F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

[BON PLAN]

F-35 mission capable rate dropped from 67.9% in 2015 to 54.7% in 2018
F-22 mission-capable rate dropped from 67.4% in 2015 to 49% in 2018
So only about half of USAF stealth fighters are mission-capable
Rates for F-15C, F-15E & B-1B improved & others show only small decline

 

[asianobserve]

Stealth is well known in France : The first stealthy designed frigates are the Lafayette ones.
Have you seen that the Burke US destroyers are not as stealthy designed?
So If USN find Stealth is not so important, why a fighter may absolutely be a stealth one?

Sure it's better to be stealth, but new kind of radars are coming, and the penalty is huge.

It does not change the fact that professional Air Forces around the World want stealth over conventional fighters. Just look at European countries everytime F-35 is pitted against Rafale, EF or Gripen the F-35 always wins. In some cases the Air Force top brass are at odds with politicians because often than not European politicians want European planes while their Air Forces want a 5th gen stealthy fighter. But between politicians and professional Air Force officials I will always defer to the latter about which fighter is best.

 

[BON PLAN]

Gripen E : untouchable !!!! (but a plane not fully developped.... let's wait a little bit for the final figure).

Rafale >= Typhoon >> F35.

As previously said, F35 is less agile than the F16. Itself less agile than the euro canards.

 

[asianobserve]

As previously said, F35 is less agile than the F16. Itself less agile than the euro canards.

You keep repeating this as if it is your mantra. But it is not true and will not become one ho matter how many times you repeat it.

 

[Immanuel]

You keep repeating this as if it is your mantra. But it is not true and will not become one ho matter how many times you repeat it.

He bases himself on a computer simulation meanwhile in real exercises the F-35 have double digit kill ratios.

 

[BON PLAN]

You keep repeating this as if it is your mantra. But it is not true and will not become one ho matter how many times you repeat it.

Just open your eyes and watch the picture.
On the same document you find a very flattering F22 figure, why on the same an abnormal one for F35 ?

It's a clear fact now that it is not a very agile plane. Normal, as it was not designed to be so, like F22.

 

[BON PLAN]

He bases himself on a computer simulation meanwhile in real exercises the F-35 have double digit kill ratios.

Real exercises? it is strange that F35 on training is always in the same side than Rafale and EF ....
The rules of these exercises are all but clear. Same that to say that AMRAAM has a pk of 90% at full range for exemple.

 

[asianobserve]

Real exercises? it is strange that F35 on training is always in the same side than Rafale and EF ....
The rules of these exercises are all but clear. Same that to say that AMRAAM has a pk of 90% at full range for exemple.

RED FLAG CONFIRMED F-35 DOMINANCE WITH A 20:1 KILL RATIO” U.S. AIR FORCE SAYS

https://theaviationist.com/2017/02/...nce-with-a-201-kill-ratio-u-s-air-force-says/

You seem to know better than all the Air Force officials of the countries in Europe that evaluated F-35.

 

[vampyrbladez]

RED FLAG CONFIRMED F-35 DOMINANCE WITH A 20:1 KILL RATIO” U.S. AIR FORCE SAYS

https://theaviationist.com/2017/02/...nce-with-a-201-kill-ratio-u-s-air-force-says/

You seem to know better than all the Air Force officials of the countries in Europe that evaluated F-35.

Go through this blog. Best analysis on the F 35A by an ex USAF aerospace contractor.

http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-f-35-and-infamous-sustained-g-spec.html

F 35A vs F 16 Blk 50 turning performance

 

[asianobserve]

Go through this blog. Best analysis on the F 35A by an ex USAF aerospace contractor.

http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-f-35-and-infamous-sustained-g-spec.html

F 35A vs F 16 Blk 50 turning performance

Nice read. In my case I must admit I'm not a pilot nor am I an aeronautics engineer to be able to make in dept technical analysis on F-35A aerodynamics. But I am using common sense. If all the major air forces of first World countries that have analyzed closely F-35s capabilities versus other planes and have unanimously concluded that the F-35 is a better plane, that's a pretty significant statistical data in favor of the F-35. Besides, between professional and active air force officials who have access to confidential aircraft data during fighter tenders and internet fanboys, I would always take the conclusions of the former anytime.

And re comparison video, the F-35A actually completed the turn ahead of the F-16C. And more interestingly, the F-16C in the video was in clean configuration, which is not how it will fight in real combat whereas the F-35A stores most its weapons inside its weapons bays, except for AIM9x (that is until ASRAAM lunch rails is developed for internal carriage).

 

[vampyrbladez]

Nice read. In my case I must admit I'm not a pilot nor am I an aeronautics engineer to be able to make in dept technical analysis on F-35A aerodynamics. But I am using common sense. If all the major air forces of first World countries that have analyzed closely F-35s capabilities versus other planes and have unanimously concluded that the F-35 is a better plane, that's a pretty significant statistical data in favor of the F-35. Besides, between professional and active air force officials who have access to confidential aircraft data during fighter tenders and internet fanboys, I would always take the conclusions of the former anytime.

And re comparison video, the F-35A actually completed the turn ahead of the F-16C. And more interestingly, the F-16C in the video was in clean configuration, which is not how it will fight in real combat whereas the F-35A stores most its weapons inside its weapons bays, except for AIM9x (that is until ASRAAM lunch rails is developed for internal carriage).

Please go through the entire blog series. It's one of the best blogs on F 35A flight data out there.

 

[asianobserve]

@vampyrbladez

Some interesting quotes by the same blogger, who no doubt is a fighter pilot, citing authoritatives papers or books:

But, as they say, time marches on, and in the past 10-12 years, several significant advancements have been made in the capabilities of fighter aircraft and air-to-air weapons. Three of these advancements; the all-aspect IR missile, greatly improved weapons delivery systems, and high thrust-to-weight engines have dramatically altered the character of the air battle, especially the close-in fight. The modern air battle is characterized by (1) time compression – shorter duration maneuvering required and (2) harder maneuvering - nose position at the expense of energy vs. nose position with energy conservation

In recent years, the level of fighter aircraft and weapon system technological sophistication has reached new heights; the most critical advance being the development of the all-aspect infrared missile. This missile negates the requirement of maneuvering to achieve a rear-aspect firing position and concurrently has caused the traditional point performance measures of merit to become deficient for determining the combat effectiveness of a fighter aircraft. To remedy this deficiency, new measures of merit are being investigated which examine aircraft maneuver and control capabilities not previously quantified.

http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2013/04/a-backgrounder-on-energy-maneuverability.html?m=1

 

[StealthFlanker]

Gripen E : untouchable !!!! (but a plane not fully developped.... let's wait a little bit for the final figure).

Rafale >= Typhoon >> F35.

As previously said, F35 is less agile than the F16. Itself less agile than the euro canards.

Nice try but your chart is absolutely nonsense to stay polite
there is no point in flight envelope ( speed and altitude wise) that F-15 can only sustain 13 degrees/second while F-16 can sustain 18 degrees/second and su-27 can sustain the upward of 24 degrees/second. (Their values is much closer to each others than that).
It is quite hilarious how they showed F-16 achieving ITR of 26 deg/sec, yet barely 18 deg/sec for STR, according to actual flight manual, when F-16 achieve 26deg/sec for ITR, it will also be capable of around 23deg/sec for STR.

That chart go further in retard level when it shows F-15 STR to be around 13 deg/seconds, at the same altitude that their "f-16" can reach 26 deg in ITR. What the actual fuck??????. A quick look at F-15 manual and everyone can see how full of shit that yellow chart is.

And then somehow the same chart shows that Su-35 with heavier weight and exactly same airfoil can have superior instantaneous turn rate to su-27? hahahahahahahahahaha that a child's dream but far from reality. ( and no TVC wont help with max instantaneous turn rate)
The figure for others aircraft in the chart is even more ridiculous. If we took the value of one aircraft as a base to find out about altitude and speed then the figure for su-27/Gripen/Rafale/Eurofighter indicate that they are at sea level, however F-15, F-35, F-16 are significantly more agile than that at sea level.

if we took F-35 numbers as a base then it indicates that they are at around 15-20k feet atleast, and there is no way any of them would hope to sustain something like 20-30 degrees /second at that altitude

 

[asianobserve]

F-35 Was NOT Inferior to F-16 in a 2015 "Dogfight"

Why Any Inference that the F-35 2015 'Post-Stall Agility' Control Law (CLAW) Test As a 'Dogfight' is Bogus

http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2017/06/f-35-was-not-inferior-to-f-16-in-2015.html?m=1

 

[StealthFlanker]

Just open your eyes and watch the picture.
On the same document you find a very flattering F22 figure, why on the same an abnormal one for F35

Because figure for every single aircraft in that photo is either wrong or the author being a retard and merged number at different altitude together.
Oh and for your information F-22 STR is actually roughly that of F-15 according to KPP and F-15 manual , contrast to the nonsense in your chart.

He bases himself on a computer simulation meanwhile in real exercises the F-35 have double digit kill ratios.

Frankly, it isn't even a simulation but a chart with a bunch of random numbers put together with none match any flight manual whatsoever.

 

[nongaddarliberal]

Since we have cancelled the FGFA program with Russia, we should lobby to buy the F 35A as an interim fighter before AMCA becomes operational, which be at 2030 at the earliest (being very optimistic here).

 

[vampyrbladez]

Since we have cancelled the FGFA program with Russia, we should lobby to buy the F 35A as an interim fighter before AMCA becomes operational, which be at 2030 at the earliest (being very optimistic here).

FGFA is still on the books, just not current version. Once Item 30 engines are installed and given FOC, we will have it done and dusted.

 

[nongaddarliberal]

FGFA is still on the books, just not current version. Once Item 30 engines are installed and given FOC, we will have it done and dusted.

Let's hope it's done quickly. What's the time frame predicted for this to happen?

 

[BON PLAN]

@vampyrbladez

Some interesting quotes by the same blogger, who no doubt is a fighter pilot, citing authoritatives papers or books:

http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2013/04/a-backgrounder-on-energy-maneuverability.html?m=1

Nice.
After the so called 5gen F35 that can't reach at least 2 main assets of the 5th gen definition (according to LM itself), now LM is trying to convince that a 7G plane has quite no measurable difference in agility with a 9G one.
Splendid.

If you are convinced, I'm not.


A 5th gen with 2 assets less, is it a 5-- gen ?

 

[BON PLAN]

F-35 Was NOT Inferior to F-16 in a 2015 "Dogfight"



http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2017/06/f-35-was-not-inferior-to-f-16-in-2015.html?m=1

Not inferior.....

BUT NOT SUPERIOR.