The F-35 Thread

[garrya]

Whats the RCS of a F-35 with external load?

Radar scattering pattern of F-35 shape look somewhat like this ( without take into account RAM and RAS )

 

And the RCS for the most part of the 4.5 gen. planes?

Radar scattering pattern of 4 gen F-16 (clean) looks somewhat like this. With weapon loaded and a bunch of corner reflector RCS will get much bigger

 

Radar scattering characteristic of an AAM

 

And before you brought up low frequency radar and what not , have a read first

https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2016/04/12/radar-electronic-countermeasure/

Edited November 25, 2016 by garrya

[Esac_mirmidon]

Read again.

 

F-35 Radar Cross Section WITH EXTERNAL STORES.

 

Not radar scattering.

[garrya]

Read again.

 

F-35 Radar Cross Section WITH EXTERNAL STORES.

 

Not radar scattering.

 

Radar scattering graph will show you estimated RCS from various aspect.Not just the front.

And why would F-35 carry weapon externally if stealth is needed ?

[Ktulu2]

The drag function [ D(x) ] will not be the same at different altitudes even with an air density correction ( you'll need a higher AoA for the same lift at a higher altitude, thus more induced drag at the same TAS ). While it could seem as an ok approximation, you'd get 1.44 times less lift, which would get you falling down pretty quick

 

EDIT : might get you an equivalent time with EES if I get nothing to do...lol

[Esac_mirmidon]

Because Darkbrotherhood7 is arguing this:

 

"Incorrect, the F-35 with external loadout still stealthier than most of the 4.5 gen fighters."

 

And i want to know the data for that. He is asking for data to others and i want to know his data for that statment.

[SkateZilla]

additional stores can be carried on external pylons for missions were maximum Stealth is not Critical.

 

it's not meant to be a 100% Stealth Only Mission Aircraft.

 

The Design has the benefit of Reduced RCS, while still being able to perform conventional missions.

[garrya]

The drag function [ D(x) ] will not be the same at different altitudes even with an air density correction ( you'll need a higher AoA for the same lift at a higher altitude, thus more induced drag at the same TAS ). While it could seem as an ok approximation, you'd get 1.44 times less lift, which would get you falling down pretty quick

If we take that into account , shouldnt it favor F-35 even more ? since its acceleration time was taken at high altitude

 

EDIT : might get you an equivalent time with EES if I get nothing to do...lol

 

what is EES ?

[garrya]

Because Darkbrotherhood7 is arguing this:

 

"Incorrect, the F-35 with external loadout still stealthier than most of the 4.5 gen fighters."

 

And i want to know the data for that. He is asking for data to others and i want to know his data for that statment.

 

I dont have exact data for that

However, with something like wing tip AAM , i dont see why F-35 would suddenly has higher RCS than 4.5 gen fighter. Its base RCS is much lower. It also has canted pylon to reduce effect of corner reflecting. Logically speaking , it should still have lower RCS.

[Ktulu2]

If we take that into account , shouldnt it favor F-35 even more ? since its acceleration time was taken at high altitude

 

 

 

what is EES ?

 

Yes it shoud! :D

 

EES= engineer equation solver / wolfram alpha on super steroids

[garrya]

Yes it shoud! :D

 

EES= engineer equation solver / wolfram alpha on super steroids

 

Nice , please do that :D

[Esac_mirmidon]

Logically yes but without real data all is a guess work from everyone.

 

And this is why i dont like this kind of discussions. Who is right who is wrong. Tons of logical deductions, but no real data because all are classified.

 

So no point to discuss certain aspects of so secret planes because nobody really knows for sure nothing except Lockheed Martin.

[mvsgas]

Logically yes but without real data all is a guess work from everyone.

 

And this is why i dont like this kind of discussions. Who is right who is wrong. Tons of logical deductions, but no real data because all are classified.

 

So no point to discuss certain aspects of so secret planes because nobody really knows for sure nothing except Lockheed Martin.

That is true for many aircraft, missiles, etc., but that never stop anyone here before. How many thread are on these forums about item "A" is better than "B" based on partial info found online?

[Esac_mirmidon]

Exact.

 

+1 mvsgas.

 

And i like to discuss, i love it and i´ve found here in this forums people sharing lovely info about almost everything helping me a lot to understand and to expand my knowledge to a higher level.

 

But when the discussion changes into A is better than B, specially about 4.5/5 Gen fighters, they ruined the threads because nobody knows for sure nothing about it.

[Darkbrotherhood7]

Whats the RCS of a F-35 with external load?

 

And the RCS for the most part of the 4.5 gen. planes?

 

Or you also are speculating without data?

 

Or in your own words. Prove it.

 

Did I ever said the RCS of an F-35 with external loadout is lower than most of the 4.5 gen fighters? No, I said it is stealthier.

 

Just as an example, if I said that the F-22's RCS is lower than the F-35 RCS, doesn't mean it is stealthier, because stealth isn't just RCS, it's a whole and complex set of low radar signature, low infrared signature, low radiation signature and eletronics package.

 

The reason why I said an F-35 with external payload is stealthier than most of the 4.5 gen fighters was actually because of its ECM. The F-35's ECM isn't just for self-defense as most of the ECMs, it is also mean to attack and that is a very powerful advantage.

 

Stealth IMO exist since the WWII when the night fighters in the pacific, using their radar, could see the enemy while the enemy wasn't seeing them.

 

I completely agree with you about people saying stuff based on speculation, I hope I clarified what I said.

[Esac_mirmidon]

RCS is one thing.

 

Stealth is another ( Radar, RCS, IR, Visual, etc )

 

ECM ECCM is another. You are mixing things in one bag.

 

The F-35 offensive ECM capabilities has nothing in relation with his stealth capabilities. One thing is being able to flight undetected in different spectres ( visual, IR, Radar ), and another to be able to Jam others.

 

If you are using ECM against others, they know you are there. Talking about modern systems of course.

 

An F-5 is not going to know you are there even if the F-35 is jamming all the way.

Edited November 25, 2016 by Esac_mirmidon

[garrya]

The F-35 offensive ECM capabilities has nothing in relation with his stealth capabilities.

It does actually because burn through distance is proportional with RCS so stealth aircraft scale much better with jamming

[Hummingbird]

The F-35 will take stealth and sensor technology to a new level, that much is clear, it's only the kinematic performance which I think can be questioned.

 

Hence the F-35 is going to be a great asset to the USAF, USN & USMC, being the perfect partner for the F-22 in a war against an advanced adversary.

 

To me it seems like more of an offensive aircraft rather than a defensive one however, which on top of costs makes me hesitant about judging it a good aircraft for the smaller NATO countries who need fighters mostly for safeguarding their own airspace. Also I think the Russians are looking it at the same way tbh, and thus feeling abit provoked by the fact that within not too long many countries around it will essentially be fielding small stealth bombers.

Edited November 25, 2016 by Hummingbird

[Esac_mirmidon]

Burn through is for beeing able to lock on it. But if you have a modern ESM ECM suite you can KNOW someone is using ECM, so you are no stealthy anymore.

 

Yes i´m not able to pick you up in my radar but i know you are there.

[GGTharos]

You might know where my friend is. While he's raising the noise floor on your sensor, I'm sneaking in closer ;)

[Sweep]

You might know where my friend is. While he's raising the noise floor on your sensor, I'm sneaking in closer ;)

 

B-but air combat is all 1v1s! You have no friends!

 

:D

[Esac_mirmidon]

True GG.

 

But that´s another story.

[Sweep]

True GG.

 

But that´s another story.

 

And yet in reality, it's all part of the same story... :)

[Boagrius]

Logically yes but without real data all is a guess work from everyone.

 

And this is why i dont like this kind of discussions. Who is right who is wrong. Tons of logical deductions, but no real data because all are classified.

 

So no point to discuss certain aspects of so secret planes because nobody really knows for sure nothing except Lockheed Martin.

 

I agree although I think you'll find there is a growing body of people in the operational community (not LM) who have a pretty sound understanding of what the jet can do, and their message has been quite clear for some time.

 

The issue with a post like Snarf's is that it is reflective of the myriad of voices out there that lack the exposure, expertise or intellectual honesty to communicate reliable information about the F35 program (ref the "bet" between mvsgas and I earlier). The divide in perception between those voices and that of the people who actually "know" seems to be quite vast.

 

The F-35 offensive ECM capabilities has nothing in relation with his stealth capabilities. One thing is being able to flight undetected in different spectres ( visual, IR, Radar ), and another to be able to Jam others... If you are using ECM against others, they know you are there. Talking about modern systems of course.

 

Actually as Garrya, Sweep and GG have quite accurately highlighted, low observability (stealth) and electronic warfare (eg ECM) are actually inextricably linked concepts/features. In layman's terms, the RCS of a given aircraft has a vitally important impact on how easy it is to conceal/protect with jamming. A VLO aircraft like the F35 is MUCH easier to protect than one that lacks the same level of signature management. Combine this with the fact that not all ECM is, in fact, immediately detectable (esp when VLO means you don't need to be pumping out huge amounts of RF energy to achieve a given outcome) and you have a situation in which the F35's VLO properties work hand in hand with onboard/allied EW assets to provide a whole other layer of protection that would be extraordinarily difficult to replicate in anything other than another 5th gen aircraft.

Edited November 28, 2016 by Boagrius

[Esac_mirmidon]

Totally agree.

[mvsgas]

But when the discussion changes into A is better than B, specially about 4.5/5 Gen fighters, they ruined the threads because nobody knows for sure nothing about it.

Don't be so hard on the guys, the thread does not get ruin, just a bit hard to follow when people get passionate about a subject and argue about the opinions on it. But as long as we (all of us) keep coming back and talking to about stuff we are passionate about. We have to be passionate to play games/sims with 600+ page manuals. Games/sims that after 6 years (A-10C) we are still playing, still learning.

 

So, moving on: Lack of HUD on the F-35; Good or bad? Helmet has all the HUD functions + more, but is it a bad choice not to have a HUD?

Edited November 26, 2016 by mvsgas