Japan deploys first DOWNGRADED F-35

[faithfulguy]

It is a FACT that exported F-35s are downgraded. You can read the report from the Canadian government for yourself (see documents below).

Stealth rankings:

1. F-22: 0.0001 m2 RCS (from GlobalSecurity)
["size of marble" on radar]

2. J-20: 0.0001 m2 (frontal) to 0.005 m2 (rear) (from Australia Air Power)
[intermediate size between marble and golf ball]

3. F-35: 0.005 m2 (from GlobalSecurity)
["size of golf ball"]

4. Exported F-35: 0.15 m2 (see citation below)
["size of beach ball"]

5. T-50/Pak Fa: 0.5 m2 (from official Russian Embassy in India website)
[size of a gigantic beach ball]
----------

"Export model F-35 is revealed to have a frontal RCS rating in 0.1~0.25 m2 (Hence the LO rating) class thanks to Canada's Defense Ministry disclosure."

"F-35 has a 95% RCS reduction over 4th-gen jets according to Julian Fantino, the vice defense minister of Canada. Going by the standard RCS of a generic 4th gen fighter used by radar vendors (5 m2), that would be 0.25 m2. If he was going by CF-18's RCS of 3 m2, then it would be 0.15 m2."

Scribd

So where does j31 ranked as compared to these other 5 fighters.

 

[khanmubashir]

Why would Japan and others NATO members mostly would settle for expensive stealth jet whose stealth has been degraded doesn't make sense especially there intended competition would be China Russia who won't degrade there weapons and would defiantly have numerical superiority so only way .to balance em would be to have a qualitative edge which would be lost if the article is true

 

[Avicenna]

Don't forget to thank AIPAC!!!!

Lovely picture, nonetheless.

 

[Martian2]

So where does j31 ranked as compared to these other 5 fighters.

Interesting, I didn't realize the J-31 isn't on the list.

The J-31 should rank higher than the J-20, because the J-31 doesn't have canards. Also, the J-31 is a smaller aircraft and this means its RCS is automatically smaller.

The J-20 and J-31 are both inferior to the F-22 in rear stealth, because the Chinese stealth fighters use LOAN technology (like the F-35). In contrast, the F-22 has very-low-observable wedge-shape horizontal nozzles.
----------

Stealth rankings:

1. F-22: 0.0001 m2 RCS (from GlobalSecurity)
["size of marble" on radar]

2a. J-31: 0.0001 m2 (frontal) to 0.005 m2 (rear)

2b. J-20: 0.0001 m2 (frontal) to 0.005 m2 (rear) (from Australia Air Power)
[intermediate size between marble and golf ball]

3. F-35: 0.005 m2 (from GlobalSecurity)
["size of golf ball"]

4. Exported F-35: 0.15 m2
["size of beach ball"]

5. T-50/Pak Fa: 0.5 m2 (from official Russian Embassy in India website)
[size of a gigantic beach ball]

Why would Japan and others NATO members mostly would settle for expensive stealth jet whose stealth has been degraded doesn't make sense especially there intended competition would be China Russia who won't degrade there weapons and would defiantly have numerical superiority so only way .to balance em would be to have a qualitative edge which would be lost if the article is true

Japan doesn't have a choice. The United States Congress has forbid by law the export of a DOWNGRADED F-22.

Japan can either buy the DOWNGRADED F-35 with a beach ball RCS (0.15-0.25 m2) or it can develop its own stealth fighter. Take it or leave it.

 

[DavidSling]

Interesting, I didn't realize the J-31 isn't on the list.

The J-31 should rank higher than the J-20, because the J-31 doesn't have canards. Also, the J-31 is a smaller aircraft and this means its RCS is automatically smaller.

The J-20 and J-31 are both inferior to the F-22 in rear stealth, because the Chinese stealth fighters use LOAN technology (like the F-35). In contrast, the F-22 has very-low-observable wedge-shape horizontal nozzles.
----------

Stealth rankings:

1. F-22: 0.0001 m2 RCS (from GlobalSecurity)
["size of marble" on radar]

2a. J-31: 0.0001 m2 (frontal) to 0.005 m2 (rear)

2b. J-20: 0.0001 m2 (frontal) to 0.005 m2 (rear) (from Australia Air Power)
[intermediate size between marble and golf ball]

3. F-35: 0.005 m2 (from GlobalSecurity)
["size of golf ball"]

4. Exported F-35: 0.15 m2
["size of beach ball"]

5. T-50/Pak Fa: 0.5 m2 (from official Russian Embassy in India website)
[size of a gigantic beach ball]


Japan doesn't have a choice. The United States Congress has forbid by law the export of a DOWNGRADED F-22.

Japan can either buy the DOWNGRADED F-35 with a beach ball RCS (0.15-0.25 m2) or it can develop its own stealth fighter. Take it or leave it.

Speculation

 

[Martian2]

Speculation

No. I quoted sources from Global Security, Russian official website in India, Australia Air Power, etc.

This is the best available information.

Speculation is defined as guessing with no factual basis.

I have cited my sources.

If you want to claim that Global Security, the Russian government's website in India, and Australia Air Power are LYING then there's nothing that I can say in response. There are flat earthers out there who refuse to believe the Earth is round.

Global Security, the Russian government, and Australia Air Power have no reason to favor the Chinese government. These are unbiased sources of information. They are also acknowledged experts.

You (DavidSling) are a nobody and definitely NOT an acknowledged expert on stealth aircraft. No one cares if you say it is all speculation (bullshit). Deniers say that all the time.

 

[DavidSling]

No. I quoted sources from Global Security, Russian official website in India, Australia Air Power, etc.

This is the best available information.

Speculation is defined as guessing with no factual basis.

I have cited my sources.

Altho there's overwhelming sources against it, and there's no official standing on the subject.
Who are we to decide who tells the truth on the matter?
You stated it like it's somwhat a fact

 

[Martian2]

Altho there's overwhelming sources against it, and there's no official standing on the subject.
Who are we to decide who tells the truth on the matter?
You stated it like it's somwhat a fact

It's the best available information. If you don't like the conclusions, too bad.

Look at the Australian government's Royal Air Force website. It clearly says the F-35 has a CEILING of 50,000 feet in the performance chart.

You can't change facts.

There is wide agreement among all of the major Western defense publications that China's J-20 and J-31 fly at 66,000 feet. I didn't make the claim. They did.

I'm merely pointing out that a fighter jet that flies 16,000 feet higher than a low-flying F-35 has a major advantage in a battle. My insight is NOT SPECULATION. It is logic that flows from the FACTS CLAIMED BY WESTERN REPUTABLE PUBLICATIONS.

 

[DavidSling]

It's the best available information. If you don't like the conclusions, too bad.

Look at the Australian government's Royal Air Force website. It clearly says the F-35 has a CEILING of 50,000 feet in the performance chart.

You can't change facts.

It's not the best information available, it's the information you chose and by that u made ur conclusion.
I could take an article saying the world is flat and by that conclude the world is flat.

 

[Martian2]

It's not the best information available, it's the information you chose and by that u made ur conclusion.
I could take an article saying the world is flat and by that conclude the world is flat.

Believe whatever you want.

In the real world, the F-35 has a service ceiling of 50,000 feet.

Go argue with the Royal Australian Air Force if you want to.

The Australia government purchased 72 F-35s.

How many F-35s have you (DavidSling) purchased? None.

You have no information on the F-35.

In contrast, the Australian government was provided performance data on the F-35 before deciding to purchase it.

So, who do we believe? The Australian government or DavidSling? Gee...what a close call.

 

[DavidSling]

Believe whatever you want.

In the real world, the F-35 has a service ceiling of 50,000 feet.

Go argue with the Royal Australian Air Force if you want to.

The Australia government purchased 72 F-35s.

How many F-35s have you (DavidSling) purchased? None.

You have no information on the F-35.

In contrast, the Australian government was provided performance data on the F-35 before deciding to purchase it.

So, who do we believe? The Australian government or DavidSling? Gee...what a close call.

I don't see how the flight ceiling has anything to do with it, u said they're selling downgrade planes, but as this article states all the planes has the same ceiling height
General Characteristics
Primary Function: Multirole fighter
Prime Contractor: Lockheed Martin
Power Plant: One Pratt & Whitney F135-PW-100 turbofan engine
Thrust: 43,000 pounds
Wingspan: 35 feet (10.7 meters)
Length: 51 feet (15.7 meters)
Height: 14 feet (4.38 meters)
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 70,000 pound class
Fuel Capacity: Internal: 18,498 pounds
Payload: 18,000 pounds (8,160 kilograms)
Speed: Mach 1.6 (~1,200 mph)
Range: More than 1,350 miles with internal fuel (1,200+ nautical miles), unlimited with aerial refueling
Ceiling: Above 50,000 feet (15 kilometers)
Armament: Internal and external capability. Munitions carried vary based on mission requirements.
Crew: One

http://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-She...-ii-conventional-takeoff-and-landing-variant/

 

[Martian2]

I don't see how the flight ceiling has anything to do with it, u said they're selling downgrade planes, but as this article states all the planes has the same ceiling height
General Characteristics
Primary Function: Multirole fighter
Prime Contractor: Lockheed Martin
Power Plant: One Pratt & Whitney F135-PW-100 turbofan engine
Thrust: 43,000 pounds
Wingspan: 35 feet (10.7 meters)
Length: 51 feet (15.7 meters)
Height: 14 feet (4.38 meters)
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 70,000 pound class
Fuel Capacity: Internal: 18,498 pounds
Payload: 18,000 pounds (8,160 kilograms)
Speed: Mach 1.6 (~1,200 mph)
Range: More than 1,350 miles with internal fuel (1,200+ nautical miles), unlimited with aerial refueling
Ceiling: Above 50,000 feet (15 kilometers)
Armament: Internal and external capability. Munitions carried vary based on mission requirements.
Crew: One

http://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-She...-ii-conventional-takeoff-and-landing-variant/

The article is silent on whether it is the American version or the downgraded export variant.

The Australian and Canadian government are both buyers of the exported version of the F-35.

Both governments say the F-35 has an RCS of a beach ball (0.15-0.25 m2). This means the export version is inferior to the American F-35.

If you want to, you can claim the Australian government, Canadian government, and The Sydney Morning Herald are all lying. There is no way to refute a conspiracy theorist.

However, both Australia and Canada are large buyers of the F-35. Since both governments are democratic, they have released information showing the EXPORT F-35 VARIANT has a beach ball RCS.

Citing performance specifications for an F-35 does nothing to refute the claim of the Australian and Canadian governments. Also, I cited US Ambassador Schieffer who told the Australian Parliament that the exported F-35 is DIFFERENT from the American F-35.

In total, that's four sources.

Australian government
The Sydney Morning Herald
Canadian government
US Ambassador Schieffer

 

[LeGenD]

@Martian2

RCS of F-22, F-35 and B-2 are classified.

RCS of J-31 and J-20 are mostly speculation.

Information in public domain is largely suspect.

 

[DavidSling]

The article is silent on whether it is the American version or the downgraded export variant.

The Australian and Canadian government are both buyers of the exported version of the F-35.

Both governments say the F-35 has an RCS of a beach ball (0.15-0.25 m2). This means the export version is inferior to the American F-35.

With nine countries involved in its development (United States, United Kingdom, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Australia), the F-35 represents a new model of international cooperation, ensuring U.S. and Coalition partner security well into the 21st Century. The F-35 also brings together strategic international partnerships, providing affordability by reducing redundant research and development and providing access to technology around the world. Along these lines, the F-35 will employ a variety of US and allied weapons.

The article talks about one F35, and it doesn't need to be "silent" about "Downgraded" F-35 cause there isn't one according to the article.
Every article that talks about F-35 as F-35 coming out of the conclusion there's no F35 "exellent" and F35 "B-"

Anyway, I had enough of nosense for one day, gl

 

[Martian2]

@Martian2

RCS of F-22, F-35 and B-2 are classified.

RCS of J-31 and J-20 are mostly speculation.

Information in public domain is largely suspect.

You can believe whatever you want.

If you want to claim Global Security, Russian embassy in India website, and Australia Air Power are all printing fiction then that's your choice.

How do publications like Global Security come up with RCS data? An obvious method is to ask the former pilots of F-22s. The F-22 was introduced in 2005. In the last 13 years, not a single pilot or mechanic for the F-22 talked? That's unlikely.

If you're Global Security and you've talked to three or more former F-22 pilots or mechanics and they all say the same thing then you print a claim of -40dbm2 for the F-22 RCS.

Large reputable publications have access to former F-22 pilots, mechanics, and aerospace engineers. We internet guys do not. Hence, we rely on reputable mainstream defense publications for our sources of information.

----------
Radar Cross Section (RCS) | Global Security
"Nov 7, 2011 - The RCS of a stealth aircraft is typically multiple orders of magnitude lower than a conventional plane and is often comparable to that of a small bird or large insect. "From the front, the F/A-22's signature is -40dBm2 (the size of a marble) while the F-35's is -30 dBm2 (the size of a golf ball). The F-35 is said to ..."