F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

[p2prada]

The above diagram is the exception rather then the rule, even in World War II more then 80 percent of losses were befor the pliot knew he was under attack or it was too late to react, since then the number has grew to 90 percent and expected to become 95 percent with the advent of stealth planes.

We are discussing about dog fights where both opposing pilots know the other exist. So who is teaching who?

Ok, this board seriously needs an introduction to the basics of modern air combat. I am going to try to give one even though my gut tells me that this will basically be a huge waste of time. This is a very very long post. You don?t have to read it, stop now or forever hold your peace? I am not going to address close range combat here because it is just too complex and dissimilar to beyond visual range combat for it to be worthwhile to attempt to deal with both in one post/thread.

We are talking about close range combat, not BVR.

Nobody here even mentioned BVR. Maybe you are just talking to yourself. If that's the case, carry on.

A plane like an Su-27 has a powerful radar, but it also has a giant RCS erasing its advantage for the most part.

Same as the F-15.

 

[Armand2REP]

Explain this. F-35 will have a more capable radar and has far higher volume for avionics than Rafale will even have. So how will it be less capable?

Its radar drops targets = junk. RBE2 AA = validated.
HMD flickers and drops = junk Top Sight = proven solid
Coms provide poor SA = junk Rafale comms = solid

They wanted F-35 yesterday so all this stuff will be downgraded to fit timelines making it no better avionics than the Rafale of today.

Rafales were offered to Switzerland at $200Million apiece while the Korean order is at $180Million apiece. So what was that about twice the cost?

Rafale was offered to Switzerland, 18 for $2.8 billion including life time support , pilot training and use of ADA facilities. That is $150m for a lifetime package each. F-35 can't be offered fixed contracts because the prices aren't fixed.

No chance at all. Meaning Rafale will never undergo a stealth conversion and if it did it will have even lesser capability due to the decreased fuel and avionics bay space.

All it needs are SH stealth pods to bring it to clean RCS which is the same as downgraded export F-35s.

F-35 has two or three times the avionics space, two times the fuel and is a stealth aircraft compared to Rafale. It is so obvious which is better. Rafale may be a better dog fighter though.

2-3X? how did you come up with that? 2X the fuel, how did you come up with that? F-35 countries out of tier 1 get a downgraded RCS version so its RCS is negligible. Face it, F-35 sucks as a dog fighter.

 

[average american]

Why spend time on something as obsolete as dog fighing when its the rare exceptions to ariel combat.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

The Super Hornet flew much before, back in 1995. It was well before F-35 design was even ready. In the beginning JSF was indeed meant to replace all of the Navy's aircraft. But overtime they realized that JSF cannot replace either the A-10 or the SH. That's why there may be two new programs to replace these aircraft.

Both SH and JSF programs are direct results of failure of NATF program with only difference that SH is just a filler program for the time JSF might take to come.

SH was sold as minor change solution to fill in time. That however not became the case, SH actually came as almost new aircraft which because of being new, cost and possible delays in JSF would stay longer in service than originally planned.

I will say this again. The new F/A-XX has nothing to do with JSF. It won't be of any threat to JSF either, it is expected to be ready only in the 2030 region which means a large part of JSF production will be over by then. SE and Block 3 are of no real threat to USN JSF orders either. It is just Boeing's was of providing cheaper alternatives to a 5th gen aircraft for the export market.

Well if USA is moving away from the logic it used to justify using common platform for all three services then only it can be. Which I don't see the case.

And for 'unmanned stealth jet' they already have X-48B which will take part in strike missions. When that part covered what special requirement a so called sixth generation fighter would fulfill is beyond imagination.

BTW flying an otherwise manned design with remote controller is very much possible and both USA and China converts their retired fighter into unmanned drones for target practice. And when the need will come this basic technology together with program like X-48 (in our case will be AURA) provides enough expertise to convert any existing jet in to optional unmanned solution.

But the big question is, are we ready to send drones to do 1 vs 1 in combat?

They are not entirely sure or you can say we are not entirely sure.

Well, they took more pain than any in putting greater pain than ever in putting commonality between three very different requirements, and for that reason they must be more than sure.

That's why I said the article is old and may not reflect the changes that may have happened since then. X-47B is a small aircraft, as much as a F-16. The F/A-XX may be a 30+ tonne aircraft with the same or greater operational range than the SH and significantly greater than F-35C. It is not supersonic either, merely a subsonic strike fighter with a limited role.

USN can't even define what they are speaking about. That may be because it is too early, may be because it is only day dreaming of just few admirals or worse it just hoax prepared by looser Boeing to tarnish JSFs future potential and to make a way for new fighter development program.

And yes article is old and may not reflect the changes which may have taken way and one of which might be dropping the idea entirely.

 

[p2prada]

It's you who did not understand the illustration. The dotted red line pointing towards the MKI is simply a reference to the high off-boresight capability of the Phyton 4 missile, which is more than 60 degrees angle off boresight. The inscription in the diagram says it all:

I know that. What I am talking about is that the red dotted line is the flight path of the missile fired from the MKI. The illustration doesn't say it, but I am.

IR missiles attacks a target by homing in on the target's thermal signature. Proportional navigation simply fine tunes the path towards the target.

IR missile seeks heat signature and RF missile targets radar signature. Both fly the same way.

Even the MKI cannot turn on its axis in a merge. The airspeed of the jet will not allow that kind of a turn. Notice how the SU-35 in the following video has to climb straight up to bleed airspeed before inverting and dropping down before it can turn on its axis.

The turn in a merge on a dogfight is the 9G turn made at the first part of the video 00:04. Even with TVC it took the Su-35 in the video a full 6 seconds to make a 180 degree turn. I can only imagine the stress that ordinary fighter pilots (not the Russian aerobatic pilot in that video) has to go through in making that turn and targetting at the same time...

Do you know that most of these "fancy" air show maneuvers aren't really the only TVC maneuvers.

In the video, check 1:52-1:55. Is that enough to get a shot in? Yes. The aircraft achieved a firing position in 3 seconds.

Google Herbst maneuver. It turns 90 in 2 seconds and a high off bore sigh missile can be fired in the 3rd second to kill that Hornet. Hook maneuver is even faster.

The diagram is only showing that it has 2 chances of hitting its target. As I said Phyton 4 is an IR missile and it homes in on the thermal signature of its target. Proportional navigation merely aids in guiding the IR missile to the target.

LOL.

Otherwise, if an MKI slows down like in 3:59 of the above video then he'll be a toast to the wingman of the plane he's pursuing.

Which means the F-35 can take out an MKI only in a 2v1.

And a group of F-35s would even be more lethal due to the fact that more helmets are targeting. Then you have F-35's networking which has been described by the Israelis in this fashion:

Same for every other jet out there.

 

[p2prada]

Its radar drops targets = junk. RBE2 AA = validated.
HMD flickers and drops = junk Top Sight = proven solid
Coms provide poor SA = junk Rafale comms = solid

They wanted F-35 yesterday so all this stuff will be downgraded to fit timelines making it no better avionics than the Rafale of today.

That's a silly way to put points across, especially considering the RBE-2AA was validated using American T/R modules.

Rafale was offered to Switzerland, 18 for $2.8 billion including life time support , pilot training and use of ADA facilities. That is $150m for a lifetime package each.

That was much later. The first one was at $200 Million per aircraft.

F-35 can't be offered fixed contracts because the prices aren't fixed.

You haven't read the DPSA report it seems. Congress was submitted a report saying the deal will be for 10.8Billion. Even price escalations won't push it above $200Million per aircraft. A long ways from your 2x figure.

All it needs are SH stealth pods to bring it to clean RCS which is the same as downgraded export F-35s.

Not at the cost of performance. SH's clean RCS is at the same level as Gripen/EF or Rafale.

If you want an idea about it, then read this article about how the Koreans want a EF level RCS for KF-X block 1 and move to a F-35 level RCS in KF-X Block 3.

http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...korean-kf-x-fighter-program-2.html#post724804

In 2009, the developers acknowledged that South Korea could not build a fully stealthy aircraft, equivalent to the F-35. They relaxed the radar cross-section to the level of such aircraft as the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and Eurofighter Typhoon.

2-3X? how did you come up with that?

You are comparing a 14 tonne "extra fat" fighter with a 9.4 tonne sleek fighter.

2X the fuel, how did you come up with that?

8.3 tonnes vs 4.5 tonnes.

F-35 countries out of tier 1 get a downgraded RCS version so its RCS is negligible.

That was cleared up by LM and USAF. All F-35s will have one standard for stealth. F-35 level stealth is allowed for export by the Congress. The same with Silent Eagle.

Face it, F-35 sucks as a dog fighter.

Yes, the only area where I would give Rafale more points.

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

Both SH and JSF programs are direct results of failure of NATF program with only difference that SH is just a filler program for the time JSF might take to come.

No it wasn't. NATF was a program meant to replace the F-14. The Navy decided it was cheaper to go for the SH instead.

JSF wasn't a "direct" result of anything except a replacement program for the Hornet.

There were two programs. One to replace F-14s with NATF and instead SH was chosen. The second was JSF to replace Hornets. Both Hornet and Tomcat served side by side. Later Hornet and Super Hornet served side by side. Later they will follow it up with JSF and F/A-XX.

Sure the question remains whether the F/A-XX will be a reasonable requirement with the X-47C coming up. But USN has a need for a long range strike aircraft like SH which the JSF isn't.

The problem is X-47C will have unmatched range and payload, but without fighter like performance. JSF has fighter like performance, but no range or payload. F/A-XX is supposed to give the Navy a strike aircraft with fighter like performance along with range and payload. It is a relevant program, the main hurdles would instead be money and technology, but the need for it exists.

 

[asianobserve]

Do you know that most of these "fancy" air show maneuvers aren't really the only TVC maneuvers.

In the video, check 1:52-1:55. Is that enough to get a shot in? Yes. The aircraft achieved a firing position in 3 seconds.

Google Herbst maneuver. It turns 90 in 2 seconds and a high off bore sigh missile can be fired in the 3rd second to kill that Hornet. Hook maneuver is even faster.

I think we'll know the real capabilities of the F-35 once it joins the American Red Flag with MKI.

Which means the F-35 can take out an MKI only in a 2v1.

That's pure fantasy. Even a Rafale can take on MKI 1-on-1. LOL

 

[Armand2REP]

That's a silly way to put points across, especially considering the RBE-2AA was validated using American T/R modules.

That is a silly way to analyse the facts. F-35 student pilots said it sucks at all those things, including the instructor. RBE2 AA was validated using French T/R modules which it has to this day.

That was much later. The first one was at $200 Million per aircraft.

It is the same price per aircraft as the last offer, fewer aircraft offered which was never $200m per.

You haven't read the DPSA report it seems. Congress was submitted a report saying the deal will be for 10.8Billion. Even price escalations won't push it above $200Million per aircraft. A long ways from your 2x figure.

You haven't read the GOA report it seems. Congress was submitted a report saying that the F-35 build cost had exceeded limitations and required a new cap placed on it. Currently estimated at $150 million flyaway, not including anything. Rafale flyaway is $77 million, so it is almost EXACTLY half the price.

Not at the cost of performance. SH's clean RCS is at the same level as Gripen/EF or Rafale.

Maybe Gripen, but it is twice the Rafale. Put those pods on Rafale and you have a strike platform that competes with export 35s.

If you want an idea about it, then read this article about how the Koreans want a EF level RCS for KF-X block 1 and move to a F-35 level RCS in KF-X Block 3.

What difference does that make? Don't start adding irrelevance to this conversation.

You are comparing a 14 tonne "extra fat" fighter with a 9.4 tonne sleek fighter.

JSF is extra fat because it has internal bays, that isn't room for avionics.

8.3 tonnes vs 4.5 tonnes.

Rafale can add 6t in conformal fuel tanks and still out fly the F-35. It is no advantage.

That was cleared up by LM and USAF. All F-35s will have one standard for stealth. F-35 level stealth is allowed for export by the Congress. The same with Silent Eagle.

F-35 supplied to the USAF is only cleared to tier 1 partners, the rest are downgraded. F-15SE is not cleared for sale to anyone.

Yes, the only area where I would give Rafale more points.

Yeah, and with a messed up radar Rafale is better at BVR and with Spectra/AASM is better at low level penetration.

 

[p2prada]

I think we'll know the real capabilities of the F-35 once it joins the American Red Flag with MKI.

Okay. But Red Flag is meant for BVR exercises, not WVR.

That's pure fantasy. Even a Rafale can take on MKI 1-on-1. LOL

What? You were the one who said the wing man will kill MKI. Wing man would mean a second jet is around. So 2v1.

Also, like I said earlier, international exercises don't mean much especially when it comes to stuff like TVC. Why would either F-22 pilots or MKI pilots give away all their techniques in games?

 

[p2prada]

That is a silly way to analyse the facts. F-35 student pilots said it sucks at all those things, including the instructor. RBE2 AA was validated using French T/R modules which it has to this day.

F-35 is still in development. And RBE-2AA was first validated using American T/R modules. The French came much later.

It is the same price per aircraft as the last offer, fewer aircraft offered which was never $200m per.

No, it isn't. The first offer was for 22 jets at $200 Million. The second offer was revised to 18 jets at $150 Million.

You haven't read the GOA report it seems. Congress was submitted a report saying that the F-35 build cost had exceeded limitations and required a new cap placed on it. Currently estimated at $150 million flyaway, not including anything. Rafale flyaway is $77 million, so it is almost EXACTLY half the price.

It doesn't matter what GOA says. DSCA says they are offering 60 F-35s to Korea at 180Million apiece along with training, maintenance and spares. That counts a lot more.

Maybe Gripen, but it is twice the Rafale. Put those pods on Rafale and you have a strike platform that competes with export 35s.

No chance at all. Rafale is not a stealth aircraft. Pods don't make a stealth aircraft. Even Silent Eagle is a psuedo-stealth arrangement.

What difference does that make? Don't start adding irrelevance to this conversation.

To point out that the comparisons you are making are not anywhere near when it comes to stealth. F-35s RCS is at a whole different level.

JSF is extra fat because it has internal bays, that isn't room for avionics.

Have you even seen the internal bays? Have you even seen the size of the radar? It is a 800mm array vs RBE-2AA's 600-650mm. The avionics bays are way bigger than Rafales.

Rafale can add 6t in conformal fuel tanks and still out fly the F-35. It is no advantage.

Where is the stealth there? Anyway Rafale's CFTs are 1150L tanks. Not 6 tonnes.

With 3 2000L fuel tanks and CFTs, Rafale has a capacity of 6 tonnes. We are talking about a lot of weight here.

Even F-35 will have CFTs, at least the Israeli version.

F-35 supplied to the USAF is only cleared to tier 1 partners, the rest are downgraded.

No, it isn't.

F-15SE is not cleared for sale to anyone.

Nobody has ordered it yet. DPSA has submitted the sale proposal already.

US reveals details of F-15SE, F-35A bids for South Korea

Yeah, and with a messed up radar Rafale is better at BVR and with Spectra/AASM is better at low level penetration.

How will you kill an aircraft you cannot really see?

 

[asianobserve]

What? You were the one who said the wing man will kill MKI. Wing man would mean a second jet is around. So 2v1.

I know what a wing man is. I'm just objecting to your claim that it would take 2 5th Gen F-35s to shot down a generation older MKI. I mentioned about the wingman just to illustrate that the kind of maneuvers that MKIs are capable of doing would make it vulnerable in a real combat scenario where protagonists don't fight 1-on-1. Surely the MKIs also do not go into combat alone, or do they??

 

[p2prada]

I know what a wing man is. I'm just objecting to your claim that it would take 2 5th Gen F-35s to shot down a generation older MKI...

What I said was, in order to make use of MKI's vulnerability in the air after using TVC, you will need a second aircraft to make use of that advantage since the first aircraft would either have a missile chasing it or would be dead. Anyway, even the MKI won't be alone.

If you think MKI will use TVC and not get a shot in, then you are mistaken.

It was you who said this,

Otherwise, if an MKI slows down like in 3:59 of the above video then he'll be a toast to the wingman of the plane he's pursuing.

 

[Singh]

@p2prada @asianobserve Also it'll matter in which area will MKI operate ? In enemy territory with a networked SAM and Radar system, MKI will be lit up like a Christmas Tree for eg.

 

[asianobserve]

What I said was, in order to make use of MKI's vulnerability in the air after using TVC, you will need a second aircraft to make use of that advantage since the first aircraft would either have a missile chasing it or would be dead. Anyway, even the MKI won't be alone.

You know what's the biggest vulnerability of the MKI? It's enormous size and unstealthy design that will light up the radar screens of F-35s at BVR ranges. And with networking MKIs wouldn't even know that they are only several kilometers away from the lead F-35 that has turned off its radar but is constantly receiving a direct feed from other fighters behind him. Note that F-35's stealth is maximised on front profiles, the part of the aircraft visible on merges.

 

[asianobserve]

@p2prada @asianobserve Also it'll matter in which area will MKI operate ? In enemy territory with a networked SAM and Radar system, MKI will be lit up like a Christmas Tree for eg.

We're still in the fantasy scenario of 1v1 or 2v2 dogfights without support assets.

 

[Rahul Singh]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

No it wasn't. NATF was a program meant to replace the F-14. The Navy decided it was cheaper to go for the SH instead.

JSF wasn't a "direct" result of anything except a replacement program for the Hornet.

There were two programs. One to replace F-14s with NATF and instead SH was chosen. The second was JSF to replace Hornets. Both Hornet and Tomcat served side by side. Later Hornet and Super Hornet served side by side. Later they will follow it up with JSF and F/A-XX.

Sure the question remains whether the F/A-XX will be a reasonable requirement with the X-47C coming up. But USN has a need for a long range strike aircraft like SH which the JSF isn't.

The problem is X-47C will have unmatched range and payload, but without fighter like performance. JSF has fighter like performance, but no range or payload. F/A-XX is supposed to give the Navy a strike aircraft with fighter like performance along with range and payload. It is a relevant program, the main hurdles would instead be money and technology, but the need for it exists.

X-17 was developed into Hornet because USN wanted to equip its fleet with a cheap solution. The Super Hornet came out when NATF failed and JSF was far in future. SH is a filler and this has been stated many times over.

Sixth Generation Fighter is not even defined thing by any potential buyer. As like it was put before, USN doesn't have any clue about its definition. In all probability they are sticking with JSF and its upgraded versions for the time it was thought and planned to serve.

 

[p2prada]

@p2prada @asianobserve Also it'll matter in which area will MKI operate ? In enemy territory with a networked SAM and Radar system, MKI will be lit up like a Christmas Tree for eg.

No doubt. But the discussion wasn't about MKI vs F-35 as a whole. It is about the relevance of extreme maneuverability against DAS type system.

You know what's the biggest vulnerability of the MKI? It's enormous size and unstealthy design that will light up the radar screens of F-35s at BVR ranges. And with networking MKIs wouldn't even know that they are only several kilometers away from the lead F-35 that has turned off its radar but is constantly receiving a direct feed from other fighters behind him. Note that F-35's stealth is maximised on front profiles, the part of the aircraft visible on merges.

It seems you have completely forgotten what the discussion is about? How will MKIs extreme maneuverability help in BVR?

Since you turned the discussion from a DAS vs TVC to a F-35 vs MKI, then let me bring in PAKFA. PAKFA will have 360 degree DAS as well as extreme maneuverability. It will also have F-35 level stealth, which nullifies F-35s BVR advantage. PAKFA also has all aspect stealth compared to F-35s frontal only. To top it off PAKFA will have 4 radars giving it 360 degree capability over hundreds of kilometers, not just the 30 or 40 Km advantage that the F-35 has with DAS. Combine that with twice or thrice the quantity of RAMJET based high off bore sight BVR + WVR anti-missile systems (meaning missile killers), pretty much all advantages are with PAKFA. Okay, let's not forget that PAKFA may very well exceed the F-22 in maneuverability, so one more added advantage. According to T-50 test pilots, the aircraft exceeds the Su-35 in pretty much every parameter by a very, very high margin. If you say MKI has a 20% increase in capability against F-16, PAKFA should have greater than 200% capability vs MKI. So, think about it.

Shall we discuss a F-35 vs PAKFA/FGFA scenario rather than F-35 vs MKI?

We're still in the fantasy scenario of 1v1 or 2v2 dogfights without support assets.

The discussion is completely off.

How will a 360 degree DAS and an Aim-9x benefit from support assets?

 

[p2prada]

Re: ADA LCA Tejas Mark-II

X-17 was developed into Hornet because USN wanted to equip its fleet with a cheap solution. The Super Hornet came out when NATF failed and JSF was far in future. SH is a filler and this has been stated many times over.

You can say the same thing over and over again. But facts are different from what you claim. Hornet filled a light fighter requirement while Tomcat filled a heavy fighter requirement. NATF did not fail, instead it never happened. As a matter of fact, USN made the right decision by going for the SH for its long range strike requirement. Hornet cannot fill that role and neither can JSF.

Sixth Generation Fighter is not even defined thing by any potential buyer. As like it was put before, USN doesn't have any clue about its definition. In all probability they are sticking with JSF and its upgraded versions for the time it was thought and planned to serve.

Fact is we in the civilian world do not know what's happening. But the US is already planning a future requirement for a SH replacement for the navy as well as a F-22 replacement for the air force. Both of these programs have nothing to do with JSF. Nothing at all.

The USN has a clear directive for a replacement program for SH. Meaning SH will be replaced 100%, now they are going to have to decide whether it will be manned, unmanned or a hybrid.

 

[average american]

From what I hear the F-22 or F35 can drop a slammer down a conventional fighter's or PAK FA throat at 55nm w/ a Pk on the order of almost 70% provided is has an altitude and speed advantage (frontal aspect I'm sure). People are dreaming if they thingk a first generation plane is going to be as steathly as a fifth generation stealth plane and maneuverability is just a turd the Russians keep polishing to get more money to build just four prototypes so far. The Russians are starting to sound more and more like used car salesmen..