Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

[kaiserd]

When did this thread stop being NEWS ONLY?

Any chance we could control ourselves rather than moderators having to step in and do it for us?

 

[fredymac]

Stennis and Essex joint operations in the Arabian Sea. Hornet/Lightning flybys at the beginning.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGETkMV1oOo

 

[LowObservable]

Cheap and effective is what is needed.

The two are mutually exclusive.

Interesting judgment. And news to the designers of the T-34, I would think.

 

[LowObservable]

There is a big difference between old articles that are expressing an opinion or goal and an 8 year old article that talks about an achievement or known & working features.

That was (clearly) not what I was referring to. As you well know. If the official information in 2010 was correct, we are six years past IOC (real IOC, not sub-specification).

 

[sferrin]

Cheap and effective is what is needed.

The two are mutually exclusive.

Interesting judgment. And news to the designers of the T-34, I would think.

It's not 1940.

 

[SpudmanWP]

That was (clearly) not what I was referring to.

Then you should be clearer in your posts.

Since I (and others) brought up "8-year old articles" specifically to talk about the achievements in stealth (notice I did not say "prediction"), you should not be surprised that people think this is what you are referring to in a following post.

As far as IOC goes, I and many others have clearly stated that the DoD & JPO messed up the cost & schedule by 5 years. However, that is a good example of "prediction" vs "achievement" (Cost & Schedule = Prediction and stealth qualities = achievement).

 

[Jemiba]

When did this thread stop being NEWS ONLY?

Any chance we could control ourselves rather than moderators having to step in and do it for us?

If the discussion runs the way, it's doing now, it's no problem, I think. So I think, we can have a try again
and allow comments to the posted news, look at the results and then answer your question "Any chance we could control ourselves" .

 

[Hood]

Not really news as such but just an interesting snippet.

Recently on another forum I belong to, someone asked whether the RAF had decided on a designation for the F-35 yet, e.g. F-35B Lightning FGR.1 etc.
There has been no word on the designation suffix yet, but apparently the RAF dropped Lightning II a few months ago and now just refers to the aircraft as Lightning in official documents. Probably makes sense given the original EE Lightning was retired 31 years ago.

 

[Mike Pryce]

UK F-35B IOC declared:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/defence-secretary-sets-sights-on-next-century-of-british-air-power

Also Tempest update (will post more there).

 

[sferrin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRW0sLsB0KY

I would like to direct your attention to 10:00

 

[Mike Pryce]

UK F-35B IOC declared:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/defence-secretary-sets-sights-on-next-century-of-british-air-power

Also Tempest update (will post more there).

Hang on, IOC phrase not actually used by MoD (except for 'Tempest') and Northrop Grumman Tweet that mentioned it now deleted. So has IOC really happened?

 

[Jeb]

I would like to direct your attention to 10:00

Baby F-22.

 

[VTOLicious]

I would like to direct your attention to 10:00

Impressive what is possible without TVC nowadays

 

[GTX]

But wait a moment, I thought the 'experts' claimed the F-35 couldn't dogfight cause it wasn't a canard style or had no thrust vectoring...

 

[sferrin]

But wait a moment, I thought the 'experts' claimed the F-35 couldn't dogfight cause it wasn't a canard style or had no thrust vectoring...

Well it is basically an F-105 after all.

 

[Sundog]

But wait a moment, I thought the 'experts' claimed the F-35 couldn't dogfight cause it wasn't a canard style or had no thrust vectoring...

An F-16 will still clean it's clock in a close in dogfight. In real life, an F-16 wouldn't get close enough to do that; i.e., that's what stealth is for. Don't confuse maneuvers flown at airshows with maneuvers required for air combat. Having excellent high alpha characteristics, IMHO, are truly meaningful in the sense that the plane should always be recoverable, unlike earlier generations that would lose control and we would possibly lose a pilot as well. High alpha control plus Auto-GCAS I think are going to keep a lot of pilots alive by virtue of not crashing when they get into unfamiliar parts of the envelope or make mistakes.

 

[sferrin]

But wait a moment, I thought the 'experts' claimed the F-35 couldn't dogfight cause it wasn't a canard style or had no thrust vectoring...

An F-16 will still clean it's clock in a close in dogfight.

In airshow configuration maybe. Not once you add the obligatory tank(s), ECM pod, pylons, etc. to the F-16.

 

[Jeb]

But wait a moment, I thought the 'experts' claimed the F-35 couldn't dogfight cause it wasn't a canard style or had no thrust vectoring...

An F-16 will still clean it's clock in a close in dogfight.

I'm getting to the point of "show me." Show me a fully up-to-date "unlocked" F-35 in a knife fight with a front-line USAF F-16C and let's see who gets the best of three fights.

 

[LowObservable]

I see good controllability, which isn't surprising because Fort Worth is good at that stuff. I see other things which are not surprising either.

There was a recognition in the 1980s that maneuverability was more than sustained g and acceleration. However, those and other aspects are still important and governed by thrust, weight, lift and drag.

So when making comparisons it's always important to make sure you're comparing the same things.

 

[Foo Fighter]

Have there been any such mock combat tests? It would make sense to me but all I have seen is claim and counterclaim with no evidence.

 

[SpudmanWP]

There have been plenty of LFEs (Large Force Exercises) like Red Flag, Norther Edge, etc where the F-35 "dominated" with "kill ratios" greater than 20:1 (as high as 24:0/25:1). This is even more impressive given that at the time the F-35s were limited due to early Blocks 2B/3i (G, speed, and weapon limited).

They have even gone head-to-head in BFM exercises with veteran F-15C crews (while having 50% virgin F-35 crews) and the F-15C was only able to win "sometimes".

 

[TomcatViP]

You'd have to be pretty blind to think that this demo doesn't show the superiority of this plane in dogfights. Among many sequences, the slow speed pass nose high where a pickup truck passing by drives faster than this 50klb airframe fly tells everybody that you'll have to keep you speed high and the G's pumping fighting this beast. Expect to see your body and mind drown when the other guy has plenty of Alpha in reserve to keep himself fresh.

I really like the acceleration at the end of the slow pass with the plane climbing and accelerating on its vector.

 

[marauder2048]

Have there been any such mock combat tests? It would make sense to me but all I have seen is claim and counterclaim with no evidence.

I think it would get interesting when cooperative Auto-ACAS shows up on the F-35.
You could start to think about things like live-fire against a QF-16.

 

[sferrin]

Anybody know if this is present in the F-22 and F-35?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUI0ffvZfPY

One of the developers popped up on F-16.net a few years back and said that at the time pilots weren't crazy about giving up control to the FCS at a crucial moment so it never went anywhere. Maybe attitudes have changed since then?

 

[LowObservable]

I don't know. FW was more keen on better gunsight symbology on the HUD.

I believe I have seen one reference to the implementation of something similar on the JA 37. Combined with the Oerlikon KCA that would be downright nasty.

 

[kcran567]

But wait a moment, I thought the 'experts' claimed the F-35 couldn't dogfight cause it wasn't a canard style or had no thrust vectoring...

An F-16 will still clean it's clock in a close in dogfight.

I'm getting to the point of "show me." Show me a fully up-to-date "unlocked" F-35 in a knife fight with a front-line USAF F-16C and let's see who gets the best of three fights.

Maybe you can get you're chance by comparing these 2 demo:

https://youtu.be/vu8N579v75U
See 5:23 and 3:52, have never seen another fighter "skid" it's tail end through a turn like
That and then pick up speed/energy so quickly (I mean a non-TVC aircraft with the horizontal stabilizers flapping away to make a stable "skid" turn. And
4:40 climbs extremely high energy like a bat out of hell.
And those unbelievably tight and graceful vertical loops...

And here is an extremely aggressive F-16 demo from Utah to compare with the F-35...

https://youtu.be/OySOOidAGDs

 

[sferrin]

But wait a moment, I thought the 'experts' claimed the F-35 couldn't dogfight cause it wasn't a canard style or had no thrust vectoring...

An F-16 will still clean it's clock in a close in dogfight.

I'm getting to the point of "show me." Show me a fully up-to-date "unlocked" F-35 in a knife fight with a front-line USAF F-16C and let's see who gets the best of three fights.

Maybe you can get you're chance by comparing these 2 demo:

https://youtu.be/vu8N579v75U
See 5:23 and 3:52, have never seen another fighter "skid" it's tail end through a turn like
That and then pick up speed/energy so quickly.

F-22 at 2:40

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYtpczzMTws

(though it doesn't "skid", it actually makes the turn.)


(The F-16 demo isn't really apples-to-apples as it would need a couple fuel tanks, an ECM pod, LANTIRN, etc. to be in a configuration similar to what the F-35 flies around in all the time.)

 

[totoro]

Would a couple of fuel tanks be needed if they're jettisoned before a plane gets close to danger?
Some F-16s have internal jammers. (granted, of lesser capability) Radar as a jammer can be configured for all platforms.

 

[kitnut617]

Would a couple of fuel tanks be needed if they're jettisoned before a plane gets close to danger?
Some F-16s have internal jammers. (granted, of lesser capability) Radar as a jammer can be configured for all platforms.

Not what sferrin is saying is it, for a fair apples-to-apples comparison, that's what an F-16 would have to have externally, whereas the F-35 carries it internally all of the time and now the F-35 is getting clearance to operate far more capably, it's just about on par with a clean F-16

 

[Sundog]

First, when the F-16 and the F-35 performed ACM against each other, it was a two seat F-16 with external drop tanks and the F-35 was never able to get the advantage. Second, why would an F-16 driver keep the drop tanks in the fight? The purpose of drop tanks is so they can be dropped. So that would give the F-16 an even greater advantage. This has always been known, it's called physics. The F-35 has higher wing loading and much greater drag across the envelope since it was designed to have large internal stores and an even larger fuel fraction. That's why it has such a large engine (Discounting the STOVL reasons).

The F-35 was always going to be superior to other aircraft simply based on it's combination of stealth and situational awareness. The fact is, regardless of the F-16's maneuverability, the F-35 will be far more survivable in future battlefields.

 

[Sundog]

Would a couple of fuel tanks be needed if they're jettisoned before a plane gets close to danger?
Some F-16s have internal jammers. (granted, of lesser capability) Radar as a jammer can be configured for all platforms.

The F-16 was designed to get to the battle with drop tanks, then drop them and fight on full internal fuel.

 

[sferrin]

First, when the F-16 and the F-35 performed ACM against each other, it was a two seat F-16 with external drop tanks and the F-35 was never able to get the advantage.

That specific incident was debunked ages ago.

 

[malipa]

Also the F-16 if it drops it's droptanks, it used to destroy part of the fins at the bottom of the aircraft decreasing it's stability. The Dutch Royal Air Force redesigned them to solve the issue. The droptanks have a right hand pattern when being ejected. It was too expensive to have two different directions.

 

[LowObservable]

First, when the F-16 and the F-35 performed ACM against each other, it was a two seat F-16 with external drop tanks and the F-35 was never able to get the advantage.

That specific incident was debunked ages ago.

Meaning what? It never happened? The writer of the report was lying? Or merely that there were some overblown interpretations that were published (shockeroo in the days of the Internet) or that different people interpreted the report in different ways?

 

[SpudmanWP]

There is an old saying that "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts".

You can read the report and have the opinion that it sheds a bad light on the F-35.

However, that does not take away from the fact that it was just a CLAWS test with a G & Speed limited early F-35. It was never intended to be a test of ACM capability. It's only purpose was to test the flight controls of the F-35 to determine if they responded in the same way that was predicted in software.

Another fact is that the CLAWS, G, and speed limitations have been opened up significantly since that test was conducted. There a several quotes from F-35 pilots that talk about Block 3F jets being "eye watering" compared to early LRIP jets.

 

[LowObservable]

So how does that "debunk" the report itself?

 

[SpudmanWP]

It was not the "report" that was debunked but the krappy articles & their "interpretations" of the report, ie the "incident".

 

[LowObservable]

That was what I asked in #1539. Next time, try answering the actual question. Saves a lot of time.

 

[Grey Havoc]

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/turkey-refuses-to-cancel-s-400-order-risking-f-35-d-454939/

 

[SpudmanWP]

Two stealth jets to arrive in Korea by March

By Park Ji-won

Two F-35A stealth fighter aircraft will be delivered to South Korea from the U.S. by the end of March, a military source said Sunday.

"Two F-35As out of 10, which the Air Force will receive this year, will arrive in South Korea by the end of March. They will be deployed by around April or May," a source familiar with the matter said.

The source said two aircraft will arrive every month and up to 10 stealth fighters will be handed over by the end of the year. The Air Force will possibly complete their deployment during the same time. By the end of 2018, the Air Force had taken over six F-35As for training at Arizona's Luke Air Force Base in the U.S.

More at the JUMP
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=261946