Maior

The missile advanced micro processors are capable of much more complex calculations and the proximity fuse and large warhead are no longer required. This missile kills by impact. It can calculate complex interception patterns while doing Mach 5 and crashes into the opponent. These advances allow for more fuel to be carried which means the Missile BVR envelope is much larger. In theory, it'll replace both the AMRAAM and the Sidewinder. Not to mention it's supposed AG capabilities.

The F-15C has never gone up against modern Flankers. We were discussing it's advantages in high energy dogfights and BVR capabilities. Which the F-15C by the way, is still the undefeated contestant. That is, until the F-22 sees some action. The F-35 has a higher speed (Mach 0.6 to Mach 1.2) and can keep it very well since it has lower drag so, the humble F-35 will have an energy advantage vs 4th gen fighters for sure. Not talking about 4+ gen. Regarding F-35 performance, I did post some numbers that show that the aircraft is no slouch. Why you keep insisting on the performance side of it I do not know. My previous edit was because I missed your post and I was the last poster. You posted in the meantime so it got stuck there. Well, wikipedia sources are all Russian from the manufacturer and go clearly against Physics. It has long been argued in other fora, that there is in fact a typo with those numbers. Taking into account known quantities such as peak power output and antenna size. The F-22 Radar has more resolution and range than any PESA RADAR. The IRBIS-e is very good mind you, just last gen.

A flanker? like the SU-27S that is the main version in Russian inventory? A piece of tech from the 80s who needs constant lock on a target to score a kill since it can't carry the R-77? The F-15C is superior to that one as well. Again with the "F-35 struggles vs this or that". How do you know? Have you seen it? have you done it? As far as I know the F-35 was never used in military exercises so what do you know that the rest of us mortals that don't work on the project do? Regarding RADARs and other stuff, check my edit in my previous post. Ah, the 16 fold increase is done in a way smarter than increasing raw power. AESAs don't work quite like other RADARs. Look at the Irbis-e from the Su-35. It has a power output of 20kw. Best of the PESA RADARs. Compare to the F-22 12kw AESA. The F-22 RADAR while not as powerful can detect targets further away. So, less power bigger detection range. I use SAR imagery in my line of work and I can tell you right now that signal modulation is an incredible tool.

It was shown in testing that the F-35 can supercruise at Mach 1.2 for at least 150nm stints. That's more than enough to enter the AO and leave it very fast without AB. The F-22 is on another level. It's supercruise speed is Mach 1.7. the Eurofighter probably has better dogfighting characteristics that apparently even the F-22 has troubles matching (Red Flag 2012). So yeah. It'll be a better dogfighter. The question is will it be more cost effective? The F-35 technologically wise is probably at a better stage in sensor fusion and integration than any aircraft in existence. This gives it's pilots better SA than anything else they encounter. That's the whole philosophy behind it's design. It will by no means however be the slouch that some people paint it to be in a dogfight. One final note on supercruise; it was not an operational requirement for the F-35 however, the aircraft was able to achieve it. This is just an added boon to the airframe. Again, I feel like people don't listen. It's not the performance of the F-35 where you can pick on it. It's the whole package compared to the alternatives available and it's useless to discuss "this vs that" aircraft as well. You can focus on discussing the F-35 whole system (with all assets involved in the operation like EWACS and other support units) attacking a good IADS as compared to 4+ generation assets attacking the same system. And then consider defence. Because I have a feeling that VLO will not be of such use on the defence as it is on the offence. And it all comes down to cost effectiveness and that's the truth of it. heck, the Russians are making strides in Plasma stealth and the French Rafale's are so good at active cancellation stealth that they could fly interdiction missions in Libya without the escort of SEAD assets. The Rafale is also able to supercruise at mach 1.2 and it's a much prettier bird... EDIT: Completely missed the post of marcos. Sorry about that. The answer was in most part addressed by Pyroflash (thank you about that too) however, I'll add just one more nugget. Atmosphere abortion also includes IR, you are very right. However, with proper calibration, you can get decimal resolution of temperature from satellites so, unless the weather is cloudy, you can get a pretty good picture. An AESA can get a fix without you even realising it was there. AESA is by no means a passive like system. It's very active. So active in fact that you cannot tell if you got a lock or not. Let me give you an example: Imagine there are five main frequencies (a,b,c,d,e) on background radiation. A normal RADAR emits in one of them so, a RWR gets the background radiation, plus the increase in a certain waveband from RADAR (suppose b). So, after a period of time, the RWR will detect (a,B,c,d,e) and now knows that there's a RADAR transmitting in b. The AESA however can transmit in a,b,c with much less power needed. so, the RWR will take a lot longer to even realise that something is locking on to it. In fact, it can even be "blinded" since the AESA can change it's frequency fast enough that the RWR will not be able to accumulate frequencies over time as well. Now, other than the fact that the Typhoon has state of the art RWR which is not common at all, the F-22 Raptor RADAR was probably working on practice mode in a much limited band of frequencies. After all, what's the point of developing state of the art RADAR with utmost secrecy if you end up creating a chance to give it all away? As per your physics, well, besides you not taking aspect into account again, the sites you provided though entertaining, don't give you values for the wavelenghts we are discussing here. Absortion coefficients are different for the range of temperatures they consider (90-110ºC) than to the values normal jet engines and rocket engines produce (699K and 3,755K respectively). They are different mainly as they are not as well absorbed by the atmosphere as are values on the temperature ranges you mentioned. Then, you have to take into account that in the upper atmosphere there is way less absorption. Check http://amazing-space.stsci.edu/resources/explorations/groundup/lesson/basics/g17b/graphics/g17b_atmosabsorb.jpg So you see, up at 60 or 80K feet, IR radiation is much less absorbed than in lower altitudes. Making the dominant factor in detection, temperature which again, varies with T^4. Those temperatures mean that Rockets are producing roughly 833 times more energy than jet engines (no AB). As an extra piece of candy, apparently the cooling system on the engine of an F-22 allows you to touch to AB section even when running at full military power. How's that for cool?

Why do you assume that a 5th generation fighter cannot do what an F-15 can? Why were no downed F-15s vs MiG-29s and other more potent close range aircraft? Because, the F-15 is excellent at keeping it's energy as it's soaring through you. By the time you finished dodging a missile (if you can) he's either already far away or, he's already attacking again. Now, the F-35 has Supercruise which means that without a screaming heat signature, it can engage and disengage at a superior speed meaning, more energy making such disengagement even faster to pull. VLO basically means that your sensors (not just radar) will have a much smaller radius of efficiency. Here's two articles for you to understand better: http://www.harpoonhq.com/waypoint/articles/Article_021.pdf http://www.harpoonhq.com/waypoint/articles/Article_022.pdf So basically, you have a Mach 1.2 object without a significant heat signature (IRST magic is nullified), that requires you to be much closer to it in order to detect it, that lobs a couple of missiles, and by the time you realise what's coming at you, he's given half a turn and disengaged leaving you to fend of the missile and forcing you to accelerate to AB if you want to have a chance pursuing it. The new missile being developed is another advantage since when they go pitbull, they can have Heat seeking warhead and there goes any warning other than visual ID. No doubt VLO advantages are not as easily exploited when WVR happens but you're always assuming that they'll be at such a huge disadvantage. In fact, you seem to be suggesting that if an F-35 or F-22 pilot is caught WVR they will go "bummer..." and do nothing at all. Again, Since the aircraft keep their energy better due to the streamlined design (no external stores), massive trust from engines and probably cruising supersonically, they'll always have an advantage in energy during a dogfight vs legacy fighters. Just like an F-15 has nowadays only with a couple of hundred knots extra. Higher energy means higher altitude achieved which in turn means your missiles will have less energy than the F-35s and the F-35 will have always have a deadlier envelope. So, less lethal radius. And again, notching and other similar manoeuvres works for VLO platforms as well. Probably, it works even better for them. The scattering in the atmosphere works only for blue light (Rayleigh scattering) and Rockets work by an explosive chemical reaction. That reaction achieves much higher temperatures and, like our friend Boltzman discovered, energy varies to the fourth power of temperature (T^4)! So, an aircraft without AB on, produces less energy and since the intensity of the signal decreases by R^2, you're looking at a huge decrease in visibility. As such, it will be detected at a much lower range than a rocket. Now I have to mention the aspect of the said rocket. while an aircraft is probably moving towards you hiding it's heat signature with it's body, a Rocket can be picked up while it's climbing where there is energy being sent directly towards your sensor so, You need to take into account this factor as well which further reduces detection range. This is valid for all aircraft. there's a field however that only applies to VLO. VLO does mean reduced RADAR signature alone. Further focus is used on IR signature reduction (like liquid hydrogen cooling of the escape gases). This will further reduce the IRST range another bit. RADAR is and will be the main sensor for the foreseeable future since the other sensors are more limited in width, and range. Plus, AESAs can vary the frequency of the signal thousands of times a second and can operate at very low energies making it possible to lock an aircraft without it's pilot ever knowing he has been locked. You need to do further research on these subjects. And this above test is based on technology we know nowadays. The most reliable way to detect VLO, is still with RADAR. That's why the Su-35 carries two L-band radars which work better vs VLO (but they're not perfect). Look, I say it again, you cannot pick on this aircraft by it's performance since you'll find no faults in it. More SA, more energy, more everything comparing to legacy fighters.

Really, Mach 1.2 supercruise is not fast enough? What legacy fighter can achieve supercruise? NONE. If you forced them on AB you're already gaining an advantage since they'll be burning their precious fuel. Plus, the ability to have all the weapons internally really sleeks the design reducing drag. Couple that with their very powerful engine and you'll have an acceleration rate faster than any of the legacy opponents and all but the PAK-FA. Of those 4+/5th gen airframes you mentioned, only the PAK-FA has proven you can achieve supercruise. Plus, the new CUDA missile will provide a leap in WVR and BVR capabilities and it's multi seeker warhead is good for many an occasion. It's not all theory. Again, 9.9 G instant turns, 70º AoA Mach 1.2 supercruise... All proven to be achieved. Sure there are aircraft who do more than this but you cannot call this bird slow on any account.

Very nice RECENT blog documentary. Worth the watch :) http://nordsky.blogspot.pt/2012/10/from-mig-29-to-mig-35-take-off-into.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXYevIHV5a0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SokBfoIOiFg Just remember to shut everything down really fast if your girlfriend/wife/parents come into the room :D

Well, It'd be pretty awesome to call in an Arclight operation and see it from the air. Or even be on the receiving end of it. You'd die but watching 90 tons of bombs going off around you must be pretty awesome. The Arclight operations cleared a corridor 2 miles wide and 3 miles deep. Boom.

Another bit of news, this time on the F-35 weapon systems. New details on the CUDA hit-to-kill missile emerge. http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/details-emerge-about-lockheeds-cuda-missile-382670/ This is the new missile that'll equip 4+ and 5th generation fighters. Announced Features: Multimode seeker head, Expands BVR envelope Increases WVR capabilities All aspect Mainly AA but Lockeed doesn't set aside the chance of Ash and AG capabilities -Low cost- With this weapon, Lockeed Martin hopes to bring new flexibility to the 5th gen fighters by reducing cost per sortie and simplify payload. A very interesting piece of technology. http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline//2013/02/more-details-about-lockheeds-c.html http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/details-emerge-about-lockheeds-cuda-missile-382670/

That IS awesome. Take your time testing (working your ass off) so then we can amuse yourselves ;)

well, it might be temporary. The T-50 hasn't got it's supposed engines yet.We'll just have to wait and see.

Well, security agencies were a bit of an oversight on my part ^^ They can help but not as effectively. China also copied the Su-27 by reverse engineering it however, they still use Israel's electronics and Russian Engines since they lack the skill to produce both. So, there's a shortcut that tells you how things work but you still need to know how to make them.

True. Russia is miles away and China is even further back. They are catching up but, it gets harder and harder as they approach the tech levels US and Europe have. It's no chance that Russia is signing deals on tech transfers left right and center. They're buying 3 Mistral ships and building other three with a full tech transfer from france ($1.6bln iirc). And a couple of years ago, they signed a deal with Israel worth $400M to buy drones and full tech transfer. It's hard to achieve the level of electronics the F-35 has. Heck, Even America and the "western world" had troubles doing it. Look at the cost slides the F-35 had. The example of Datalink is a perfect of catching up. Russia's recent aircraft have uprated western like datalink capabilities. But an F-22 raptor can use it's radar to act as a modem and do datalink transmissions in a faster more secure way. So Russia now, has what the Americans had in the mid 90s. Will they be able to improve it? Sure. But they have to pay for it. There are no shortcuts in modern warfare. lf you want tech, you have to pay for it. Either by paying Researchers and Engineers and allow the natural flow of science to take it's course or, by paying for the tech transfer which will be costlier but faster. Russia has almost 20 years of neglect to make up to and china still has troubles making decent engines and micro electronics.

Don't forget, the US also prints fake untraceable dollars to follow drug money around... So they say. This parallel economy dollars are actually useful to keep the economy afloat. Iran bought their F-14s with fake dollars apparently. Still, the main problem is that we have one block of people who say that this weapon systems should be done regardless of what non experts say, and another side who are going to argue that spending money in such systems while people are starving is a poor idea. regardless of performance. That's when Politics come to play. The Canadian CF-105 got axed this way. The longer a project drags on, the more likely it is that the project will end up being axed in a move to gain votes. For example, With the US debt ceiling looming and midterm elections in two years, if any more delays happen to the JSF, I bet that the program will be axed. The dollar is not used in many transactions anymore FYI, now you have competing currencies. Iraq wanted to start trading oil in Euros prior to the invasion (hence the French not wanting to go there). Also, the increasing cost of programs makes war more likely to occur since the only way you'll get your money back, is by using these weapons and take what you need. It's an investment ^^ Ahhhh, politics and weapons... A dangerous combo indeed.

Better yet, they're making us pollute the earth since that makes global temperature rise and we'll be all slowly roast alive. Sealing our juices within :megalol: Speculation is endless man :) Well, developing these systems could, in a way, precipitate the use of nukes since it'll be the only standoff weapon able to stop the winning side. If the F-22 and F-35 do what they say they will do, then until Russia (well, they're the most advanced and resourceful opponent for now) or china can catch up tech wise, their only real defence is to go for a Nuclear draw. We only need one lunatic with his finger on the button. If either USA or Russia decide to go all out nuke, there's no amount of F-35s that can save us. Those nasty multiple warhead Russian nukes are tough as nails. They have all kinds of evasion software and skills (if skill is the right word here). Now, I have a feeling that in a big engagement facing fully integrated ADS, their abilities will give them an edge but not be decisive (judging by the history of warfare). Maybe we should all just carefully put our guns down with no sudden movements. And go see who has the right to offshore drilling in the Polar caps by using DCS...

What else on your Christmas list? I'd be happy with a fighters of the late 80s addon for FC3 (next buy). F-16 Blk 30, and F/A-18 C for the Americans and, a Mirage 2000-5 and a Tornado for european jets. This way, we could use FC-3 to have some exciting scenarios with one air superiority, one multirole and one carrier borne aircraft for the Russian and American sides, and, basically two multirole for the European side. I'd be a very happy camper. heck, make a simplified version of the Harrier jet. That way, we can all scratch that itch while we wait for the full DCS versions of said planes. Wishful sinful Our love is beautiful to see I know where I would like to be Right back where I came ...

Dude, if aliens that are capable of mass interstellar travel come here, having 1250 F-35s in the air will be pretty useless. This is what you get by watching war of the worlds while high. trust me, been there, done that (just don't have the T-shirt).

Very nice. Reminds me of Harpoon... This together with the combined amrs module, any hope of providing extra depth to the tactical operations control side of DCS (from what I could gather from the videos the control part has a lot of room for improvement)?

well, all the criticism on performance, is rubbish. All the criticism on the whole point of developing these weapon systems, is the one to be had imho. Should they be built, this F-35 will be top notch. However, I still would like to see a comparison between a superbug or a viper with all the F-35 tech retrofitted and see the difference in cost and performance.

Well, I recently re-begun playing air sims and I'm having trouble finding targets even with my wingman ^^ I suck at this game. But I agree. The wingman just keeps giving me targets even though I have no idea how to get a lock on them (well, I know the controls, I just lack the skill to fly and engage the buggers at the same time).

Well, If they're caught up, they need to defend themselves. Imagine in a conflict where a new kind of sensor is capable of lighting up F-.35s like christmas trees (not very likely I know). The pilots need to be able to engage and pull out. Also, they need to evade Integrated ADS which, if good, will eventually detect LO airframes.

Just FYI, Defence talk is mostly crewed by Defence specialists who provide sources for their claims. It's not a "general public" kind of forum. I seldom post there since I have troubles keeping up with all the info (some of those guys really have insider access). I have a file somewhere on my computer with a lot of links considering the F-35 gathered from there. Need to see if I find them... Been away from the aviation geek path for a while... Anyway, the 9.9G is just to point out that it's not a slouch. No plane that can pull this can be called lazy or slow. The top speed is there just as information More important is the Mach 1.2 supercruise over 150 nm stints. That's some very good speed. Sure other planes might have a higher top speed but, they'll end up spending their fuel trying to achieve it. F-35 supercruise is definitely an advantage. the very high AoA is another proof of agility. The post was a bit of a heads up for F-35 detractors. Performance will not be the issue that'll make or break this aircraft.

Sure: Supercruise at Mach 1.2: http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2012/November%202012/1112fighter.aspx Mach 1.6 and 9.9G instantaneous turn: http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7 http://www.network54.com/Forum/211833/thread/1323490277/last-1323683064/F-35+pushes+Mach+1.6+and+does+9.9g 70º AoA: Couldn't find it... read it somewhere... Probably one of those DoD project evaluations. All of the above and many more: http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/air-force-aviation/f-35-multirole-joint-strike-fighter-2013-190/ Again, my main gripe against the F-35 has to do that no one has shown what would happen if they fitted an F-16 or a Super-hornet with all the bells and whistles the F-35 has. Would it be more cost efficient? Would it offer similar performance sans stealth? There's no doubt that the F-35 will be a potent aircraft nowadays. A couple of years ago the project did hit some serious bumps. But things are running much smoother now. Of course, if you consider smooth a $160M price tag... With prices further increasing if Canada does drop out of the race... Soime eye candy:

Well, for those worried about F-35 performance, it has demonstrated 9.9G instantaneous turns, Mach 1.6 max speed, 70º AoA and mach 1.2 supercruise. If you want to take an issue with it it's cost/efficiency. There's no doubt this will be a potent aircraft. And yes, this is the "tuned down" version of the plane everyone is talking about. 1st post here ^^