garrya

I wouldn't call the video reasonable, while the true performance of military systems are classified, things like "jamming synergy with lower radar cross section" is simply physics, things like "apart from DAS F-35 is also equipped with EOTS" or "F-35 will be equipped with Meteor" or "F-35 has measures to reduce its infrared signature" are fact. If the video doesn't get those basic facts right, it is hard to take any other information from it as serious. For example: if there is a video comparing F-16 vs F-18 and they started right off the bat by saying:" Both aircraft have twins engine" or "F-16 can carry FLIR pod while F-18 cannot" then the rest of the video will lose all its credibility For AIM-120 1 on the bay door 2 inside the A-G side of the bay, but not on the same horizontal plane Some what like F-22 configuration There is an on going program for missiles on F-35, F-22 called SACM-T, one of the candidates is CUDA, once it becomes reality F-35 will be able to carry 12 AAM internally. It has similar diameter as AIM-120 but half as long talking about the future the aircraft has others tricks as well,

I don't think you are serious when posting that video, however to stop any potential confusion of others reader, i will point out these extreme bias points in the video a) F-35 was stated to have RCS of a golf ball or 0.001m2 at X band but the video stated that number to be 0.1 m2 b) Video basically copied the stealth performance vs radar band from APA, but both don't have access to F-35 radar scattering test data and they sure as hell don't have access to test data of CNT RAM which has very wide effective bandwidth https://www.google.com/patents/US20100271253#v=onepage&q&f=false c) he fail to mention the synergy between jamming and radar cross section, which should be a massive advantage of F-35 against Su-35 d) Author mentioned that neither F-35 or Su-35 have IR reduction measure. That is actually wrong. Both F-35 and F-22 was stated to have a top coat that help reduce IR signature in long IR wavelength. From the frontal arcs the nozzle is hidden from sight by the horizontal stabilizers, and the serrated pattern of the nozzle will not only reduce radar reflection but also cut down plumes length Another IR reduction measure on F-35 are 2 massive scopes to cool the nacelle bay and engine nozzles e) Then the comparison between DAS and OLS-35, claimed that OLS-35 is better while completely ignored EOTS. Then also forget to mention that LFR of OLS-35 is merely 20 km, so firing solutions is around that distance f) he stated that F-35 will detect Su-35 from 150 km, this is from the assumption that Su-35 will have RCS =1m2 (quite unreasonable for a fully loaded Su-35) and an old estimate from APA when they thought APG-81 had 1200 T/R elements, real numbers was later shown to be 1625 T/R elements. g) video mentioned various long range missiles for Sukhoi aircraft while intentionally ignored Meteor for F-35 h) Video also ignored others features that will available at block 4 of F-35 such as DIRCM, 6 internal air to air missiles and so on

AFAIK, The internal gun has always been there for the A version , the B version didn't have it because they wanted to reduce weight as much as possible for STOVL capability, C version could have got the gun but NAVY think longer combat is more useful (TBH, it does make sense, since shorter combat radius mean the carrier are more vulnerable to attack). Nevertheless, the gun is not a priority ,because a stealth aircraft can choose to avoid conflict if necessary IMHO, this is an apple to orange comparison, the hornet need external pylon for weapons, F-35 doesn't, and the main selling point of F-35 is stealth which would be a waste in extrernal configuration

Gun software for sure not a priority for F-35, there are others much more important stuff like the radar, ESM, DAS, integration of SDB... etc. And to be honest if you sue all fake news channels then you will be doing it all day

http://aviationweek.com/defense/closer-look-stealth-part-5-nozzles-and-exhausts#slide-3-field_images-1655211

Thank you, i was very hesitant to add too many equation and technical details since i was worried that readers may find it too boring That actually a surprise for me, i always thought the spacing in phone will look weird Thank you Probad

Thanks you:thumbup:

Can i have one too please:D

I just finished a new post , guys https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2017/02/22/electro-optical-systems/

Khibiny was not even installed on Su-24 to begin with. TBH , this is very low level propaganda

:megalol: they seriously believe an 1 kW jammer on an aircraft can magically jam/deactivate an 1 MW radar on a ship from distance few hundred meters? :laugh: Not sure if they don't understand basic physics or just try to push their proparganda :laugh: it also quite funny how their " crew statement on social media " can't be found anywhere, no screenshot, nothing.

look like older coating version though So they have another RAM for F-35 to replace the previous one? will this be applied to F-22 as well?

I guess since this

http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pages/2017/March%202017/March%2028%202017/Let%E2%80%99s-Do-More-Shots.aspx

I didn't said weight, i said T/W ratio. Nevertheless, the roles is so small that you simply cant look at thrust/ weight of fighter and decide which will go faster.

It depending on what flight regime is the most important for you. For subsonic regime where most dogfight happen , a variable inlet is pointless. Moreover, DSI is better for signature From this http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=52510 topic

Induced drag plays minimal role when the speed is supersonic These fastest aircraft such as Mig-25 , SR-71 achieve their speed by unique airframe shape, engine, inlet design. Not by being light and having high static T/W If you want to explain your point then do it. If you don't want to then don't. No need to announce it

A clean F-16 has a Drag Area (Cd x Wing Area) of 8.92 ft^2. A clean F-35A has a drag area of 9.8 ft^2. The F-16 is 'cleaner'. If we assume a six A-A loadout and no external fuel tanks but full fuel for the F-16, as if it just dropped a centerline then the F-16 has a Drag Area of 10.51 ft^2 and weigh in at roughly 15 tons. T/W= .97. A 2020 F-35 with six AIM-120s would have a Drag Area of 9.8 ft^2. With 80% internal fuel (since the F-16 got to lose 22% of his fuel load) the F-35 would weigh 23 tons. T/W= .93(using sea level static thrust, but T/W is useless) and top speed of M1.6 Assuming same speed and altitude (this lets us normalize some of the factors so that we can use Drag Area instead of calculating Drag) the F-16 would accelerate at (T-D)/W=a Adjusting rations to compare for the F-35 we get (1.48T-.93D)/1.53W=1.01a but a top speed of only 1.6M (placard limit, it has more thrust than needed) This is for as clean of a combat F-16 as you get. Add fuel tanks or ECM and the drag and weight both go up resulting in a lower 'a'. Reduce fuel more out of the F-16 to simulate flying farther and you would be reducing it out of the F-35 on a near 2/1 basis.Which mean F-35 will get even better

Top speed is limited by dynamic thrust vs drag, it has nothing to do with Thrust/weight ratio.For example: F-16 has much higher thrust/weight ratio than F-4 or Mig-25. Yet both Mig-25, F-4 can have much higher top speed. .Drag is depending on aircraft shape and size , without some complex CFD or drag tunnel experiments, it pretty much impossible to know for sure. Dynamic thrust of aircraft is mostly decided by inlet and engine design. For example: variable inlet often mean better dynamic thrust at high speed than fixed intake F = ma so a ( acceleration) = force/mass, however, the force here is not the thrust of the engine but resultant force which calculated by taking dynamic thrust minus drag. Since both dynamic thrust and drag varied with altitude and speed, it is not possible for you to estimate the acceleration from a simple T/w rati. Moreover, it is rather meaningless to calculate T/W of 2 aircraft with different combat radius. An f-16 with same fuel percentage as an F-35 may have higher T/W but at the same time much shorter combat radius and time on afterburner

Iam not talking about normal bombs , but this Worse case you can use Hydra70 or CRV7 with flechette warhead

That true for 500-1000 pounds bombs but not so true for mini size weapons like SDB or APKWS. And the GAU-8 is really that accurate either, it actually spray bullet over radius much larger than SDB and APKWS CEP. F-35 has both infrared system and radar. A-10 only has an infrared system and that not even cover 360 degrees. In bad weather, A-10 will do a lot worse while F-35 can still operate in zero visibility due to the radar. Ok , but in that case A-10 still significantly inferior to UAV such as the MQ-9 which can loiter for over 14 hours fully loaded. So why should anyone keep A-10 instead of running a force with F-35 and cheap UAV ? Actually, F-35 can carry 8 SDB in internal configuration, but that is for high threat environment only. If threat level are low ( where the non-stealthy F-16 can access), then F-35 can carry 24 SDB in total with both internal and external pylon. F-15 can carry maximum of 28 SDB

I don't understand why people treating the cannon like some magical weapons that have no substitute in CAS. It not like A-10 only use its gun either. What the problem with using APKWS and SDBII instead? Same can be said about F-35 Actually , what are their loiter time respectively ? In low threat environment, F-35 can effectively carry 3 times more SDB than F-16

So what tasks that A-10 can do but F-35 cant ?

That exactly what iam talking about: If you fight against AA like 9K33 OSA, Tor and Tunguska the armor and cannon of A-10 won't help. It will have to use missiles/guided bomb instead. In which case the F-35 will be better because its sensor and weapons have much longer range. If you fight against an armor division that can;t fight back then the armor isn't very useful and something like cluster bomb and APKWS can do similar job as the gun

Ok, but why would F-35 has problem with visual when it has DAS ( which as far as i know have automatic tracking function) While i agree that F-15 can carry more weapon , iam not sure if it really makes that much of a different. If we consider F-15E with external weapons and F-35 with an internal weapon then for certain F-15E can carry a lot more. But it is a moot point since F-15E wont be able to get into area that requires F-35 to use its internal configuration. If we compare F-15E and F-35 both in external configuration then i think the different is negligible. For most CAS target, i would say weapons such as SDB II , SPEAR, APKWS can do great job. You dont need massive bombs like GBU-31 or super long range weapon like JASSM. F-35 in external configuration can carry a maximum of 24 SDB II /SPEAR along with 4 AAM for self-defense F-15E can carry a maximum of 28 SDB II along with 4 AAM for self-defense. Very small different IMHO. F-15E has another pair of eye but how about the automatic search and track function of DAS ? Machine make a lot less mistake than human and they dont get tired or distracted There are a few argument that supports A-10 in CAS over F-35 1/ A-10 has better loiter time.Fair enough since A-10 is a slow aircraft and has quite high bypass engine , and loiter is useful 2/ A-10 has better airframe armor and better cannon. I think these are quite overrated feature. A-10 armor and GAU-8 won't help it duel with mobile short range AA and if it uses Maverick then the advantages of armor and cannon is moot. 3/ A-10 can carry more than F-35. May be, i guess it depend on the kind of weapon too, SDB II is not intergrated on A-10 AFAIK, so A-10 may not be able to attack as many targets as F-35. Moreover, in future, we have weapons like APKWS , LOGIR , GBU-X ,JAGM. Technically if those weapon are integrated on A-10 it can carry more. But if it is really that important shouldn't B-1B be the best CAS platform with its loiter time , speed , loadout and double crew member ?. I would argue that F-35 also has advantages over A-10 in CAS. 1/ it has a radar so finding target will be much quicker with GMTI function, DAS has automatic target track too 2/ it has DAS and DIRCM so much safer against sneak up MANPADS 3/ it go to target/run aways quicker. Generally, the point is i dont see how F-35 is bad in CAS, it may not be the best one there is, but at least comparable to most others asset.