The only tiny wee problem with your strawman lukos is that nobody has actually made such claims.

The points made by many with regard to the F35 are rather more complex than Gripen good F35 bad but your postings consistently characterise comments you apparently don’t agree with in this fashion.

Taking what others write and mis-representing them to suit your love of the F35 is dis-honest, inaccurate and boring and does not make for a useful or interesting discussion.

If your interest is in dragging down a discussion on the F35 in an attempt to gloss over the evident issues with the program and it’s product your activities are consistent with the hundreds of similar postings on this board by F35 aficionados.

I do forlornly wonder if you could toddle off and take your mis-representations someplace else?

Obviously my ‘misrepresentations’ have touched a raw nerve.

Lukos, the problem ain’t that the F35 is stealthy, the problem is that it flies like a brick because it had to fit on a LHD.

Nic

Well there’s a misrepresentation. ‘Flies like a brick’. Does the J-31 look like it’ll fly better? There are certain compromises associated with stealth but to say it flies like a brick is just ridiculous. Maybe it’d fly slightly better if the B version was designed separately but that would surely increase costs, both per unit and operational.

FD you must remember the F35 is the bestest cos LM and others with vested interests say so.
Don’t you dare go pointing out that the reasons the F35 lovers give for it being the bestest don’t stand up to any critical scrutiny and are in effect the same reasons all fanboi’s give for their favourite being the bestest.

The lack of interest displayed by the F35 supporters in engaging in true discussion of the issues with the aircraft is telling.

The fact that this aircraft very likely represents the platform that the majority of the free world (whatever that actually means) must rely upon to maintain that “freedom” is also one that should encourage critical thought and challenge. Instead time and time again we see the same tired old bs being spouted with outright statements of superiority based on nothing more than marketing and program cheerleading.

If i was inclined towards conspiracy theories i’d have no hesitation in declaring the whole program as a Chinese plot with it’s supporters either being Chinese stooges or unwitting dupes.

Well let me introduce you to the BS the other side has span before FD even mentioned enemy stealth aircraft.

“We should build a cheap non-stealth LO fighter….. like a Gripen.”

Yeah, that would be an absolute dream for PAK-FA and J-20/31 drivers wouldn’t it? Every engagement a turkey shoot.

You can make sensible arguments as to why A and C development should have ran separate to B development but the counter-argument is commonality and mass production, which tends to reduce costs. But if someone had suggested basing the A and C on a re-developed F-22, with the more robust stealth coating, a more efficient production line, slightly bigger bays and more internal fuel, that wouldn’t be entirely stupid. But chucking slightly cheaper non-stealth planes at the enemy until they run out of missiles just gets zero support from me. Pilots are probably not mad keen on it either.

So you maintain that even if the F-35 comes up again an opponent with an equally low signature, it will prevail !! because it has IRST (or similar) better than the competition, (whilst you don’t know what the competition offers), and better missiles.. and better radar. Well look at that, these are the things the other side is saying. More over, the other side has begun designing planes to specifically counter any advantage the F-35 might have, and one side in particular, even had access to said plane’s data. … wow.

What competition are we talking about exactly. The F-35’s coating has been applied to the F-22 and the RCS was unchanged.

http://www.dailytech.com/F35+Stealth+Coatings+Applied+to+F22/article21321.htm

That means that on a smaller aircraft, the RCS is likely to be even lower. So far the competition consists of the PAK-FA, J-20 and J-31. So let’s look at each:

Now given that there are only about 3 dozen Su-35s, the PAK-FA numbers are likely to be equally restricted. It’s sure going to take them a long time to have as many PAK-FAs as there are F-22s, let alone the projected number of F-35s. The PAK-FA only looks like it’s remotely stealthy from one aspect – the front – because the nacelles and nozzles sure aren’t a stealth design. Aside from that it’s a bigger aircraft, which should make it optically more easily detected across the whole spectrum even assuming equal stealth technology. The radar has less T/R modules (1526 vs 1676) and so far only a +/-60deg field of engagement is available with Russian SRAAM technology for WVR combat. The quoted IRST range is also lower at 50km in the case of the Su-35.

The J-20 looks more of a threat and the Chinese have the money and manufacturing power to knock stuff out quick. However, canards don’t make for an optimally low RCS and the wing planform seems to be focused on BVR combat manoeuvres. Nozzles again not particularly stealthy and again a very large aircraft wrt detection. It might be a concern but the F/A-XX is likely to follow closely after it and there are probably enough F-22s in the mean time.

The J-31? I don’t see it being better in any way really. Largely seems to be a copy with 2 engines and less combined power and a smaller wing area but a larger wing span and greater length, all of which are bad for RCS. Weight is likely similar. Avionics for both J-XX aircraft is probably cloned Russian stuff.

I don’t give damn about gen classifications. Gripen E has everything most Euro nations need and can be had in sufficient numbers. Which makes the respective forces more flexible, more deployable and more effective than when equipped with the F-35.

Oh don’t look now but I think we touched a nerve. Quite frankly an upgraded F-16, which already has AESA available and is available now, could offer the same at a lower unit and operational cost. Not particularly useful against a modern IADS though.

a) These figures are useless for comparison unless you know the calculation method used and can assure it is directly comparable to the one of the F-35.
b) Rafale is arguably too expensive for many nations, as well, no doubts here.
c) F-35 can, too, can easily be detected and shot down in BVR.

a) An attempt to hide from commonly available facts by subterfuge.
b) So only a Gripen E will do then eh?:highly_amused:
c) Really? And what tests have been used to show this then? Can it actually be shot down before it shoots the enemy down?

That means? Be specific, please.

That means basically every non-5th gen fighter that was beaten in the bid or ran away from the bid because it knew it didn’t have a chance. Running away doesn’t mean you didn’t get beat, it just means you’re a coward too.

I’ve never undestood what people liked about the F-35 but that kinda explains it.. Thanks..

Yeah good try. How about we discuss what people like about the Gripen E/NG? It’s a 4th gen aircraft that will arrive after the F-35 and is set to be kinematically inferior to a Typhoon, and with a smaller radar but people have dubbed it 6th gen. Nothing quite like supporting the underdog. Costs? Well let’s see, looks like the Rafale is costing more than Jane’s estimate, although partly disguised by the currently weak Euro:

Air&Cosmos 2425:
Page 18/20 : MRO

So basically it’s a case of paying 80% of the F-35 unit and operating costs for a plane that can be easily detected and shot down BVR.

What other planes?

The other planes in the running for the same contracts.

why wouldn’t you count yourself/scooter/pfcem/djcross/spudman/hopsalot as ‘people’ ?

We’re not afflicted with underdog mentality though.

Does it ever occur to you that aircraft undergo a series of trials before sales contracts are signed and that the F-35 obviously won those?

I’ll give you that (yet, in how many airshows? In vertical thrust?)
“
In service next year? I hope you won’t mind my saying “I told you so” if this time next year it’s all turned into a can of worms.

Give it a chance.

Testing stealth coatings maybe?