The DOT&E reports directly to the SecDef in an advisory role. They cannot make policy or acquisition decisions but often make waves through publicly releasing reports.
F-35 Program - General Discussion
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
well lets hope its an evaluation where they overlay a Blue Flag exercise on top of a Red Flag exercise and compare oranges with oranges......
How "oranges to oranges" was the original A-7 to A-10 eval?
SpazSinbad
Active Member
A Golden Nugget for F-35 ACM - High AoA Maneuvers
F-35A High Angle-of-Attack Testing
Steven Baer, Oct 2013, Lockheed Martin, Edwards Air Force Base, California, 93523
“...Circle flow combat is one of the basic fighter maneuvers where two pilots engage in a sustained or instantaneous turn towards or away from one another. In this fight, the first pilot to get his aircraft's nose on the enemy will get the first shot off. In Fig. 7 is a combat scenario where both the aircraft turn towards one another. Here the friendly fighter has high AoA capability, allowing him, with proper timing, to pitch his nose up to get line of sight first on the enemy.
Used properly, high angle-of-attack capability can be the "gold nugget" that determines whether or not the F-35 comes out the victor in air combat. When combined with an already impressive arsenal of weapons, sensors, and stealth, the JSF will be a formidable foe in the air.”
http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=21418 (PDF 1.2Mb) &/OR An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie The error is original file location: h ttp://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2014-2057
FIG. 7: [ame="http://s98.photobucket.com/user/SpazSinbad/media/NewNewAllBum/F-35_AOA_Testing_AIAA-fig7.gif.html"]F-35_AOA_Testing_AIAA-fig7.gif gif by SpazSinbad | Photobucket[/ame]
F-35A High Angle-of-Attack Testing
Steven Baer, Oct 2013, Lockheed Martin, Edwards Air Force Base, California, 93523
“...Circle flow combat is one of the basic fighter maneuvers where two pilots engage in a sustained or instantaneous turn towards or away from one another. In this fight, the first pilot to get his aircraft's nose on the enemy will get the first shot off. In Fig. 7 is a combat scenario where both the aircraft turn towards one another. Here the friendly fighter has high AoA capability, allowing him, with proper timing, to pitch his nose up to get line of sight first on the enemy.
Used properly, high angle-of-attack capability can be the "gold nugget" that determines whether or not the F-35 comes out the victor in air combat. When combined with an already impressive arsenal of weapons, sensors, and stealth, the JSF will be a formidable foe in the air.”
http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=21418 (PDF 1.2Mb) &/OR An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie The error is original file location: h ttp://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2014-2057
FIG. 7: [ame="http://s98.photobucket.com/user/SpazSinbad/media/NewNewAllBum/F-35_AOA_Testing_AIAA-fig7.gif.html"]F-35_AOA_Testing_AIAA-fig7.gif gif by SpazSinbad | Photobucket[/ame]
Last edited:
Blue Jay
Member
So I've read a lot of the stuff here on the forums on the F-35 and I have one request. Sorry if this information is already available elsewhere I think I just ay have missed it.
How does the F-35 compare to other aircraft like the teens, russian fighters, and euro-canards in terms of pure aerodynamics? The media is screaming that it can't turn, can't climb, and basically can barely get off the ground. However I'm starting to suspect that this isn't true...
How does the F-35 compare to other aircraft like the teens, russian fighters, and euro-canards in terms of pure aerodynamics? The media is screaming that it can't turn, can't climb, and basically can barely get off the ground. However I'm starting to suspect that this isn't true...
Try and compare apples vs. apples. Firstly, these are planes made for combat, not for airshows. A clean F-35 on the outside would be configured internally with 2 X 2000lb JDAM and 2 X AMRAAM, 18Klbs of fuel and a çomprehensive suite of integrated sensors. The jet you compare it with would be aerodynamically draggy, with all sort of weaponry, external fuel tanks and sensor/targeting pods festooning the wings and under the fuselage. Advantage F-35 all day.
Last edited:
Many of the critics compare it apples to apples with 4th gen airframes, This is more an apples to oranges comparison.
The F35, with its RCS, sensor fusion, networked sensors, Combat Cloud, integrated ECM, etc etc etc, is a generational leap forward despite the critics blogs.
I would have a look at a clean Super Hornet, as a guide to its maneuverability. It was going to be a clean f-16 or Hornet, but that was changed before the first one was built.
A one on one within visual range, has a high probability of both planes getting hit by a missile. The latest missiles from both sides are that good.
The F-35 will go as a minimum group of 4.
ParlInfo - Parliamentary Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade : 20/03/2012 : Department of Defence annual report 2010-11
"Our current assessment that we speak of is: greater than six to one relative loss exchange ratio against in four versus eight engagement scenarios—four blue at 35s versus eight advanced red threats in the 2015 to 2020 time frame."
Why bother listening to the media?
Just watch...
http://youtu.be/mfWHHuLILs0
It flies just fine, turns fine and accelerates fine. It is a combat aircraft and its performance specifications are based on a heavy operational weapons load, a heavy fuel load and a full sensor suite. Compare this aircraft to others within similar conditions (how combat really looks) and the reality is that no 'specification' will determine the outcome of a fight. Tactics, doctrine, suporting systems and concept of operations will.
Every aircraft is a compromise. Some will turn tighter, some will fly and accelerate faster and some have better sensors and weapons.
Historically the best combat aircraft are the ones that are able to shoot first. Does sheer performance help you shoot a guided weapon first, or does knowing where to send your guided weapon, before your opponent does, win the day?
further to this...
the platform agility wailers also seem to think that the weapons systems advances are also in a state of development suspension.
an aircraft turning at 7-9 before the pilot blacks out is going to struggle against a missile that turns at 35g - let alone an all aspect missile where the platform can launch that weapon at any angle within the weapons effective terminal kill sphere.... let alone where a flight of aircraft can stay signature masked as they have another asset providing them with the firing solution - redforce may well see the telegraphing aircraft but has no idea that there is a shooter nearby due to signature masking
an aircraft that can minimise the range at which redforce can detect it by rote also means that if it gets in closer it then shortens the ability of the opposing aircraft to effectively evade etc....
this obsession with thinking that air combat will be metered down to absolute agility is just a canard....
Last edited:
Its grasping at straws. Few would argue that its better in general to use iron sights than it is a telescopic scope for accurate shooting, but if that's the only argument you have, you have to run with it, even in the face of reality...
Last edited by a moderator:
Another point that is not discussed often enough, re the 1st shot 1st kill.
Lets say an SU35, or a rouge F15 fiired 2 or 3 BVR shots at an F35.
The radars of the SU etc may have picked up the F35, but they will not be at huge range advantage, as the small cross section of the 35 wil have made its detection much later, so it can also see the Su, and has also fired a shot.
Now , the radar on an R77, or AMRAAM, whatever, is much smaller and less powerfull than a fighters radar, can the R77 even see the F35 well enough to lock on without help from the Su?
The 35, s amraam, will however see the Su very well, and should only need to deal with its Ew, which the F35 is jamming.....
Lets say an SU35, or a rouge F15 fiired 2 or 3 BVR shots at an F35.
The radars of the SU etc may have picked up the F35, but they will not be at huge range advantage, as the small cross section of the 35 wil have made its detection much later, so it can also see the Su, and has also fired a shot.
Now , the radar on an R77, or AMRAAM, whatever, is much smaller and less powerfull than a fighters radar, can the R77 even see the F35 well enough to lock on without help from the Su?
The 35, s amraam, will however see the Su very well, and should only need to deal with its Ew, which the F35 is jamming.....
unfortunately it doesn't stop the idealogues from frothing at the mouth.
spey and his GCI vision of radarless gunned up jet powered equivs of a "Pitts special" spring to mind...
Last edited:
Yes, that is the principal intent of signature management, to disrupt the 'kill chain' sufficiently to allow Blue forces to engage Red forces well before the Red force can engage them.
Its also the point that is most commonly overlooked given the enthusiasts tend to want to comment on agility (or rather statistics) that suit their preferred platform of choice.
The combat effect that entire force packages of low observable combat aircraft is going to have, is going to be astonishing.
Ok, this is fun: Just take the case ( not like it is true and a fact) that the assumptions you might be making are:
- F-35 Stealth remains Consistent
- F-35 Stealth remains Consistent
- F-35 Stealth remains Consistent
Given that there is a real and tangible reason why the USAF is not making anymore B-2 bombers and said F-35 might use a technology evolved from the B-2, don't you think that just maybe (like stand out like A MASSIVE RED FLAG maybe) your assumption might be ill founded?
Lets just take the case ( as a thought experiment ) That there could be certain conditions which make the F-35 a radar mirror ( you know, like a RCS larger than a TU-95 Bear) then where are we going to be with the magic F-35 if it's LO technology has a "use by date"?
These are serious FUNDAMENTAL discrepancies that remain untested and (at least in the public domain) unanswered.
Bottom line is that the F-35 is a great plane so long as it makes the opposition's OODA loop larger than yours through:
- Low Observables
- Sensor suite technologies that allow you to see the bad guy before he/she sees you
If you degrade these ( in any way) than it is an F-105, and "Not so useful after all"
cheers
W
Last edited:
Geez wookie!
If the stealth of the F35 is compromised, it is still a pretty handy fighter. Its cruise speed is higher than other F series, it will be clean, so still has a better range than an F series carrying drop tanks, and dosnt have weapons pylons hanging from its wing, so it will still dance with the best of them.
If all its sensors go, then I suspect it will cease to fly anyway, sothats a kill for the bad guys.
But it will be connected to awacs, navy assets, land based assets, or a combo. Its own sensors, like EW, its Radar and whatever shoosh shoosh gear it has will make it pretty good, far from a thunderchief.
If the stealth of the F35 is compromised, it is still a pretty handy fighter. Its cruise speed is higher than other F series, it will be clean, so still has a better range than an F series carrying drop tanks, and dosnt have weapons pylons hanging from its wing, so it will still dance with the best of them.
If all its sensors go, then I suspect it will cease to fly anyway, sothats a kill for the bad guys.
But it will be connected to awacs, navy assets, land based assets, or a combo. Its own sensors, like EW, its Radar and whatever shoosh shoosh gear it has will make it pretty good, far from a thunderchief.
Meh, I don't hold to my opinion ( or any of our colleagues) as being "God like" but these kind of things occasionally keep me awake at night.
( paused thinking for ten minutes)
cheers
W
Not really W. First of all as you well know, B-2 isn't getting made because they cost in excess of $750m a piece and even the USG couldn't cop that. The capability isn't the reason why that build stopped, just as it wasn't with F-22A either.
Yes the LO of the F-35 (or any aircraft for that matter) isn't a magic bullet solution under all conditions and all circumstances, but it is a huge tactical advantage compared to not having it at all, or in limited applications only. Certainly far more useful than continually investing in an incremental 'nn' percentage increase in sustained turn rate performance...
Otherwise all you have is a day only 'light' fighter with a pair of Sidewinders and an internal gun only...
But hey, it turns nice and pretty at the airshows and all that...
Edit: And I can't believe you're going with the Thunderchief comparison of all things! That aircraft more than most is THE textbook example of why asinine 'empirical' analysis of combat aircraft is such a waste of time. An aircraft that was designed for a specific role, through the application of appropriate tactics was able to excel in a vastly different and largely un-intended role.
You are 'dissing' the confirmed killer of 27.5 MiG's in ACTUAL air combat for only 17 air to air losses in against genuine role specific air to air fighters in return there my friend...
Boagrius
Well-Known Member
^ I've always found the comparison with the Thud perplexing. The whole landscape of military aviation has changed qualitatively since then, for example:
- We now have PGMs (!?)
- F35 with DAS/HOBS/LOAL AIM9X does not NEED to point the nose like the Thud to get an A2A kill (at least "in the phonebooth")
- (Similarly) AAMs have undergone several generational leaps since the Thud's time that have qualitatively changed how A2A combat is done eg. BVR missiles can actually hit things.
- We now have datalinks... like... really good ones.
- The above two potentially allow for things like EM cold AMRAAM shots, perhaps even cued by Barracuda(?)
Apples and oranges...
- We now have PGMs (!?)
- F35 with DAS/HOBS/LOAL AIM9X does not NEED to point the nose like the Thud to get an A2A kill (at least "in the phonebooth")
- (Similarly) AAMs have undergone several generational leaps since the Thud's time that have qualitatively changed how A2A combat is done eg. BVR missiles can actually hit things.
- We now have datalinks... like... really good ones.
- The above two potentially allow for things like EM cold AMRAAM shots, perhaps even cued by Barracuda(?)
Apples and oranges...
Last edited: