oh....:shudder I guess something that can super cruise is of a HUGE advantage then! Do you think that the JSF will be much better off in this regard? Ive read that it cant supercruise, but i dont always believe everything i read! Thanks for the supersonic reply mate!
EA/18G Growler
- Thread starter Malayali
- Start date
-
- Tags
- boeing northrop grumman
I don't think it's a planned capability for the F-35 to be able to supercruise, but in a clean config and with that big donk down the back, I wouldn't be surprised if it could just slip through. I guess we'll find out in testing in the coming months.
It certainly wont be able to sustain M1.6+ like its F-22 big brother! I saw a sustained M1.8 without using reheat once in my F-22 sim ride.
Cheers
Magoo
...Me Old China?
On the other hand, you might want to share your vast insight and objectively based assessment with the other 'International Partners'.
On the other hand, you might want to share your vast insight and objectively based assessment with the other 'International Partners'.
I'd be very surprised if Italy doesn't continue in the program. In fact I think that they, along with the USMC and RN will be the ones pushing hardest for development of the F35B VSTOL version. They need it for their new carrier. I'm inclined to accept the explanation offered re the 2007 Budget.On the other hand, you might want to share your vast insight and objectively based assessment with the other 'International Partners'.
Highly Unlikely
Given the frontal area, low recovery intake configuration (due to lift fan geometry), overall aerodynamics and thrust to weight along with the low target acceleration in the design specs, it would be highly unlikely this aircraft will be able to supercruise, certainly not in any useable manner.
Hi Magoo et al,
Given the frontal area, low recovery intake configuration (due to lift fan geometry), overall aerodynamics and thrust to weight along with the low target acceleration in the design specs, it would be highly unlikely this aircraft will be able to supercruise, certainly not in any useable manner.
Balance and Objectivity
As far as previous post is concerned, just trying to bring some balance and objectivity back into the debate. If this results in highlighting AD's arrogant tones and BADs, this is purely coincidental.
As do I, along with the industrial agenda. As is being put forward by the GAO, the JSF Program would be wise to focus on the STOVL, in the first instance; get it right, then sort out the 'neither fish nor fowl' aspects to determine the best way to meet the USAF and USN requirements.
As far as previous post is concerned, just trying to bring some balance and objectivity back into the debate. If this results in highlighting AD's arrogant tones and BADs, this is purely coincidental.
Is the lift fan geometry going to impact upon the other variants?
What would you expect the efficiency (thrust/sc etc...) degradation to be between variants?
Common
The point here is where the lift fan is to be located. For reasons of commonality, the effect this generates in relation to the intake and its geometry is common to all variants.
Apart from specifics peculiar to the STOVL (eg. bleeds, nozzle, lift fan losses, etc), would expect same for all - though this could change with cooling and services issues.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Well mate, it's a bit rich when YOU complain about objectivity isn't it? When the US Deputy Defence Secretary HIMSELF publicly states the importance of the JSF program and then ANNOUNCES increases in the level of funding for it, it's pretty hard to say the program is in trouble, wouldn't you say?On the other hand, you might want to share your vast insight and objectively based assessment with the other 'International Partners'.
As to the international Partners, gee, "only" Australia, UK, Canada and the Netherlands (and not co-incidentally, the Countries that have the largest planned ordered for the F-35) beside the US itself, have signed up for the MoU.
Italy has a requirement for the STOVL variant of the F-35. How are they possibly going to meet it, without investing in the F-35B? Maybe AFTS could propose an upgrade and life extension for the Harriers?
nfloorl:As to the others, well I concede that publicly they are still to sign up to the MoU and are checking out other options. Norway in particular seems focussed on obtaining the best possible industrial package for itself. An admirable goal, but this does not mean that they won't choose F-35. Nor does it mean others Country's such as Singapore, Japan and Israel won't either...
Like I said, thinking the JSF program is in trouble, is wishful at best...
The number point towards the JSF not being able to supercruise.
Supersonic is when the entire plane has broken through the sound barrier, this is usually Mach 1.3+, which the F-22 is the only aircraft that can supercruise. Being able to hit Mach 1 doesn't mean the aircraft is supersonic.
Transonic is while only part of the aircraft has broken the sound barrier Mach 0.99 to around Mach 1.3
The JSF will definitely be able to Transcruise, just above Mach 1
The JSF will definitely be quite a quck aircraft, even though it is quite slow compared to the F-22. With a normal A2A weapon load the F-15, F-16, SU-30 all struggle to reach Mach 1 without afterburners. So the JSF will match or exceed the cruising speed of every 4th generation fighter.
Thats pretty good for a bomb truck.
Supersonic is when the entire plane has broken through the sound barrier, this is usually Mach 1.3+, which the F-22 is the only aircraft that can supercruise. Being able to hit Mach 1 doesn't mean the aircraft is supersonic.
Transonic is while only part of the aircraft has broken the sound barrier Mach 0.99 to around Mach 1.3
The JSF will definitely be able to Transcruise, just above Mach 1
The JSF will definitely be quite a quck aircraft, even though it is quite slow compared to the F-22. With a normal A2A weapon load the F-15, F-16, SU-30 all struggle to reach Mach 1 without afterburners. So the JSF will match or exceed the cruising speed of every 4th generation fighter.
Thats pretty good for a bomb truck.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
When an aircraft goes fully supersonic is different from aircraft to aircraft. If the Eurofighter is past the transonic regime at M1.3 with 4-6 draggy AAMs, then why wouldn't the F-35 with its internal weapons bay hit supercruise at M1.2 or less?
Jeung Would Be Pleased
Mod edit: If you have a problem with my status as a moderator here, please feel free to raise the issue with Webs. Your opinion of me is blatantly obvious and is of no interest to me whatsoever. Now can we as I've asked you and others before, get back to the topic? Feel free to PM if you wish and I shall explain exactly about what I do in "real life". Suffice to say it is directly involved in our "day to day" "National security" in Australia and is unrelated to anything I do or say on this or any other website.
Mod edit: If you have a problem with my status as a moderator here, please feel free to raise the issue with Webs. Your opinion of me is blatantly obvious and is of no interest to me whatsoever. Now can we as I've asked you and others before, get back to the topic? Feel free to PM if you wish and I shall explain exactly about what I do in "real life". Suffice to say it is directly involved in our "day to day" "National security" in Australia and is unrelated to anything I do or say on this or any other website.
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually due to the wing sweep of the Eurofighter it would probably become supersonic earlier than the JSF.
Carrying external weapons would have very little effect on when the aircraft becomes supersonic. However the amount of thrust needed to become supersonic would be higher due to increased drag.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Going in a slightly different direction.
If the RAAF does purchase F/A-18F and/or EA-18G Super Hornets, how similar will the Super Hornet cockpit be to the legacy Bugs & the HUG Bugs. Also, as I understand it the Hawk 127 LIF had the cockpits setup to provide a display like the F/A-18 A/Bs. Would there be a need to re-config any of these aircraft for training purposes? Or would that be done by whatever Super Bug OCU was formed?
Now that the holiday season is over, I just have one final thought. Bah, HUG Bug!
-Cheers
If the RAAF does purchase F/A-18F and/or EA-18G Super Hornets, how similar will the Super Hornet cockpit be to the legacy Bugs & the HUG Bugs. Also, as I understand it the Hawk 127 LIF had the cockpits setup to provide a display like the F/A-18 A/Bs. Would there be a need to re-config any of these aircraft for training purposes? Or would that be done by whatever Super Bug OCU was formed?
Now that the holiday season is over, I just have one final thought. Bah, HUG Bug!
-Cheers
Last edited:
Some of you may have missed this:
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/announcement.php?f=20
***No need to comment on this, please read and understand***
The usernames in BLUE color need to pay attention and abide by the rules of the forum. Usually, we've never had to tell defense professional group members how to behave and have intelligence debate, this is really starting to become an issue where some of the defense pros are acting like small children and not playing the ball right. Please be respectful of each other's opinions. Let not your experience and confidence cloud your judgement and objectivity as well as sense of mutual respect.
No need to comment on this, please continue with the discussion.
Thank you and enjoy!
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/announcement.php?f=20
***No need to comment on this, please read and understand***
The usernames in BLUE color need to pay attention and abide by the rules of the forum. Usually, we've never had to tell defense professional group members how to behave and have intelligence debate, this is really starting to become an issue where some of the defense pros are acting like small children and not playing the ball right. Please be respectful of each other's opinions. Let not your experience and confidence cloud your judgement and objectivity as well as sense of mutual respect.
No need to comment on this, please continue with the discussion.
Thank you and enjoy!
Well said Mr Web master.
If you disagree with someone dont call them a retard. Provide a good rebuttal to their argument without resorting to insults.
One thing though is the twin seat hornet with the weapons operator would be completely different kettle of fish. The guy in the back would have to learn everything from scratch.
My understanding is that the twin seat hornets can act as a training with duplicated pilot systems front and rear, or it can be set up with the pilot in the front and weapon systems operator in the back. It can also be set up so that it acts as a single seat with weapons and flying performed only by the front seat. Pretty nifty.
If you disagree with someone dont call them a retard. Provide a good rebuttal to their argument without resorting to insults.
A single training flight is required to convert from the classic hornet to the super bug. I remember someone saying that a single flight is one too many. So my understanding they are very similar aircraft.
One thing though is the twin seat hornet with the weapons operator would be completely different kettle of fish. The guy in the back would have to learn everything from scratch.
My understanding is that the twin seat hornets can act as a training with duplicated pilot systems front and rear, or it can be set up with the pilot in the front and weapon systems operator in the back. It can also be set up so that it acts as a single seat with weapons and flying performed only by the front seat. Pretty nifty.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
A factor which many people also overlook is RAAF would also acquire a far more capable forward air control aircraft, another thing which is somewhat lacking in RAAF's Orbat at present.
The 2nd seater which RJM refers to above is exactly what is needed for this role.
I guess a lot of the "upcoming" ex-F-111 Navigators could be employed usefully in the back seat of a Rhino eh?
Agra had some discussions about this the other week. IIRC he said that they'd identified poss 16 backseaters for conversion role into Rhinos...
still, it was idle chat.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Wing sweep affects drag. I understand the supercruise definition requires the airflow passing the airframe to be entirely supersonic. Thus drag of course affects efficiency, but supercruise would happen earlier with the 'clean' F-35 than with the external weapons Eurofighter. As the F-35 would leave the transonic flow regime at a lower speed, the speed requirement for being supercruise is lower than for the Eurofighter... (?)
Last edited:
Scorpion82
New Member
At least earlier blk 1 SH have a lot of commonalities with the normal Hornets. Though there're some important improvements to the blk2 modells, I think the trainers would be still sufficient at all.