F-35 myths and facts

[500]

here is the calculator for you kids..
http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm

You mix up LOS and visual range. Radar can't see without LOS. According to u if you see a plane on ur radar from 200 km thats visual range?

 

[gambit]

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...dream-fly-and-bad-news-china-and-russia-26876

"The F-35 is a dream to fly. It is the easiest airplane to fly. I can now focus on employment and winning the battle at hand as opposed to looking at disparate information and trying to handle the airplane,” Canterbury told Scout Warrior.

What I have been explaining to people on this forum all these yrs, that the goal of avionics is to make the pilot less of a pilot and more of a decision maker and killer.

Still think the F-35 cannot maneuver?

Aerodynamics is about how efficient is airflow around a body, not how appealing that body looks to the untrained eye.

Take the mass of a brick -- Fig 2 -- and reshape it into an arrow or a 'flying wing' and we will have two different bodies of the same mass but with different flight characteristics.

Take the mass of a brick -- Fig 2 -- and reshape it like figures 3 and 4 and we will have two different bodies with the same mass but with different propulsion requirements. The 'chunkier' body -- Fig 4 -- will be less appealing to the untrained eye, but to the expert, the 'chunkier' body will flow air just as efficient as Fig 3 but with less drag.

Maneuverability is about the efficiency of the flight controls system to exploit to the maximum the aircraft's body shape WITHOUT departure from the controlled flight. Since the days of the F-16, much have been learned about aerodynamics and flight controls software. Sustained g is still a good quality to have, but instantaneous g coupled with off boresight weapons capability is the equalizer. The F-35 does not need the sustained g of the F-16 in order to be a competent 'dogfighter'.

The mission data packages are loaded with a wide range of information to include commercial airliner information and specifics on Russian and Chinese fighter jets. For example, the mission data system would enable a pilot to quickly identify a Russian MiG-29 if it were detected by the F-35’s sensors.

The mission data files are being engineered to accommodate new threat and intelligence information as it emerges. For instance, the system might one day have all the details on a Chinese J-20 stealth fighter or Russian T-50 PAK FA stealth aircraft.

There is no 'might' about it.

As of now, ALL possible 'stealth' fighters from any country is Dead On Arrival (DOA).

 

[CriticalThought]

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...dream-fly-and-bad-news-china-and-russia-26876

What I have been explaining to people on this forum all these yrs, that the goal of avionics is to make the pilot less of a pilot and more of a decision maker and killer.

Still think the F-35 cannot maneuver?

Aerodynamics is about how efficient is airflow around a body, not how appealing that body looks to the untrained eye.

Take the mass of a brick -- Fig 2 -- and reshape it into an arrow or a 'flying wing' and we will have two different bodies of the same mass but with different flight characteristics.

Take the mass of a brick -- Fig 2 -- and reshape it like figures 3 and 4 and we will have two different bodies with the same mass but with different propulsion requirements. The 'chunkier' body -- Fig 4 -- will be less appealing to the untrained eye, but to the expert, the 'chunkier' body will flow air just as efficient as Fig 3 but with less drag.

Maneuverability is about the efficiency of the flight controls system to exploit to the maximum the aircraft's body shape WITHOUT departure from the controlled flight. Since the days of the F-16, much have been learned about aerodynamics and flight controls software. Sustained g is still a good quality to have, but instantaneous g coupled with off boresight weapons capability is the equalizer. The F-35 does not need the sustained g of the F-16 in order to be a competent 'dogfighter'.


There is no 'might' about it.

As of now, ALL possible 'stealth' fighters from any country is Dead On Arrival (DOA).

Come @gambit let's talk facts

Take away the stealth, and F-35 is a pretty mediocre fighter. There is a reason we keep hearing about its role as an information gathering and dissemination platform. It was never conceived as an air superiority fighter - that role belongs to F-22. It's role was always EM warfare, and strike, working in a networked environment, and providing situational awareness for the 4th gen jets.

Aerodynamically speaking, that fat underbelly causes a lot of drag, online videos showing its climb rate reflect mediocre performance, and both the turn rate and roll rate are nothing to brag about. It relies on slower speed, finer control, which in a furball would be a liability.

The jet is a marvel of engineering, but it is sadly not a dog fighter.

 

[500]

Myth #11 Stealth does not work.

Stealth is a technology which reduces radar cross section of a fighter from about 15 m^2 to about 0.01 m^2. That reduces detection range about 6.2 times. Lets see what it gives to us.

Air to air:

Two aircraft equipped with similar powerful radars, one with RCS 15 and another 0.01. Chart shows detection range to scale. Obviously left plane will have a huge advantage in a battle. It can attack right plane without him even seeing, it can chose right position attack from the side for example, it can turn afterburners and climb to increase missile range and energy for maneuver.

Air to ground:

Yellow circle shows S-400 detection range of aicraft with 15 m2 RCS (~410 km), red - with 0.01 m2 RCS (~65 km). With stealth plane u can you can attack targets inside the red circle with cheap glide bombs including S-400 itself or simply bypass it.

Stealth does not make an aicraft immune or invisible, but gives a HUGE advantage both air to air and air to ground missions. Thats why all leading airforces around the world are either designing own stealth or buying it.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Stealth is a technology which reduces radar cross section of a fighter from about 15 m^2 to about 0.01 m^2. That reduces detection range about 6.2 times. Lets see what it gives to us.

I think not by that much. Maybe half. But not from 15 to 0.01.

Yellow circle shows S-400 detection range of aicraft with 15 m2 RCS (~410 km), red - with 0.01 m2 RCS (~65 km). With stealth plane u can you can attack targets inside the red circle with cheap glide bombs including S-400 itself or simply bypass it.

No state will attack Russia. EVER. Anti Assad army got low RCS wood made cruise missiles and they always get detected and destroyed 100+ km from the base.

 

[Ultima Thule]

I think not by that much. Maybe half. But not from 15 to 0.01.

Yes they are RCS of 0.01m2 even clean F-16 has a RCS of 1m2 @undertakerwwefan

No state will attack Russia. EVER. Anti Assad army got low RCS wood made cruise missiles and they always get detected and destroyed 100+ km from the base.

Wood made cruise missiles @undertakerwwefan and they are not attacking russian asstest in syria, they are testing their weapon systems against each other (US/EU + Russia) @undertakerwwefan

 

[gambit]

Come @gambit let's talk facts

Yes...Let's...

Take away the stealth, and F-35 is a pretty mediocre fighter.

You can make that criticism about ANY jet. Take away the F-15's huge radar, and it is a pretty mediocre air combatant.

There is a reason we keep hearing about its role as an information gathering and dissemination platform.

Because that was designed into the jet's DNA. You cannot take this capability away from the F-35 any more than you can remove its fly-by-wire flight controls system.

It was never conceived as an air superiority fighter...

It was never meant to be. The F-35 was never conceived to deliver large bomb loads, either.

Aerodynamically speaking, that fat underbelly causes a lot of drag,...

Yeah...And am sure that came from extensive personal experience in aviation...From merely eyeballing aircraft's shapes...

Why not tell us the exact RCS value at the standard X-band radar signals at 100 km out?

...online videos showing its climb rate reflect mediocre performance, and both the turn rate and roll rate are nothing to brag about.

Airshow videos do not -- AND CANNOT -- show any jet's full capabilities. Not because there is anything 'secret' about maneuverability, but because of the need for -- what else -- SHOW?

Airshows have three demo forms:

https://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/airshow/military/media/Thunderbirds_Maneuvers_Package.pdf

2. The Thunderbirds have three shows that may be performed depending upon weather or terrain considerations.

A High Show, which includes formation rolls and loops, may be flown with a minimum ceiling of 8,000' and 5 nautical mile visibility.

A Low show, which has formation rolls only, may be flown with a minimum ceiling of 3,500' and 5 nautical mile visibility.

A Flat show, which includes no loops or rolls, may be flown with a minimum ceiling of2,000' and 5 nautical mile visibility (57 WG/CC or USAFWC/CC may waive the flat show minimum ceiling to 1,500').

A 'flat show' has the least performance 'Wow' factor. Simply put, a 'flat show' is for the day when there is heavy cloud cover over the demonstration area.

But even so...A 'high show' is still limited in what it can demonstrate what a particular aircraft, civilian or military, can do. A demonstration area is always calculated, so even on a clear day, any high performance aircraft, civilian or military, can quickly fly out of the audience's view, vertically or horizontally. That is why I said 'cannot'.

Airshows simply do not reveals the F-35's full flight performance capabilities, let alone its full COMBAT capabilities, and those are definitely secrets.

The jet is a marvel of engineering, but it is sadly not a dog fighter.

Just because the F-35 can maneuver to 9g, that does not mean its original platform design was to be a 'dog fighter'. The first jet to have that 'dog fighter' DNA from conception is the F-16, which to this day is still the par to meet.

You can criticize the F-35 on its maneuverability all you want, but the real sad fact is that no one, not even the Russians and the Chinese, can make an F-35 equivalent for at least another decade, but more like two decades. Right now, the -57's program is 'Nyet' and the J-20 is still struggling with a propulsion issue.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

F-35's closest counterpart is Su-34. Both are built primarily for strike with a secondary air to air role. Both have fuselage mounted EO targeting. F-35 has EOTS and Su-34 has Platan.

 

[Ultima Thule]

F-35's closest counterpart is Su-34. Both are built primarily for strike with a secondary air to air role. Both have fuselage mounted EO targeting. F-35 has EOTS and Su-34 has Platan.

No F-35 have Stealth features and F-35 will roast the opponent Jets in BVR arena @undertakerwwefan

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

No F-35 have Stealth features and F-35 will roast the opponent Jets in BVR arena @undertakerwwefan

Says who any country will invade Russia? This isn't Napoleon or Hitler anymore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_invasion_of_Russia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa

 

[Ultima Thule]

Says who any country will invade Russia? This isn't Napoleon or Hitler anymore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_invasion_of_Russia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa

i am not telling that F-35 roast Russian jets. i am talking about in general sense @undertakerwwefan ANY ENEMY @undertakerwwefan

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

i am not telling that F-35 roast Russian jets. i am talking about in general sense @undertakerwwefan ANY ENEMY @undertakerwwefan

Ireland has 0 combat jets. Russia don't need combat jets.

 

[Ultima Thule]

Ireland has 0 combat jets. Russia don't need combat jets.

@undertakerwwefan then why they are using hundreds of military jet, i think you have no brain in your head but a dog sh!t instead of thebrain @undertakerwwefan

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

@undertakerwwefan then why they are using hundreds of military jet, i think you have no brain in your head but a dog sh!t instead of thebrain @undertakerwwefan

creates jobs

 

[Ultima Thule]

creates jobs

ok those jet development project is for only for creating job but not for defense of the country @undertakerwwefan

That confirm that you haven't a brain but a dog shit instead of a brain @undertakerwwefan