dark light

Jaidyn24

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 6 posts - 46 through 51 (of 51 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2288949
    Jaidyn24
    Participant

    The F-35A failed (by a very, very small, small number, six miles) the KPP for combat radius on internal fuel, the KPP was 590 NM, the aircraft flies for 584 NM.
    http://www.fas.org/man/eprint/F-35-SAR.pdf

    The combat radius for a F-35A equiped with the maximum internal and external fuel is (was? Numbers from the LM presentation to the Norwegian Government in 2008, seeing how they were hopelesly optimistic for the range on internal fuel…) 728 NM.

    http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/11/4/8b64135d-310d-4106-8400-6f51f8d22a4d.Full.jpg

    http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FD/Temadokumenter/JSF_RBI-svar.pdf

    The equivalent number for the Gripen NG is right here (page 13):
    http://www.saabgroup.com/Global/Documents%20and%20Images/About%20Saab/Events/Farnborough%202012/Gripen%20presentation%20Farnborough.pdf

    The comparison with the much heavier Dave is not a pretty one (for the Dave).

    The rest of your numbers are identicaly bogus, you´ve mixed the Gripen A/B/C/D with the E/F, very diferent birds.

    He actualy knows a lot more on the JSF than you do on the Gripen.

    1. OK so your comparing a fully combat loaded F-35 to a ferry range Griffin?

    2. No the 6 AMRAAM rack is not flying on the F-35 but neither is the NG Griffin.
    3. Remember lets try and compare apples to apples make sure the griffen has enough gas to fly 600Nm along with, a sensor pod, 2X 2kLB weapons and 2 AMRAAMS will even the next gen griffin be able to use the ferry range in that configuration? The F-35 has less ferry range but this is not relevant.
    4. Do F-22s and F-16s even use AB to get to mach 1 then throttle all the way back? can a F-16 go mach 1 without AB? neither of us claimed the F-35 would do mach 1.6 on AB. You claimed a marginal SC at 1.2 which isn’t up to U.S. standards because a lot of the plane is still subsonic. If your going to say the griffin is a super cruiser then by your definition the F-35 would be a super cruiser. How is it that by your definition mach 1 with no AB is super-cruise when its griffin, but mach 1 with no AB on a F-16/F-35 (note they handle similar because of the flight software) is not super cruise?
    5. even with out the 6 AMRAAM rack and dropping the 10 miles of fuel margin in the KPP the F-35 is a lot better than EVERY version and every variant of griffin. Please show me a version of griffin that goes 600+ NM with 2klbs and 2 AMRAAMs and I will be silent.

    in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2289107
    Jaidyn24
    Participant

    1. The F-35 has a 600 NM combat radius on INTERNAL fuel.
    The griffen has a 431 NM radius
    Performance

    Maximum speed: Mach 2 (2,204 km/h, 1,372 mph) at altitude
    Combat radius: 800 km (500 mi, 432 nmi)
    Ferry range: 3,200 km (2,000 mi) with drop tanks
    Service ceiling: 15,240 m (50,000 ft)
    Wing loading: 283 kg/m² (58 lb/ft²)
    Thrust/weight: 0.97
    2. The F-35 can carry an insane amount of weapons when loaded with internal and external. I would dare say it carries a lot more than a griffin.

    Armament

    Guns: 1 × 27 mm Mauser BK-27 Revolver cannon with 120 rounds (only available on single-seat A/C model)
    Hardpoints: 8 (three on each wing and two under fuselage) and provisions to carry combinations of:
    Rockets: 4× rocket pods 13.5 cm rockets
    Missiles:
    6× Rb.74 (AIM-9) or Rb 98 (IRIS-T)
    4× Rb.99 (AIM-120) or MICA
    4× Rb.71 (Skyflash) or Meteor
    4× Rb.75
    2× KEPD.350
    2× Rbs.15F anti-ship missile
    The F-35 carries the Griffins max missile load internally with 6X AMRAAM
    Imagine an F-35 in NON stealth Mode with 6X AMRAAMS internally and
    6X externally. 2X AMRAAMS on a Inboard pylon dual rack 1 on the middle rack and a AIM9X on the out board rail. The F-35 In non stealth mode destroys the griffin In both range and weapons load.

    http://www.flightglobal.com/Assets/GetAsset.aspx?ItemID=44502
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_JAS_39_Gripen

    3. If your going to consider mach 1.2 super cruise then you must add the F-35 into the same boat. The plane has marginal super-cruise by your definition.

    “Griffiths declined to compare the F-35 to the F-16s he once flew. But he noted the F-16 is only technically an 800-knot and Mach 2.02 aircraft. In practical terms, most pilots will never see speeds above 700 knots or Mach 1.6 because real-world load-outs don’t allow it.

    The F-35 can’t supercruise like the F-22 Raptor, but the test pilots have found that once they break the sound barrier, supersonic speeds are easy to sustain.

    “What we can do in our airplane is get above the Mach with afterburner, and once you get it going … you can definitely pull the throttle back quite a bit and still maintain supersonic, so technically you’re pretty much at very, very min[imum] afterburner while you’re cruising,” Griffiths said. “So it really does have very good acceleration capabilities up in the air.”

    http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-15698.html

    Do you know very much about the F-35?

    in reply to: Denmark set to run fighter selection in 2013/4? #2289126
    Jaidyn24
    Participant

    At the end of the day it comes down to this. Do you want to face down the T-50 in the out dated Griffen for the next 30 years, or an F-35?
    Do you want to intercept the next generation Russian bomber in a Griffen or a F-35? The F-35 has more fuel, a better weapons load out, and will see the
    Russian planes from much farther away. If money is your only concern, then why not buy used F-16s for 15 mill? why spend any money on a tac air force at all? If your looking for the best plane for the lowest price a AESA equipped F-16 is your answer.

    Jaidyn24
    Participant

    ??

    in reply to: F-35 News thread. Part Deux #2296461
    Jaidyn24
    Participant

    I really wish, that Canada would either buy the plane or not.

    in reply to: Which direction Taiwan? #2299250
    Jaidyn24
    Participant

    It is my Humble opinion, that Taiwan should spend all of the political capital at there disposal to acquire,

    A. F-35bs is a large quantity AV-8s and F-35bs are some of the only fighters than would give China great difficulty in totally destroying the defending air forces.

    B. Like mentioned above Taiwan should purchase dirt cheap surplus harriers as the Lo in a Hi lo mix. maybe 200 harriers and 100 F-35Bs.

    This would ensure that short of total capitulation, or the firing of nuclear weapons The Chinese would not be able to land forces across the straight unmolested. A pop up F-35 carrying NSM or a even a Av-8 Firing SBD at your landing ships is a Chines nightmare.

    I would Hide them in Mountain tunnels, In grass clearings, I would even build surplus hangers in commercial areas ( parking lots). I would put some in HAS.
    I would put the supply train on trucks Hidden in revetments or in underground warehouses. And I would support it all with a fiber optic secure network. let the Chinese waste thousands of SRBMs on patriot batteries, and air fields. But again all of that would require money and common sense.
    Just my 2 Hay pennies

Viewing 6 posts - 46 through 51 (of 51 total)