The F-35 Thread

[aaron886]

Holy crap, enough with the off-topic semantics!

 

Fly Navy!

[Sweep]

Holy crap, enough with the off-topic semantics!

 

(picture)

Fly Navy!

 

Nice picture!

[TomOnSteam]

I'm always hearing people on non aviation forums say the follow:

 

-I can't dog fight, F-4's couldn't dog fight and they lost all of their planes.

-It's too fragile and keeps breaking down

 

I don't agree with that, because (I know it can dogfight like a boss) but also that it will almost never get into a dogfight, since they don't really exist. I've heard that dog fights haven't existed after WW1.

 

It seems like people just like repeat sensationalised and ill-informed media statements

 

What do yo guys think?

[SkateZilla]

Dogfights existed well past the Vietnam Era...

[Sweep]

I'm always hearing people on non aviation forums say the follow:

 

-I can't dog fight, F-4's couldn't dog fight and they lost all of their planes.

-It's too fragile and keeps breaking down

 

I don't agree with that, because (I know it can dogfight like a boss) but also that it will almost never get into a dogfight, since they don't really exist. I've heard that dog fights haven't existed after WW1.

 

It seems like people just like repeat sensationalised and ill-informed media statements

 

What do yo guys think?

 

It was the F-4 *pilots* that couldn't dogfight - Not the jet itself! :) (That's something they always miss, the internet people always go for lack of A/C performance and the gun issues...)

 

As for the F-35, well, they say it handles like the Hornet there, but with better acceleration and climb...Add in unobserved entries, excellent weapons, jamming, and some other things - Sounds like a decent ACM'r to me.

[Rogue Trooper]

I'm always hearing people on non aviation forums say the follow:

 

-I can't dog fight, F-4's couldn't dog fight and they lost all of their planes.

-It's too fragile and keeps breaking down

 

I don't agree with that, because (I know it can dogfight like a boss) but also that it will almost never get into a dogfight, since they don't really exist. I've heard that dog fights haven't existed after WW1.

 

It seems like people just like repeat sensationalised and ill-informed media statements

 

What do yo guys think?

 

The perfection of dogfighting was in WWII.

[Rogue Trooper]

But the F-35 should not need too dog fight... in essence it is what the F-4 was meant to be.... some serious years later.

[probad]

i think people miss the idea that air superiority is not dogfighting. dogfighting can be a part of achieving air superiority but its about near the bottom of the list now in terms of methods you want to use to achieve it. designing a machine with a focus on dogfighting instead of maximizing primary mission features would be a serious case of misprioritization.

Edited April 8, 2016 by probad

[aaron886]

10 posts later and the thread is back in the weeds... :megalol:

[NaCH]

I anyone is interesed, here to me is a good opinion program from Reuters that general defense topics.

On this one talked about the f-35.

 

[ame=

]

[/ame]

[Bullfrog_]

But the F-35 should not need too dog fight... in essence it is what the F-4 was meant to be.... some serious years later.

 

To be fair, the F-4 did what the F-4 was meant to do pretty well, as long as it had "Navy" written on it.

[Rangi]

Holy crap, enough with the off-topic semantics!

 

Agreed.

 

 

 

We might get a useful aircraft one day.

 

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/video-f-35-begins-raytheon-jsow-qualification-fligh-423782/

 

Looks a bit wobbly on the way out but safe enough.

Edited April 9, 2016 by Rangi
Fun

[HiJack]

What It’s Really Like To Fly The F-35: A Marine Pilot Speaks

 

http://www.investors.com/news/what-its-really-like-to-fly-the-f-35-a-marine-pilot-speaks/

[paulca]

It's odd if you look at the number of "Modern" fighter aircraft there are in the world today.

 

ie. There is about... em... one. The F-22. The F-35 (to my understanding) is the cut down, cheaped out export version of the F-22.

 

That's an awful lot of eggs in one basket. I'm from the UK and from what I can gather the next most modern fighter is the Eurofighter / Typhoon.

 

Compared to the number of fighters born in the 60s, 70s and maybe the 80s the last few decades have seen very, very few.

[Tirak]

ie. There is about... em... one. The F-22. The F-35 (to my understanding) is the cut down, cheaped out export version of the F-22.

 

[sobek]

It's odd if you look at the number of "Modern" fighter aircraft there are in the world today.

 

Odd?

 

Cold war ring a bell? Ever looked at the development of the economic growth rate in the US and EU?

[Emu]

i think people miss the idea that air superiority is not dogfighting. dogfighting can be a part of achieving air superiority but its about near the bottom of the list now in terms of methods you want to use to achieve it. designing a machine with a focus on dogfighting instead of maximizing primary mission features would be a serious case of misprioritization.

NATO hasn't really had any dogfights since the AMRAAM entered service and only 5 of 29 F-15 kills in Desert Storm involved dogfights and they were mainly caused by a combination of dodgy IFFs and RoEs.

[Mike5560]

Based off of the things I have been reading and hearing from actual pilots, rather than defense analysts....I think the maneuverability won't be an issue....granted, it won't be an F-22, but that doesn't mean it won't hold its own.

 

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/verbatim/4/168984/first-norwegian-f_35-pilot-recounts-flight-impressions.html

 

"Overall, flying the F-35 reminds me a bit of flying the F/A-18 Hornet, but with an important difference: It has been fitted with a turbo."

 

https://tacairnet.com/2016/03/01/f-35-can-dogfight-says-norwegian-test-pilot/

 

I think the maneuverability argument could be likened to F-4 or F-14 fans complaining about the new Hornet in the late 70s.....its max speed is somewhere around 1.8 mach, which may have sounded like blasphemy at the time. We learned that max speed wasn't so important (beyond a certain degree) with the evolution of fighters.

 

Now, it's all about situational awareness, low observability and advanced datalink networking. If two aircraft merge it's more than likely that one of the two will be killed by a third party who can internalize the picture and develop a plan of attack at 1G.

[Pilotasso]

NATO hasn't really had any dogfights since the AMRAAM entered service and only 5 of 29 F-15 kills in Desert Storm involved dogfights and they were mainly caused by a combination of dodgy IFFs and RoEs.

 

There was actually little combat at all. This is why I think the analysis of these records might lead you into erroneously believing dogfighting is a thing of the past. Personally I only see one offs engagements and no statistical validity to this argument.

[Boagrius]

There was actually little combat at all. This is why I think the analysis of these records might lead you into erroneously believing dogfighting is a thing of the past. Personally I only see one offs engagements and no statistical validity to this argument.

 

In any case US doctrine certainly seems to have shifted away from dogfighting as a "Plan A" contingency. I imagine there would be a substantial amount of data collected from large scale exercises like Red Flag influencing this as well...

 

Frankly I think it makes sense. The ever advancing capabilities of HOBS missiles and sensors (off board targeting via datalinks, guidance hand-overs, EODAS etc) seem to be making it more and more optional, rather than mandatory, to point the nose at a target before firing from close range (still with a good pK). Hell, even the slammer is supposed to have HOBS capability in the Delta model...

 

I suspect the "phonebooth" is becoming a bad place to obtain reliably favourable kill:loss ratios for just about everyone - hence the "first look, first kill" dogma.

Edited May 3, 2016 by Boagrius

[Ktulu2]

The way I see it is that, while the eventuality of a fun kill is not a thing of the past, crossing BVR will put the ennemy at a big enough disadvantage so, if someone goes gunzgunzgunz, the suporior training/equipement will make it so that it is not a vietnam head-on merge, but more about attacking a target that bled all of its speed/position or that is cold.

[Emu]

There was actually little combat at all. This is why I think the analysis of these records might lead you into erroneously believing dogfighting is a thing of the past. Personally I only see one offs engagements and no statistical validity to this argument.

With the likes of AIM-9X, ASRAAM and MICA IR, how exactly do you you get a dogfight, even if all radar missiles fail? The only way I can see is if someone loses it during a routine escort. There is simply no other way of a hostile plane getting to the point of a head-to-head pass, which would mark the start of a dogfight.

[Emu]

The way I see it is that, while the eventuality of a fun kill is not a thing of the past, crossing BVR will put the ennemy at a big enough disadvantage so, if someone goes gunzgunzgunz, the suporior training/equipement will make it so that it is not a vietnam head-on merge, but more about attacking a target that bled all of its speed/position or that is cold.

Deterrent Sparrow shots were indeed a tactic used even in Vietnam to force the enemy to a position of weakness pre-merge.

[MA_Goblin]

Article that I just found, sorry if it's been posted before.

Enlighten me about the contents all that's well adversed in the matter but don't shoot me :music_whistling:

 

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/22/american-gripen-the-solution-to-the-f-35-nightmare/

[Sweep]

With the likes of AIM-9X, ASRAAM and MICA IR, how exactly do you you get a dogfight, even if all radar missiles fail? The only way I can see is if someone loses it during a routine escort. There is simply no other way of a hostile plane getting to the point of a head-to-head pass, which would mark the start of a dogfight.

 

Raptor says 'hi' from your left 8 at half a mile. See ya! :megalol:

 

IMO, WVR will happen, gun fights might even happen, but until the other guy gets his own 5th gen with comparable SA building capabilities...Head on passes ain't happening.

 

Article that I just found, sorry if it's been posted before.

Enlighten me about the contents all that's well adversed in the matter but don't shoot me :music_whistling:

 

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/22/american-gripen-the-solution-to-the-f-35-nightmare/

 

American Gripen?