It’s the RECO-NG but probabley not a fully functional one, but a store representive item for flutter testing etc.
F-35 was NEVER requiered to be MULTI-ROLE, and de-facto it is designed as a STRIKE aircraft FIRST = OPTIMISED for the role with secondary A2A capabilties.
So performing AA and AG missions is not multirole? LOL
Priorities apart multirole is multirole, if the aircraft is more optimised for strike or AA doesn’t matter, if it is designed to perform both roles IT IS MULTIROLE.
BTW show me a single drawing/grahpic of a concept for the USMC Harrier II replacement!
Air Combat is about STANDARD PROCEDURES that you visibly don’t know of nor have ever eared of.
Yeah for sure I learned nothing within ~20 years…:rolleyes:
Typical RANGE is dictated by engine SFCs at nominal altitude and CRUISE is expressed in terms of SFC = lb/nm, typicaly re-expressed in terms of CRUISE at below 90% military power settings.
This has exactly what to do with my statement?
Combat load, i.e the fuel weight it is expected to carry when it encounters its threat/target in a typical combat scenario is equivalent in percentage to that of Western aircrafts.
To use your words do your home work and learn your ABC. NTOW of the Su-27 is ~22 t, there is no way that an operationally configured Flanker holds max. fuel with its normal TAKEOFF WEIGHT, NOT COMBAT WEIGHT!
The Su-27 was designed as a long range interceptor/escort aircraft. When patrouling a large area or escorting other assets deep into the enemies territory the aircraft would be fully fueled to go that distance, have combat reserves and to make it back home. For stock missions not requiring to travel that far or loiter that long the aircraft won’t be fully fueled and just holds about 5 – 6 t when on TAKEOFF, not mid air on combat!
Dropping EFT is not as common as you think, it’s valid only in tactical emmergency. What if you want to fight the following day, and you have another emmergency? And yes, I know that Flanker usual fuel load is 1/2 of max.
As I said you drop the tanks IF required. There is not necessarily a need to drop the tanks in every situation when you face a threat. Depends much on the threat itself and the performance achieveable with the EFTs. In the case of the Typhoon the EFTs are virtually cleared for the entire flight envelope. There will be a degration in performance, sure, but the performance is sufficient and the aircraft doesn’t necessarily hold its max number of fuel tanks. Depends on the mission requirements.
in order to have some decent combat radius, especially when facing an oponent with 11 tons of fuel such a flanker, a Rafale, would need more than 1 EFT you mention. In these conditions, do you believe that the Rafale will perform better or worst than F 35 in terms of cruise speed, max. dash speed, acceleraton or turn rate?
Sorry but what is that nonsense about fuel? Air combat is not about range course duration. Sure you need some range/endurance but everything depends on the mission and situation! Claiming a fighter with lower fuel load like the Rafale or Typhoon has no chance to deal with a Flanker which holds twice the fuel is nonsense. And drop tanks can be dropped, IF required. BTW do you realise that Flankers typical fuel load isn’t much more than 5 – 6 t? The reason for this is that a fully fueled Flanker is to heavy to perform well.
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2007targets/Day1/Davisday1.pdf
That is one that is online…
Fine and now we wait and see how much an operationally configured F-35 will weight in reality when development is finished.
What can still do Mach 1.6 with 3 drop tanks? How fast can it go WITHOUT drop tanks…
M 1.6 is the cleared speed, it might go even faster and max. speed without drop tanks is M 2.0 (limited by intake arrangement and structure/material).
Trust me, just like all other performance parameters, the F-35 will EXCEED its Mach 1.6 top speed KPP THRESHOLD.
We will see in the future.
Interesting that they sent single seaters now, when they have just used Bs in the past. This must be the third deployment of AdA Rafales to Afghanistan. But seems to be the first time they operate from Kandahar. Previous operations were conducted out of Dushabne in Tatjikistan.:confused:
That detailed datum didn’t give any informations concerning drop tanks. The impressive photo showed as we seen was a some kind of max limit load not a standard combat load.
It is conceived that 2 of three paveway bombs was loaded beside main wheels not that couple of additional pylon inboard.
Take a look at the images from the No.11(F) sqn US deplyoment. You’ll find quite a lot images with 2 tanks + 4 LGB + 1 LDP + AAMs (max number of AAMs not used as just AG training was concerned). That means this configuration is well an operational one, not just a heavy load testing.
Post weight-reduction weights:
F-35A
26,664 lbs
18,307 lbs internal fuelF-35B
29,695 lbs
13,400 lbs internal fuelF-35C
29,996 lbs
19,145 lbs internal fuel
Care to provide the source?
Even EMPTY drop tanks add MORE than enough drag to decrease performance.
They do increase drag yes, yet the question is how much in this particular case and is it going to affect the performance. 3 drop tanks and still M 1.6 capable, someting the F-35 has yet to demonstrate CLEAN!
STOVL engine data from the said brochure:
Maximum Thrust: 43,000 lbf (191.3 kN)
Short Takeoff Thrust: 38,100 lbf (169.5 kN)
Hover Thrust: 39,400 lbf (175.3 kN)
Main Engine: 15,700 lbf
Lift Fan: 20,000 lbf
Roll Post:3,700 lbf
Length: 369 inches (9.37 meters)
Inlet Diameter:
Main Engine: 46 inches (1.17 meters)
Lift Fan: 50 inches (1.27 meters)
Maximum Diameter: 51 inches (1.30 meters)Bypass Ratio:
Conventional:0.56
Powered Lift:0.51Overall Pressure Ratio
Conventional:28
Powered Lift:29
Well the fact that the official data state 43k lb and just in a single graphic it is 48k lb, leads me to believe this is more likely to be a typo than anything else. But we will be “smarter” in the future;)
As far as dry thrust is concerned from the PW brochure which states 191.3 kN reheat thrust (19512 kg/42926 lb), the max static dry thrust is 128.1 kN (13066 kg/28745 lb) or about the same as the F100-PW-129 in reheat.
The external tanks would just increase the RCS of the Typhoon and make it even easier to acquire and target. So, while the tanks could be dropped to increase the Typhoons performance. It would likely be targeted and engaged before it knew of a need to drop them…….
Also, its very likely the thrust of the F-35A (with P&W F135) is not 40,000 lbs but 43,000 lbs. Hey, even a AFA source claims 48,000 lbs………Yet, use the lower number if you like?
We speak about performance here, nothing else. And no I didn’t use the lower number (40k lb) but the average and so far officially confirmed number (43k lb). The 48k lb figure might be easily a typo all sources so far suggest 43k lb, with 40k lb meaning the thrust class. So 43k lb is safe to assume, 48k lb is not.
Even the Super Hornet is listed as having a top speed of M1.8+, so I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if the F-35 was in that same class.
I mean to remember that the top speed is indeed not more than ~M 1.6 on the Super Hornet, while official sources still state M 1.8+. Take it for what it’s worth.
Is that 2 tons less than the AA-1 or AF-1(weight optimized) model? Also, what thrust are we assuming for both aircraft? Lastly, what are the effects of hanging missiles and fuel tanks externally, vs. the clean profile of the F-35?
It’s 2 t less than the specification stated on LM official website which is 29300 lb (13318 kg) for the F-35A.
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/products/f35/f-35specifications/f-35a-ctol-specifications.html
Engine thrust comes from the PW brochure about the F-135 which states 191.3 kN (19512 kg) reheat static thrust.
Typhoon’s empty weight is 11000 – 11150 kg according all publically available sources and reheat thrust is 2 x 90 kN (9180 kg) reheat static thrust. This excludes reports about increased engine thrust for production aircraft with EJ200 Mk101FOC which is fitted since block 2.
http://www.eurofighter.com
http://www.eurojet.de
Loading 2 SRAAM + 4 MRAAM has almost not impact on performance. Droptanks have some impact, but it is said that the aircraft loaded with 4 x ASRAAM, 4 x AMRAAM and 2 x 1000 l tanks can be flown throughout the flight envelope with almost no degration in performance. (Statement has to be set in relation however).
But external tanks can be dropped, IF required. The F-35 will have to carry its structural weight and volume all the way at any time.
The F-35 will have astounding acceleration! Especially, from High Subsonic to Low Supersonic Speeds. With a top speed of greater than Mach 1.6 and likely closer to Mach 1.8! This in-turn will make it a extremely capable dog fighter when needed…………….:diablo:
Mach 1.8 will make it a capable dogfighter?:diablo: