jessmo24Oh I forgot that your on the design team and have classified information regarding its stealth. Nice try:rolleyes:
If you would take the time to look you would see that even the engine outlet section has been optimized for VLO. Im not talking about AA-1 Im talkign about the weight optimized varients after swat. YES all aspect stealth!
jessmo24Look blue who does what better?
1. The F-35 has better weapons and better access to Gps ( The Euro Gps isnt fully ready yet and gps could be cutt off from France is in a dispute).
2. The F-35 has better and newer sensors with Aesa, put of the box 360 degree Irst
3. The F-35 has a better fuel fraction and higher thrust to weight. you have to strap tanks all over a squall To do what a F-35 does clean.
4. Is a full all aspect stealth aircraft out of the box! it can fulfill the F-117s mission from the start, it can go into down town bagdad, Moscow, bejing, paris, or anyother heavily defended airspace on earth and deliver weapons on target. Im not adressing just the range of the target here. talking about the ability to prosecute even if it gets there!
5. It will slaughter anything short of a T-50 or F-22 In BVR combat. You gambled that The rafael sensors would save you from the F-22 in an exercise and learned a horrible lesson in the UAE. Now your makign the same gamble that the Raf will make it to a merge.
6. If you merge with it you had better hope that what ever version your fighting Wont have Aim9-x with Hobs ability. then its either your dead or mutual kill.
7. Better comm network, better SA, better, automatic main soft ware.
Please tell me 1 thing that the French Rafael does better than a F-35 besides turn slighty tighter, or go slightly faster? It goes mach 2 but I dont see you flying around with Ab on at all times. I suppose its faster than a Raptor also?
jessmo24The Hudson Institute’s Richard Weitz, posting over at Second Line of Defense, says Russian arms sales to China are drying up as Chinese industry increasingly builds its own high-tech weaponry and Beijing objects to Russian technology transfer restrictions.
Since 2001, Russia has sold more than $16 billion worth of arms to China, with yearly sales peaking at $2.7 billion, he writes; accounting for nearly 40 % of all major Russian arms sales. In recent years, however, things have changed:
“Since 2005, the PRC has stopped purchasing Russian warships or warplanes and has ceased signing new multi-billion arms sale contracts… The director of Russia’s state-controlled arms export company, Rosoboronexport, recently forecast that the value of Russian arms sold to China could decline to as low a level as 10 percent of the value of all Russian military exports in coming years. Some defense experts believe that figure could fall even further.”
China now competes with Russia in lucrative international arms markets by offering Russian knock-offs at bargain prices, or, without the onerous restrictions often imposed by Moscow. “Chinese manufacturers are producing either more completely indigenous advanced weapons systems or more defense technologies, sub-systems, and other essential components that Chinese manufactures can insert directly into foreign-made systems.”
Chinese firms adroitness at reverse engineering foreign technology is well known. A case in point: the Chinese built J-11B fighter. Russia gave the Chinese the designs to the Sukhoi-27 fighter in 1995 after the Chinese agreed to purchase 200 kits to produce it under local license. In 2004, after building 100 planes, the Chinese cancelled the contract for the remaining fighters, claiming they no longer met Chinese requirements. Soon after, the knock off J-11B began appearing for sale on international markets.
😮
jessmo24The link isn’t working, but the quote does not say that all weapons can be launched at supersonic speed and specifically says max speed for AAM’s. I have seen no statement that all bay doors could be opened at supersonic and I would be interested to know the speed possible for the two big bay doors.
Did you notice that max speed was said to be mach 1.6?
Here is a proper link with the full article.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/New-Lockheed-Martin-F35A-Will-prnews-3873261685.html?x=0&.v=2
jessmo24I have a good uestion for you blue:
If the F-35 can launch A2G weapons at mach 1.6 and the Rafael cant, does that mean the F-35 has a kinematic advantage over the Rafael?
Im ready for you to respond and tell me that the squall can fire all weapons in
all configurations at mach.
Supersonic launch of internal weapons, including maximum-speed (Mach 1.6) launch of internal air-to-air missiles, is a feature of all F-35s. An internal-weapons-only configuration is used when Very Low Observable stealth is required to complete a mission. When VLO stealth is not required, more than 15,000 pounds of additional ordnance can be loaded onto six external pylons.
‘Who WizenHeimer’ more likely…. But also good news:
New Lockheed Martin F-35A Will Test Weapons FORT WORTH, Texas, April 20 /PRNewswire/
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases … 65819.html
jessmo24This argument is gettign silly. Just like the F-22 one before.
Euro canard fan: We will detroy the Raptor, the Tiffy and raf are in the same
class!
Raptor fan: you have no clue what your talking about!
Raptor goes to Red flag and the Middle east for exercise, destroys all in its path.
Euro canard fan : Well we dont know ALL the details maybe it was dact. Maybe the tiffy and Raf were meant to be shot down on purpose. Lets not talk about the raptor any more!
Euro canard fan: The tiffy and the Raf are in he same class as the F-35 its a dog it doesnt stand a chance!
F-35/ raptor fan: O-o Are you serious?
Red fag 2015??
jessmo24You seriously think 12 F35 can attack moscow when T50 and S400 are operational?
:D:D:D
12X 8 small diameter bombs? you do the math!
jessmo24Beesly talks fuel fraction and A2A combat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96Kx6b7oKA8
Hes talking about loading only 8k pounds of fuel on the F-35a for airfield defense
which would make it a 38k pound AF with 41k Lbs of thrust. The thing already out accelerates a clean block 60 F-16 fully loaded. I can imagine it would Kill the raf in this config. You have to understand 18k pounds of fuel is a lot
and may not be appropriate for every mission.
jessmo24is it me or does 20k pounds of thrust seem as Little underpowered for a aircraft that supposed to be 5th generation and come even remotely close to the Raptors performance? If its going to be stealthy it will need internal bays.
That means even higher thrust to weight. they cant be serious.
jessmo24Its called small diameter bomb! And this is just pointless.
jessmo24I would love to see a simulation in which a French Raf flies into Moscow and fights its way through T-50s and S-400s on its way to a high value target.
Lets just say 12 Rafs with some of them providing top cover.
I wonder if the odds of success look better in a F-35?
jessmo24What they’re referring to by drawing comparisons with both the F-16 and F-18, is the turning/acceleration of the F-16, along with the low speed/high angle of attack of the F-18.
He just felt the need to correct me and parse my words with out bothering to fully read what I posted or look at the original quote. This is the kind of pen*s waving that lowers the quality of boards, and hinders good discussion.
The performance of the aircraft is said to be Between the F-18 and the F-16.
Its comparable, It shares characteristics from both air craft. This still never addresses my point! If the F-35 A is a dog, then what about the F-16 F-18 and the Super hornet? How can you have a 50 degree aoa and be considered a dog?
jessmo24Hawkeye :
I know and think the same , a redesign is needed .
Typhoon ‘s canards could be kept where they are but the FBW would need to be upgraded for Carrier Ops . The gears would have to be changed all together and the front wheel would also need a similar system than the Rafale has to allow heavy load take-off (unique feature of Rafale M) .No need . 35 “Seaphoons” per ship (3 Carriers : 2 UK , 1 Italy = 105) are plenty enough .
I am thinking as a European , not as a French or as a British or else . Keep that in mind 😉With will and money , the “Seaphoon” could be operational by 2016 .
True , 3 years of training (maybe 2) with the French and US Carriers and the British pilots would be up to speed , I bet on it 😎
The money is there , that I can assure you , but not the will , unfortunately .
Easy , Germany doesn ‘t pay anything . Or they get an aircraft carrier and participate 😉
pfcem :
I think that we can all agree on this .
*****************************
From day one , I believed that the F-35 was going to be a dog and for many good reasons . I am no-one but some clever chaps who know more than I do share my views .
The bird ~sorry~ “thing” is ugly , fat as a cow , heavy as a bull , slow as a snail . Fortunately , the thing has a powerful engine and it can try to do some subsonic stuff but it has a wrong airframe and aerodynamics are p!ss poor at medium to high (? lol) speed .
Simply because it has some of the best US avionics and is so-called stealthy , it is suppose to survive and to do its job , I don ‘t believe it .As I see it , it can makes its way in , but can ‘t make its way back .
That I don ‘t like 😡
It is not fast enough , it not armed well enough . If I was a F-35 driver on his way back after dropping my 2 LGBs , I would probably use the low level option and count on my “stealth” and my DAS and EOTS to try to avoid any threat because my aircraft is not capable to fight an interceptor on equal ground .
And if the sh!t hit the fan in AtoA , I hope to have some friends around .Now , with a decent planning , a F-35 with no external stores will penetrate the enemy airspace more discretely than a Rafale but it will have less fuel , less weapons and will still be fat as a cow , heavy as a bull and slow as a snail . Its way back will be heavily compromised .
Cheers .
Blue you do realize the F-35A is designed to have F-16/F-18 level performance right? How can you say the F-35 A is fat and slow but the F-16 isn’t? here is a snippet form a post of mines.
1. we know that the aircraft has a requirement to either meet or exceed F-16/F-18 performance.
2. anecdotal evidence from Italian F-35 program workers: the meantime, and without discussing specific performance characteristics, Italian air force fighter pilots involved with the F-35 program tell Aviation Week that the aircraft’s performance falls “between the F-16 and the F/A-18 in terms of flight envelope — and is actually closer to the F/A-18, considering its high angle of attack and slow-speed maneuvering capabilities.”
3. The F-35 has greater than 55 degree AOA:
The aircraft can also reach a 55-deg. angle of attack in trimmed flight, while most fighters, excluding the F/A-18, are limited to 30 deg. The exact performance of the current F-35A configuration ? also known as the 240-4 ? are classified. But a similar earlier standard (240-3) was credited with a maximum speed of Mach 1.67; acceleration from Mach 0.8 to Mach 1.2 at 30,000 ft. in 61 sec.; a top turning speed of 370 kt. at 9g and 15,000 ft.; and a sustained turn capability of 4.95g at Mach 0.8 and 15,000 ft. Moreover, an aircraft with those performance figures would carry two beyond-visual-range AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (Amraams) in the internal weapons bay.
4. It will out accelerate a clean F-16 block 50 + Fully combat loaded
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.
5. some quotes differ for obvious reasons but it appears we have 49k+ of thrust on the engine.
So if your inclined to you can take all of the quotes from aviation week, Fights testers, requirements, and other various news articles, throw them away and still cling to the idea that this aircraft turns and handles like a F-111. If your actually use some simple common sense you will realize that we are dealing with a fighter that is somewhere in the F-16 range or ability in a dog fight. No it doesn’t out turn a Sukkoi or a T-50 it has no Tv nozzles. But In a modern engagement with both fighters using either TV or High off bore sight missiles the outcome will more than likely be a mutual kill anyway!
Further more Lockheed has demonstrated an effective over the shoulder launch ability.
If I had the opportunity to command a squadron of F-35s I would not attack T-50s confronting its strengths IE speed, TV, fuel. I would use the F-35s strengths to defeat the enemy via, greater stealth, excellent sensor fusion, fuel, Numbers, and high off bore sight. Indeed if the F-35 will succeed against the T-50 it can not depend on the airframe alone
Sign In
