F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

[vampyrbladez]

older F35 ? it was a 2016 flight, ie 10 years after first pre serial flight..... YOU ARE NOT SERIOUS.
FBW are among the first thing to be fine tuned, because a lot of things are collegated with that.

Report was for a version older than 3I. 3F is current standard with 9G clearance. 3I is 7.5G, thus apples and oranges. F 35A in video is 9G rated 3F version.

 

[BON PLAN]

Report was for a version older than 3I. 3F is current standard with 9G clearance. 3I is 7.5G, thus apples and oranges. F 35A in video is 9G rated 3F version.

Explain me why a plane is 7.5G limited after 10 years of flight tests and suddenly is 9G?

F35 is not a special plan form plane. It's very classical.
EF2000 as Rafale or Gripen were brand new aerodynamical formula, with long or close coupled canards. Their FBW were on top after a couple of years. Incredible LM was not able to close its FBW system in 10 years. F22 was fully cleared quickly.

I think it's another BS from LM.

 

[BON PLAN]

Just wait to (perhaps) have the result of the swiss tests, with F35 and all the others.....

 

[StealthFlanker]

LOL. Your are THE liar specialist!
Never imagine this F35 was fill up of fuel to make this aero demo! And fully fuel loaded it is a turkey in the sky.
F35 STR is average. It is smashed by all euro Canard in ITR and STR.

No, i am someone who actually know what he talking about, whereas you don't, your argument is basically limited down to nonsense claim and theory that you got from reading tabloids, and no Eurocanard can't beat ITR of F-35.

We just know from US mouths that a twin seater F16 with 2 external tanks beats the F35 in dog fight.

Except that it didn't, you can repeat your claims a hundred times, it is still isn't true. According to the test report, that was a test to see how the FBW behave when F-35 gone max elevated AoA

and FYI, you should know that rafale actually lost to F-4 before, which is even worse than "f-35 losing to F-16"

older F35 ? it was a 2016 flight, ie 10 years after first pre serial flight..... YOU ARE NOT SERIOUS.
FBW are among the first thing to be fine tuned, because a lot of things are collegated with that.

Nope, FBW isn't the first thing to be fine-tuned, it depends on KPP.

 

[asianobserve]

UK to send new aircraft carrier loaded with F35 jets into South China Sea

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/11/uk-...oaded-with-f35-jets-into-south-china-sea.html

 

[BON PLAN]

and no Eurocanard can't beat ITR of F-35.

No west plane has a better ITR than Gripen and Rafale. Maybe F22...
The sole problem of Delta canard is that they lost energy during STR, but T/W ration of Rafale avoid that (Gripen is short).

 

[BON PLAN]

and FYI, you should know that rafale actually lost to F-4 before, which is even worse than "f-35 losing to F-16"

A Rafale lost against a F4. A single exemple make a rule? NO.

 

[BON PLAN]

Except that it didn't, you can repeat your claims a hundred times, it is still isn't true. According to the test report, that was a test to see how the FBW behave when F-35 gone max elevated AoA

Making aggressive stick and pedal inputs mean nothing. THE OUTPUTS ARE ESSENTIALS. And the F35 is fat and slow.

 

[BON PLAN]

UK to send new aircraft carrier loaded with F35 jets into South China Sea

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/11/uk-...oaded-with-f35-jets-into-south-china-sea.html

Impressive !
I count 3 helo on the deck. and.....
and.....
no? No F35 ! very stealthy on the deck the F35.

 

[BON PLAN]

Nope, FBW isn't the first thing to be fine-tuned, it depends on KPP.

LOL. 10 years of flight test and no definitive FBW ? You are pulling my leg Bro.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Explain me why a plane is 7.5G limited after 10 years of flight tests and suddenly is 9G?

F35 is not a special plan form plane. It's very classical.
EF2000 as Rafale or Gripen were brand new aerodynamical formula, with long or close coupled canards. Their FBW were on top after a couple of years. Incredible LM was not able to close its FBW system in 10 years. F22 was fully cleared quickly.

I think it's another BS from LM.

The F 35 is not one plane but three different programmes sandwiched into a single one which superficially looks similar but has radically different design and specifications.

The F 35A that was tested in 2015 was a 3I variant aka 7G. The F 16D was 7.5G. The F 35A in the airshow is the final variant aka 3F, one of the first to get the standard IIRC.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Request all members to read through this blog. Best set of calculations by an independent contractor on F 35A kinematics.

http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-f-35-and-infamous-transonic.html

http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2015/04/f-35-transonic-acceleration-vs-f-16.html

 

[StealthFlanker]

No west plane has a better ITR than Gripen and Rafale. Maybe F22..

Really? and that base on what? you have EM diagram to support that? or that your opinion as usual?
You know what, action speaks louder than words,
In the video below F-35 turn 90 degrees between 0:09 and 0:12 that equal to ITR of at least 30 degrees/second. Now you find me a video of Rafale , a video of Eurofighter and a video of Gripen turning faster than that. If their ITR is so much better than F-35 like you prefer to think, it should be very simple to find a video.

The sole problem of Delta canard is that they lost energy during STR, but T/W ration of Rafale avoid that (Gripen is short).

No, the sole problem of delta is lower CL/alpha curve than a straight and trapezoid wing, hence, when at the same AoA, the lift per unit area of delta is less than straight wing.

 

[StealthFlanker]

Making aggressive stick and pedal inputs mean nothing. THE OUTPUTS ARE ESSENTIALS. And the F35 is fat and slow.

I feel like you can't read sometimes, the test is literally about FBW control and how the jet react to aggressive input, and in the report, they clearly explain the flaw of the FBW anti spin logic at that time and correction that should be made to improve handling capability

A Rafale lost against a F4. A single exemple make a rule? NO.

So you understand that several Rafale losing to F-4 in exercise doesn't make a rule, but somehow, a single F-35 losing to F-4 in elevated AoA test make a rule for all F-35?

LOL. 10 years of flight test and no definitive FBW ? You are pulling my leg Bro.

You think aircraft testing is only about pulling G and that it???
you think aircraft are just magically able to carry and launch missiles?
You think software just magically manifest into existent?

 

[BON PLAN]

In the video below F-35 turn 90 degrees between 0:09 and 0:12 that equal to ITR of at least 30

Video.... A very fine tuned measure equipment....

Rafale datas :
32 deg/s instananeous at sea level
26 deg/s sustained at sea level

 

[BON PLAN]

No, the sole problem of delta is lower CL/alpha curve than a straight and trapezoid wing, hence, when at the same AoA, the lift per unit area of delta is less than straight wing.

It's the problem of a Delta. But not of a close coupled delta : the canards energise the flow on top of the Delta.
How do you think rafale is the sole plane able to carry up to 1.5 x its empty weight?
How do you think rafale is able to land on a carrier at 115 knt?

 

[BON PLAN]

You think aircraft testing is only about pulling G and that it???
you think aircraft are just magically able to carry and launch missiles?
You think software just magically manifest into existent?

Do you think a fighter is made to fly straight ahead?
Do you think it's clever to qualify a fighter to release a wepon up to 7G and 2 years after to do the same job up to 9G? NO. It's bull shit. It's why fully open the air domain, so the fine tuned of the FBW, is one og the main and urgent goal of a design team.

 

[BON PLAN]

In the video below F-35 turn 90 degrees between 0:09 and 0:12 that equal to ITR of at least 30 degrees/second. Now you find me a video of Rafale , a video of Eurofighter and a video of Gripen turning faster than that. If their ITR is so much better than F-35 like you prefer to think, it should be very simple to find a video.

last summer in Switzerland :
https://www.aeronewstv.com/fr/evene...-en-demonstration-dans-les-alpes-suisses.html

A 360° in 15 seconds. 180° in 5 or 6 seconds. (from 0.40....)

 

[StealthFlanker]

Video.... A very fine tuned measure equipment....
Rafale datas :
32 deg/s instananeous at sea level
26 deg/s sustained at sea level

So basically you can't find a video to support your claim, you can't give any flight manual either so you put up some random number hoping that everyone else will be deceived?

It's the problem of a Delta. But not of a close coupled delta : the canards energise the flow on top of the Delta.
How do you think rafale is the sole plane able to carry up to 1.5 x its empty weight?
How do you think rafale is able to land on a carrier at 115 knt?

LERX can energize the flow on top of straight /trapezoid wing too, the canard is just a way to reduce pressure through vortex generation, but it can't eliminate the trail characteristic of delta which is lower lift generated per area at the same AoA

Do you think a fighter is made to fly straight ahead?
Do you think it's clever to qualify a fighter to release a
wepon up to 7G and 2 years after to do the same job up to 9G? NO. It's bull shit. It's why fully open the air domain, so the fine tuned of the FBW, is one og the main and urgent goal of a design team.

Who said fighters are made to fly straight ahead? no one except you, since you don't have any evidences for your claims you decided to make a strawman argument.
and it isn't BS to quantify a fighter at 7G then later quantify it at 9G, it all depending on what the user deemed more important to them.

last summer in Switzerland :
https://www.aeronewstv.com/fr/evene...-en-demonstration-dans-les-alpes-suisses.html
A 360° in 15 seconds. 180° in 5 or 6 seconds. (from 0.40....)

Why do you lie when everyone can see the video?
From 0:40-0:47, Rafale turn 180 degrees =>average to 25.7 degrees/second

Which is the same as F-35 in my previous video, turn 180 degrees from 0:09-0:16 => average to 25.7 degrees/second

From 0:47-0:57, Rafale turn 180 degrees => average to 18 degrees/second

From 0:40-0:57, Rafale turn a full 360 degrees => average to 21.17 degrees/second

 

[BON PLAN]

LOL. Big LOL.

In your very mathematical analysis (congrats ! High level mathematics) the F35 made a 180° in the vertical plan (thank you gravity) when Rafale made it's one in pure horizontal plan....

In your video, the F35 never made more than 90° (if not 80°) in the horizontal plan.... The last turn is not seen competely on the video. Strange isn't it? .... You know why? Because despite 18T engine the Fat turkey is degrading energy deeply.

In my video, from a straight flight, the Rafale turn begin at 0.40. At 0.46 the 180° is made => 30°/sec in average (a initial high turn thanks to ITR of 32° minimum, and a STR in the 26° region).
After 0.46 it's pure STR. 25.6°/sec is validated.

Your marvellous marketing turkey is fat and slow moving. It's just evidence.