Eurocanards are a big step up from that.

Sorry, 5th Generation Fighters are a big leap in Fighter Evolution. Much like it was at the end of WWII when Jets started to replace Propeller Driven Aircraft. Did that mean the latter was obsolete well technically YES. Yet, that doesn’t mean they had no value. Nonetheless, the future was clear and today we have no propeller fighters at all. Which, is hardly surprising……..

Also, I would add that you can’t shoot what you can’t see. During engagements between F-22’s and F-15’s. The Eagles “never” even seen the Raptors until the flew over them! Just like the recent case of the Iranian F-4’s and the single F-22 over the Persian Gulf. Which, is not to say that the F-22 or even F-35 aren’t very capable Dog Fighters in WVR. The point is they will rarely need that capability in the vast majority of its encounters.

In short the difference in capabilities between 4th and 4.5 Generation Fighters isn’t that great. Yet, the difference in capabilities between 4.5 and 5th Generations is Substantial.

Did you read anything that I wrote?

The 4,5 gen fighters lowered the RCS a lot compared to previous early 4th gen fighters (with exposed engines and with an exterior in aluminum). The F35 just takes it to the next step. All of your arguments could be used to describe the Eurocanards when compared to 4,5th gen fighters as well. The difference here is that the avionics on the F35 basically is on par with the Eurocanards upcoming versions, possibly slightly better. Kinematic performance is inferior. RCS management better, but IR signature worse (last one is just basic thermodynamics).

The F35 isnt that big of a step forward, in many areas it’s even a step back.

And we have qoutes from other pilots stating the oposite.

I have given you numbers from Lockheed, yes the actual numbers, as well as the transonic ones from the US DoD reports.

And we also know what the Tactical mnwr wt means in the comparison.

1. Why can’t you believe test pilots? Take an F-16 load it up with a standard war load and then compare that to the F-35. At beyond mach 0.6 an F-35 will outpace it. Anyway we have three different variants with varying performance profiles. How about loading down a Typhoon with lots of munitions what is its flight performance then?

Hmmm, why would anyone do such a poor comparison?

Intercept mission = light combat load to take down incoming aircrafts. Ie 2 BVR missiles + 2 WVR missiles + speed. Sometimes even with a single drop tank.

The F35 is like a pickup truck. Excellent for carrying stuff long ranges, but it’s not fast, its not excellent off road and it isnt the most economical car. Similarly the F35 isnt the best interceptor, heck it’s is probably among the worst performers out there in that particular role.

Just look at how LM had to scew the comparison to make it comparable to an F16 with drop tanks.

You don’t think you are a conspiracy theorist? What would you call someone that will accept no explanation other than a conspiracy? (and bribery on the scale necessary to sway a contract like this would most certainly require a conspiracy)

Yes hopsalot, you can solve your problems the typical way as we see you or your peer do in the picture.

Now, tell me that this is not a sign that a tender is rigged.

Alan Williams, a former assistant deputy minister at the Department of National Defence and the official who signed the memorandum of understanding in 2002 that brought Canada into the Joint Strike Fighter program, said normal procedures weren’t followed.

“Not only is it not normal, but it’s a complete hijacking and rigging of the process,” he said in an interview on Monday’s Power & Politics.

“In 2006, the military and civilians recommended the F-35 to the minister and four years later, they developed their requirements, obviously rigged or wired to ensure that the only jet to meet the requirements would be the one that they recommended four years earlier,” Williams said.

Thats just one of the examples. Regarding Korea i have no say because there isnt proof of anything yet. And the F35 isnt even ordered yet. It just smells fishy. Personally I think they could make good use of a couple of F35s. Im getting tired of explaining 1 + 1 = 2 to religious fanatics.

I wont talkt to you for a while since we clearly see that you dont even read the shortest articles in your preferred language if they dont support your beliefs.

You are right Tu22m and I do agree that for the strike figther role for the US and as a specialised niche tool for some other nations it will be effective. (At least i hope it will).

As you say, for most nations it is not the correct aircraft.

I think a key requirement for any airforce getting the F35 would be that it is an airforce consisting of several types already so they can compensate for the shortcomings of the F35. Ie, they should already have cheap attack aircrafts for the sustained operations and preferably faster jets (if possible cheaper as well) for the intercept role. That way there is no loss in capability by the F35 even though support will get more complex.

Personally I would love the combo 60% F16/Gripen E/Rafale + 30-40% F35 in a larger airforce (last 10% might be a cheaper attack ac like AMX, A-10, Su25 etc). That way the F35s can be saved for the missions it is tailored for while the airforce has sustainable costs for all other operations.