F-35 Joint Strike Fighter News, Videos and pics Thread

[Brumby]

This is exactly what is wrong. It is practically impossible for the F-35 to be number 2 in the world simply because it isn't designed for the role of air superiority. The same as how the F-16 is not the second best fighter in the world for its generation.

This marketing gimmick is based on a complete lie. The F-35 barely even manages to cross the transonic region and then takes forever to go supersonic. That's not an air superiority fighter. A Rafale with 8 tonnes of payload can manage much tighter turns than a F-35 with just internal load. Rafale is cleared for 5.5G sustained turns with 3 2000L tanks, 6 AASMs and 4 missiles. A clean F-35A barely manages 4.6G, at least that's the program goal today. A Typhoon loaded with 8 missiles can climb faster and higher than a clean F-35 anyday of the week. A Su-35 can manage far greater acceleration than the F-35 at any altitude. The Su-35 goes 300 Knots to 700 knots with 50% fuel and 1000 m altitude in 22 seconds. While Su-35 takes 8 seconds to cross the transonic regime, the F-35A itself has its original time in the transonic regime extended by 8 more seconds. The F-35C's time was extended by 43 seconds.

Your statement that it is practically impossible for the F-35 to be number 2 goes beyond intellectual honesty but instead is bordering on arrogance as it is simply based on selected performance figures to advance your narrative. Unfortunately the history of air warfare does not support such an assertion. In the authoritative work by Pierre Sprey "Comparing the effectiveness of air-to-air fighters : F-86 to F-18", history tells us that there are a number of factors that governed the success or failure in achieving air dominance. When it comes to aircraft specific factors, the three primary drivers are; (i) stealth; (ii) situational awareness; and (iii) transient performance and maneuverability. Every aircraft is built to some form of compromised design. Tactics and training are geared to leveraging the strength and avoiding weaknesses in any conflict. Dominance is achieved not by individual dogfights but by how air assets are used and leveraged. The F-35 is designed to excel in situational awareness and combined with stealth will bring the fight to the enemy before the enemy can respond. It will have the advantage of first shot and tactics will be developed around that and not engage in dogfights because frankly that is not a cost effective way to fight an air war in the 21st century.

 

[HMS Astute]

However from whatever information on avionics the French have released for the Rafale, the F-35 has not even been planned with such things.

If i were you i wouldn't put my faith on a declining country with less than 1/6 of US economy and 1/11 of US defence budget.

 

[Jura The idiot]

...

The 36 F-35 deliveries include:
•23 F-35A - U.S. Air Force
•2 F-35A - Royal Australian Air Force (first two)
•4 F-35B - U.S. Marine Corps
•7 F-35C - U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps (first carrier variant)

...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

some additional information can be found in

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

for example

The overall acquisition effort is estimated to cost a total of $398.6 billion for a total of 2,457 aircraft. That breaks down to an overall per-plane cost of $162 million, including research and development.

 

[A Bar Brother]

Your statement that it is practically impossible for the F-35 to be number 2 goes beyond intellectual honesty but instead is bordering on arrogance as it is simply based on selected performance figures to advance your narrative. Unfortunately the history of air warfare does not support such an assertion. In the authoritative work by Pierre Sprey "Comparing the effectiveness of air-to-air fighters : F-86 to F-18", history tells us that there are a number of factors that governed the success or failure in achieving air dominance. When it comes to aircraft specific factors, the three primary drivers are; (i) stealth; (ii) situational awareness; and (iii) transient performance and maneuverability. Every aircraft is built to some form of compromised design. Tactics and training are geared to leveraging the strength and avoiding weaknesses in any conflict. Dominance is achieved not by individual dogfights but by how air assets are used and leveraged. The F-35 is designed to excel in situational awareness and combined with stealth will bring the fight to the enemy before the enemy can respond. It will have the advantage of first shot and tactics will be developed around that and not engage in dogfights because frankly that is not a cost effective way to fight an air war in the 21st century.

This is considering the F-35 has achieved FoC and is a full fledged fighter.

Look, let's be realistic. Half the stuff planned for the F-35 is not ready, LM is just playing catch up with Europe. When the F-35 was designed, it was supposed to be the best. But then it got delayed, and the Europeans raced past the F-35.

The AESA is two years away from IOC. The EODAS is also far away from IOC. The sensor fusion is not tested. The F-35 is still being flown with very limited flight envelope.

And all this time, the Europeans are already at their third iteration of sensor fusion for their aircraft, the French with the F3R and Sweden with Gripen E. What the French have planned for introduction in the early 2020s is incredible, with GaN and smart skins. They plan to cover the fuselage with active sensors that will provide the aircraft with full 360 degrees radar and datalinks. I'm pretty sure it is part of their active cancellation package. And all this time the F-35 will still be perfecting aspects the French are already flying with. You can realistically say, what's been planned for a Block 20 or 30 F-35 is what the French plan on introducing 10 years earlier.

Let me reiterate this point again. Once active cancellation technologies are introduced, it is going to be a major game changer.

 

[tphuang]

Thank you TP, your understanding of aircraft and systems is a God-send brother, I'm thankful for someone knowledgeable enough to bring some common sense back to this thread on the F-35. I am actually very impressed by the F-35s Air to Air capability, and the situational awareness and electronics would likely be a threat even to the Raptor. It will be most interesting to see how block III shapes up for both aircraft, these are indeed exciting times in the Fighter world!

AFB, I really don't know too much of anything, especially the intricacies of figuring out what makes a fighter jet super maneuverable. That's beyond my background. Based on reading on other people's comments, it seems to me that F-35's flight performance is under estimated. And with the rest of what it brings to the table, it's quite easy to see it as more dangerous than J-20 or PAK-FA if used correctly. Different aircraft are built with different missions in mind. With F-35, US knows that it will have other fighters, AWACs and large surface combatants in its disposal. And if you factor its EW suites and the ECM of supporting aircraft, F-35 might as well be blind to radar. And with its avionics suite and shared data from surrounding asset, it should have much better situational awareness than any of its possible enemy.

J-20 and PAK-FA are designed with different operational usage in mind I think. J-20 might be able to go really far by itself into enemy territory, attack target and super cruise (assuming it gets the right engine) its way out of there. I don't think F-35 would be capable of that nor is it built for that purpose.

 

[Air Force Brat]

AFB, I really don't know too much of anything, especially the intricacies of figuring out what makes a fighter jet super maneuverable. That's beyond my background. Based on reading on other people's comments, it seems to me that F-35's flight performance is under estimated. And with the rest of what it brings to the table, it's quite easy to see it as more dangerous than J-20 or PAK-FA if used correctly. Different aircraft are built with different missions in mind. With F-35, US knows that it will have other fighters, AWACs and large surface combatants in its disposal. And if you factor its EW suites and the ECM of supporting aircraft, F-35 might as well be blind to radar. And with its avionics suite and shared data from surrounding asset, it should have much better situational awareness than any of its possible enemy.

J-20 and PAK-FA are designed with different operational usage in mind I think. J-20 might be able to go really far by itself into enemy territory, attack target and super cruise (assuming it gets the right engine) its way out of there. I don't think F-35 would be capable of that nor is it built for that purpose.

That's right, and why General Hostage stated that it might take eight F-35s to accomplish the same mission that he would task two F-22s to perform, the F-35 will have unmatched situational awareness, and an unbelievable avionics package. There is little doubt that the F-22 will remain the most capable fifth gen stand alone aircraft into the foreseeable future, others promise much, but as you have well stated they are limited in many areas, most particularly starting with engines, the Russians have not denied that by placing the emphasis on kinematic performance that they had willingly/knowingly compromised the stealth of PAK-FA.

The J-20 on the other hand continues to focus on stealth shaping and enhanced agility provided by its distant coupled canards, in fact of all the fifth gen wannabes the J-20 is no doubt the most likely to be able to conduct the deep penetration strike in the same vein as the F-22, how successful they ultimately are will once again be determined by when/if they are able to successfully field the WS-15 in the J-20, while it looks promising, real progress has been very difficult to "nail down".

Back to the F-35, the fact that the A has been flown to 9.9gs positive, flown to 73 degrees angle of attack and successfully recovered without departing, without the benefit of OVT, spin testing in particular and flight testing in general have demonstrated what a very fine and easy to fly airplane LockMart has created. One that will allow the pilot to fly his mission, without having to concern himself that his aircraft might "bite" him in the middle of those hard pulls to put him "guns up" with the bad-guys. While much has been written and "regurgitated" in criticism of this very fine airplane, the F-35 has proven itself to a very versatile weapons platform, and an overachiever along the many milestones that constitute flight test and shortly IOC. Many thanks to those with the foresight/fortitude necessary to be full partners in what promises to be the most prolific and effective aircraft platform of this new century?

 

[Skywatcher]

So I should call my country's officials liars then, when they say the jet they are working on will be the most advanced in the world?

Do you really think the FGFA will be the most advanced in the world?

 

[A Bar Brother]

Do you really think the FGFA will be the most advanced in the world?

That's my point. Nobody knows. What HAL/Sukhoi says is as much an insult to intelligence as what LM is advertizing. It is all propaganda.

What Hostage said is practically very impressive for any air combat command chief of any country to say. The F-35 is going to need numbers just to match up to the F-22. You need 8 F-35s versus 2 for the F-22. The F-35 is irrelevant without the F-22s. Whether it conflicts with Hi/Lo combination or something else, the fact is he is practically saying they are not going anywhere without the F-22s regardless of how many F-35s they are going to get.

Then he says the Russians make "highly capable" stuff but cannot mass produce, and he also says the Chinese stuff is questionable, but they can mass produce them in massive numbers.

All of his points make sense, and all of his points conflicts with whatever LM has been advertizing since many years.

You don't become the air chief of an air force by saying "I think." That's a politician's words what Air Marshal Brown said. As a matter of fact, I actually believe that had LM advertized the F-16 as an air superiority fighter back in the day while treading into the F-15's realm, I would find that more believable than what they are doing today.

The reason why you need only 2 F-22s versus 8 F-35s is as simple as kinematics. Without kinematics you don't have air superiority. As Hostage says, the F-35 pilot messed up or was ambushed by the second line of defense in case it ever gets into a WVR combat. It's not close to matching any 4.5th gen or 5th gen fighter as far as WVR is concerned. That's not what an air superiority aircraft is supposed to do.

If the F-35 does get into WVR or even BVR combat against the PAKFA, the PAKFA will simply shoot down the incoming missiles and use its superior kinematics to fire away missiles at higher kinetic energy while successfully chasing the F-35. So, the payload difference alone is too big for it to be an air superiority fighter, let alone kinematics.

And just a reasonable study into European programs provide enough evidence that the F-35 has actually fallen far behind.

This is the Dutch evaluation conducted a few years after the F-35 development began.

The Rafale was practically on par with the F-35. The difference between the two aircraft is just 2 points. This is the Dutch MoD's revelation. The score given to the F-35 was 697/850 while Rafale received 695/850. What's more telling is while the Rafale was actually flight tested, the F-35 beat the Rafale based on paper evaluation. And we know for sure that the F-35 has been downgraded since then.

This is what the Dassault CEO had to say about it.

The Typhoon, whose development also started in 1998, was fielded as an air defence aircraft in December 2005. This fighter will not have a true omnirole version (enabling, for instance, to lift and fire a cruise-missile) before the next decade.
Ever since the beginning of the decade, the Rafale has always been deemed superior to the Eurofighter« Typhoon » by the countries concerned (i.e. the Netherlands, South Korea and Singapore), whenever it has been in competition (or has been submitted to comparative evaluations) with this rival. In the Netherlands, for instance, the Rafale’s score differed by a scarce 2% from that of a « paper JSF ». A number of elements enables us to tackle the future with confidence, such as the imminent fielding, in the Air Force, of Rafale upgraded to F2 omnirole standard, the fact that a number of foreign experts recognize that the Rafale offer is superior to the Typhoon offer, and the doubts remaining about the F-35/JSF programme.

Today, most of Rafale's avionics have already achieved FOC and have progressed to new generation avionics while the F-35 is still stuck trying to achieve the exact same specs since the time of the Dutch evaluation. The Europeans, particularly the French, have moved way ahead of the F-35 already in many aspects, and will far surpass the F-35 by the time it achieves FOC.

Anyway, getting back to what you asked, IAF rejected the F-35 for the FGFA the previous decade.

 

[Skywatcher]

That's my point. Nobody knows. What HAL/Sukhoi says is as much an insult to intelligence as what LM is advertizing. It is all propaganda.

Umm, because LM has an actual product out right now, compared to HAL/Sukhoi?

 

[Brumby]

Look, let's be realistic. Half the stuff planned for the F-35 is not ready, LM is just playing catch up with Europe. When the F-35 was designed, it was supposed to be the best. But then it got delayed, and the Europeans raced past the F-35.

The AESA is two years away from IOC. The EODAS is also far away from IOC. The sensor fusion is not tested. The F-35 is still being flown with very limited flight envelope.

And all this time, the Europeans are already at their third iteration of sensor fusion for their aircraft, the French with the F3R and Sweden with Gripen E. What the French have planned for introduction in the early 2020s is incredible, with GaN and smart skins. They plan to cover the fuselage with active sensors that will provide the aircraft with full 360 degrees radar and datalinks. I'm pretty sure it is part of their active cancellation package. And all this time the F-35 will still be perfecting aspects the French are already flying with. You can realistically say, what's been planned for a Block 20 or 30 F-35 is what the French plan on introducing 10 years earlier.

Every aircraft that you mentioned including the F-35 sits in their respective development cycle based on a set of priorities and drives an outcome that is always relative and dynamic in terms of placement of technology. Such is the nature of the business and any comparative arguments in my view is not productive because a snap short in time is all it provides until the next phase. There is however an over arching argument that I can make for the F-35 that seriously challenge the French and in the longer term the Swedish in staying the course. The common denominator in this business is that the development cost curve is increasingly exponential in nature. In this respect, the F-35 has an edge simply because it has the volume to sustain a development path where economies of scale is the final arbiter in driving unit cost down.

Let me reiterate this point again. Once active cancellation technologies are introduced, it is going to be a major game changer.

If and when there is a proven working product. The challenges are significant if not impossible especially against AESA. With LPI features they can emit multiple frequency simultaneously with continuous hopping based on some algorithm which would seriously challenge the propagation of mitigating signals within an acceptable pipeline delay. I acknowledge there are developments in parallel allay architecture that would enhance signal processing and data analysis but a working solution is very different from a theoretical model.