Ignore the Cuda nonsense, it’s better to carry Meteor externally,
& perhaps 4 aim-132 internal in A2A configuration

:confused: why it should carry meteor external ????

Yes, The FA18 has great high alpha handling (or at least high alpha entry), the charts cant show that… or they can but its hard to make it easy to read (plotting instant and sustained turns was borderline too much). I did another compilation where I converted the F15Cs sustained Gs into deg/second @15K and it was fairly close in the mach 0,4-mach 1,2 region.

Here are the links again:
F16 http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-5260-view-previous.html
F15 (this one correlates pretty ok but not exactly to my old chart) http://forum.keypublishing.com/showpost.php?p=1599867&postcount=108
F18 http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-13383-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-30.html

Basically this is needed for turning.
1 Large control surfaces with high maneuverability (to force the plane into high alpha).
2 Low wing loading (to get tighter turns according to Newton)
3 High thrust/weight ratio to compensate for the energy bleed from the high AoA or turn rates.

1 Gives great nose pointing abilities and this is what makes the F35 look good. The other two parameters are needed for the classic dogfights and this is where the competition looks better.

So the F35 will be excellent at pointing its nose to at the enemy and fire away its 4 missiles. If the enemy survives it will most likely end bad for the F35, as concluded in the Australian inquiry.

Btw, does anyone know how to put users on ignore? Irtusk and some other trolls look like promising candidates to test that function on.

The attachement is Draken getting 100 deg + Alpha in the 60s

1) in WVR if the f-35 still have missile left , it will not turn much , may be not even turn at all as it have JHMCS and DAS
2) with the new CUDA missile , an F-35 in air to air mission can carry 3 Meteor + 4 CUDA all internal ( not too bad isn’t it ) , and as BAE say , it can also have 2 more aim-132 external on low observable pylon and as the missile have small fin the RCS will not increase very much :confused:
3 )i think you should check your graph , may be you make some mistake 🙁 , no one ever claim F-15 a better dogfighter than F-16 ( most pilot say F-16 is better at WVR ) , and your chart show something completely different :confused: => not sure how accurate it is about the F-35
4 ) the Draken in your picture is performing cobra , so it not sustainable (only for 1-2 sec ):confused: i dont think you can compared it with the ability of F-35 to stay at 50 degree AOA

If one of F-35 use the radar, enemy still could jam it, and decrease the range of the radar. Also enemy RWR could detect APG-81 emission.
But when enemy won’t use the radar, but only RWR, MAWS, IRST, MIDS ( only passive detection- no EM emmision- radar, EW) then ASQ-239(RWR) will be useless in this situation.
But all this discussion is pointless as we just don’t have acces to real info, as it is classified, and we just don’t know which fighter will enjoy advantage in this kind of situation ;).

:p i think u try to avoid admitting the obvious advantage of F-35 over fighter like EF-2000 , Rafale , su-35BM
1) APG-81 is an AESA radar so it is much harder for enemy RWR to detected it compared to normal radar , and it will be even harder trying to jam it ( the range will be much shorter ) , and without enough number of aircraft to triangulate then information from RWR can’t be used for missile launch
2) trying to jam radar mean send out emission => F-35 can detected enemy by ASQ-239
3 ) head on detection of IRST against non-after burning target will not be very high ( may be < 100 km ) and honestly i can’t find anything about IRST on fighter use dynamic ranging to calculate the range 🙁 i mean all the IRST on fighter now have laser to measure range except the one on EF-2000
4) all fighter carry missiles externally will likely to have RCS > 1 m2 => F-35 can track them from > 160 km , while even APG-77 or Irbis-e can only see F-35 from 35-50 km => VLO fighter will have first look , first shot
5) F-35 have top coat that reduce it’s IR signature , and it’s apg-81 can also be use as a jammer
however the biggest problem of F-35 is that it carry too little missiles only 4 Meteor in air to air 🙁

You do know what instantaneous turn rate is, right?

The cap for all current fighters is 9G for pilot reasons. The big difference is the sustained turn rate. If you look at my chart you will see that the F16 “matches” the F15 at around mach 0,65. Thats the dotted line that gets chopped off because of the 9G cap.

But what did the article really say?

Your quote:

Yes, the 9G instantaneous load is the dotted line. All modern fighters will have the same line if they are rated 9G. If the flight control system allows one can easily pull more, but that might be dangerous for the pilots.

Do you see this? The F35C with the best turning capability has a cap for instantaneous turns that is the yellow dotted line.

Still congruent with both sources. M Kelly compared the B and C versions to the Hornet (Super Hornet?) and called them almost identical in the maneouverability, now we know that the only thing the F35A does better is instant turn radius where it matches the F16.

Thanks for the update though. Now I have 3 sources that say the same thing.

sustained turn rate of f-15 is better than F-16 😮 seriously ?????

The F-15 has a sustained turn rate of 16 deg/s and an instantaneous turn rate of 21 deg/s.
The F-16 also is far more maneuvrable it has a Max instantaneous turn rate of 26 deg/sec while the best MiG-23 max instantaneous turn rate is 16.7 deg/sec, other turn parameters are the sustained turn rate and load factor at a turn but again the F-16 is superior to the MiG-23 in these too, the F-16 has a Max sustained turn rate of 21.5 deg/sec while the MiG-23ML has a Max sustained turn rate is 14.1 deg/sec

http://backfiretu-22m.tripod.com/id15.html
sir i think your graph is completely wrong

How much g can F-35 pull, when fired AMRAAM from internal weapon bays ?
LM said that it can fire AMRAAM over the shoulder in high g dogfight thanks to EOTS, but why other fighters can shoot AAM up to 4 g from fuselage station and the only wing station is “9 g capable”?
I just don’t buy this idea …

http://www.dassault-aviation.com/fileadmin/user_upload/redacteur/Defence/Rafale/foxThree_n11.pdf

“The fuselage-mounted MICAs
can be ejected at up to 4 g
whereas the wing-mounted
missiles can be rail-launched
at up to 9 g.”

Theoretically – how much g AAM should hold to turn 180 deg and kill 9g target, when launch from 9g pulling fighter? We know that the missile will require about five times the G capability of the target to complete a successful intercept. So… -AMRAAM should persist over 50g in this situation. We know that AMRAAM can pull max 35-40g (heavy, no TVC), and only short range AAM ( like IRIS-T) achieve 60g.
I will be waiting to see AIM-120D over the shoulder shoot in dogfights in reality :D.
MBDA Mica is more versatile then AMRAAM in WVR , it demonstrate over the shoulder shoot – but not in high g dogfights, I don’t think any current system could do this, and especially heaavy AIM-120D.

why the f-35 even need to pull any G in that situation ?? , it will just fly in a line and if the enemy decided to follow they will take and aim-120 at their face , and aircraft can’t not always pull 9 G like in theory , they will lose air speed

If the Mig-31 were an all round Fighter rather than a pure interceptor than your logic would be quite correct. In fact if we are to only compare One parameter which is the ability to maintain mid-high supersonic speeds for prolonged times then yes the Mig-31 is superior to the above mentioned aircraft …However with the 4.5 gen to 5th gen aircrafts, we are comparing all round a2a fighters, that can handle both the intercept role (High speed, high altitude BVR) as well as the close fighting role (Manuvering WVR)..Even the russians were smart enough to draw a distinction between the Su-27 and the Mig-31, therefore until the Mig-31 becomes an all round fighter, and is a credible aircraft in all the spheres of air combat (BVR against fighters —-> WVR against fighters) we cannot compare the two categories (Interceptors vs all round a2a fighters)…

i think the problem of the mig-31 is actually it’s huge rcs like a 747 , if it have rcs equal to f-35 or f-22 it could be quite dangerous

1)So why the best fighters in the world – F-22A, EF-2000 and Rafale has got supercruise and great performance ? The Raptor pilots said that speed is almos as important as stealth.

2)Bad weather is below 5km – medium alt, so BVRAAM hasn’t got such a big NEZ at this alt – nowhere near 50km against fast maneuvering targets.

3) IRST doesn’t need laser range finder to measure the range. For example PIRATE IRST use dynamic ranging and triangulation ( 2 aircrafs with MIDS ) to find the range (DTI 12/2009, “Double vision”)
I think that F-35, like other fighters in CAP mission will stay at 35k ft and if detect enemy then use AB to go ~ 1,4 Mach and fire AMRAAM. In this situation modern IRST can detect it well beyond 50km (~70-80km).

1) i really dont think EF-2000 and rafale are better fighter than T-50 , J-20 , F-35 , USA is not stupid they dont spent money on stealth for nothing
2) a lot of cloud is also bad for Irst , and there also cloud at 50000 fts
3) what is dynamic ranging :confused:
4) fighter with RCS > 1 m2 will be track by apg-81 from over 160 km

1.Sources please. According to aviation week & space technology 03/19/2001 Super Hornet has around 1sq m frontal RCS.
I also read in some magazine that EF-2000 in clean configuration has frontal RCS below 1sq m.
I don’t think SH has any advantageous in this area.

2.ATFLIR isn’t IRST. It can’t search volume of the sky like radar. F-15K/SG has the only US modern IRST in service right now ( I don’t know much about F-16 blk 60, but it probably have just FLIR? ).

F/A-18E/F:
“0.1 m2 class”, the declaration of USN in 1999~2000.
Rafale:
“1/10 of the frontal RCS of MIRAGE-2000” (about 0.1~0.2 m2), declared by Dassault in 1999.

information on the internet are quite varied , so iam not very sure
btw i think any modern FLIR have air to air function , for example like the sniper-xr that have been re packet as EOTS and DAS can also be used as IRST