What's new

USAF pilot: F-35 lousy

nice Fox News, no pilot in reality has complained about F-35 instead reflected on the capabilities it brings to them

F-35 are meant to operate in groups with support of AWACs and etc. , they are not intended for dog fights , because the age of dog fights is long over

F-35 can carry 12 Cudas , which actually brings a bigger capability than bigger Chinese and Russian aircraft

J-20, with proper engines (guess what the su-35 sale is about) will spank this little fat boy like no tomorrow.

you know nothing about J-20 and know even less about F-35 , yet somehow you manage to come to this conclusion
 
Did you know that Sprey wanted the F-16 to be without a radar, no missiles, and only guns ? A large number of F-16s was supposed to be led to the fight by a few F-15s and use numerical superiority to subdue enemy fighters.

Well 'Boyd's version' of F-16 was smaller and did not have a radar, that is correct. Whether it would have remained so, if Boyd and Sprey had their way, is any body's guess. As electronics shrank in size, it would certainly have been possible to fit radar even in Boyd's version. But this is beside the point. The point Sprey and others raise is something else. That in aerial combat against an opponent worth its salt (not Saddam's airforce), the combat will eventually end in a dogfight.

An intelligent opponent (again we are not talking about Arab air forces), would definitely invest and develop electronic warfare techs which would cause the precipitation of a dogfight. F-35 does poor in dogfight as noted by almost all aviation experts critical of it and even its proponents do not claim it being a dogfighting machine. And once hit, F-35 is not a survivable plane since it was not designed to be. Even its hydraulics use the onboard fuel as working fluid. That is the dumbest thing, I have ever heard in my life. I would not even drive a car that uses fuel for hydraulic fluid let alone flying a plane into combat.
 
lol 4th such thread had opened, I wonder how much War is boring is earning by people clicking to his website...

This have been busted again and again, the AF-2 (The F-35 in this report) are to test BASIC FIGHTER MANUVERABILITY which have no software for turning the plane, for helmet mount locking and for missile or gun.

Aircraft AF-2 did not have the mission systems software to use the sensors that allow the F-35 to see its enemy long before it knows the F-35 is in the area. Second, AF-2 does not have the special stealth coating that operational F-35s have that make them virtually invisible to radar. And third, it is not equipped with the weapons or software that allow the F-35 pilot to turn, aim a weapon with the helmet, and fire at an enemy without having to point the airplane at its target.

Joint Program Office Response to "War is Boring" Blog | F-35 Lightning II

lol I wish I can think of that I would have been a millionaire by now.
 
Well 'Boyd's version' of F-16 was smaller and did not have a radar, that is correct. Whether it would have remained so, if Boyd and Sprey had their way, is any body's guess. As electronics shrank in size, it would certainly have been possible to fit radar even in Boyd's version. But this is beside the point. The point Sprey and others raise is something else. That in aerial combat against an opponent worth its salt (not Saddam's airforce), the combat will eventually end in a dogfight.

An intelligent opponent (again we are not talking about Arab air forces), would definitely invest and develop electronic warfare techs which would cause the precipitation of a dogfight. F-35 does poor in dogfight as noted by almost all aviation experts critical of it and even its proponents do not claim it being a dogfighting machine. And once hit, F-35 is not a survivable plane since it was not designed to be. Even its hydraulics use the onboard fuel as working fluid. That is the dumbest thing, I have ever heard in my life. I would not even drive a car that uses fuel for hydraulic fluid let alone flying a plane into combat.

you should take over the R&D department at Lockheed :D
 
nice Fox News, no pilot in reality has complained about F-35 instead reflected on the capabilities it brings to them

F-35 are meant to operate in groups with support of AWACs and etc. , they are not intended for dog fights , because the age of dog fights is long over

F-35 can carry 12 Cudas , which actually brings a bigger capability than bigger Chinese and Russian aircraft



you know nothing about J-20 and know even less about F-35 , yet somehow you manage to come to this conclusion

How do you know what I know about either of those planes? You seem to be putting a lot of faith in a fat porky one engined plane with limited speed, range and internal weapons bay. And please, keep putting all the hope in BVR engagements. We all know the Chinese are 'too stupid' to develop longe range radars and missiles. Put down the pro-American Koolaid, and educate yourself.

PS: There is no such thing as a 'cuda' missile. It's merely a research and development project. Look at how long it took for Lockheed to develop and field the JASSM. Some two decades. Let's see how the 'cuda' works out.
 
How do you know what I know about either of those planes? You seem to be putting a lot of faith in a fat porky one engined plane with limited speed, range and internal weapons bay. And please, keep putting all the hope in BVR engagements. We all know the Chinese are 'too stupid' to develop longe range radars and missiles. Put down the pro-American Koolaid, and educate yourself.

PS: There is no such thing as a 'cuda' missile. It's merely a research and development project. Look at how long it took for Lockheed to develop and field the JASSM. Some two decades. Let's see how the 'cuda' works out.


LOL , because not a lot of people actually know about the sensors that will go in J-20 and F-35 in the first place
or a lot of other information regarding J-20 and F-35

Americans have decades of experience and first developed a stealth fighter also a decade ahead of others

Cuda is a classified project for USAF with barely any details revealed apart from F-35 being able to carry 12 of them
the project will be an essential part in putting F-35 ahead of others , so its not "just a research and development project"


I don't put all the hope in BVR engagements , the people that actually fly the planes know the situation they will be dealing with , and according to them BVR is the importance they are looking for, in the battlefield of the future.

dog fights can happen , but most of deciding air engagements will happen in BVR situation , as Russians and Chinese themselves put a great emphasis on it.
 
LOL , because not a lot of people actually know about the sensors that will go in J-20 and F-35 in the first place
or a lot of other information regarding J-20 and F-35

Americans have decades of experience and first developed a stealth fighter also a decade ahead of others

Cuda is a classified project for USAF with barely any details revealed apart from F-35 being able to carry 12 of them
the project will be an essential part in putting F-35 ahead of others , so its not "just a research and development project"


I don't put all the hope in BVR engagements , the people that actually fly the planes know the situation they will be dealing with , and according to them BVR is the importance they are looking for, in the battlefield of the future.

dog fights can happen , but most of deciding air engagements will happen in BVR situation , as Russians and Chinese themselves put a great emphasis on it.

You're right about the sensors, but you know just as much as anybody, that China has advanced electronic warfare capabilities, and with it's millions of engineers, can easily outperform the US in the coming years. Aside from all this, sensors and BVR capability are no substitute for a good basic airframe. The F-35 is not a good basic airframe, because it's built around different requirements (B-model) etc. Idiots couldn't even put on a correct tail hook for the carrier model. And you keep talking about 'top secret technology'. Come on. The US isn't infallible. The Chinese J-10 is just as capable as the Rafale/Eurofighter. So what makes you think the J-20 is a flop? If anything, the Chinese took all the info they wanted from the Americans and improved it.


The Cuda is nonsense, it's merely a drawing board program. Hasn't even been properly defined or engineers, hasn't had a test or anything. Look it up on the internet. Not a single peep from that program since it's 'announcement' in 2012.
 
The Cuda is a joke. What kind of range do you expect to get from a missile half the size of the AMRAAM?

Cuda.jpg

f35-cuda.jpg
 
The Cuda is a joke. What kind of range do you expect to get from a missile half the size of the AMRAAM?

Cuda.jpg

f35-cuda.jpg


you are the joke , Cuda has the same range as AMRAAM :crazy:

You're right about the sensors, but you know just as much as anybody, that China has advanced electronic warfare capabilities, and with it's millions of engineers, can easily outperform the US in the coming years. Aside from all this, sensors and BVR capability are no substitute for a good basic airframe. The F-35 is not a good basic airframe, because it's built around different requirements (B-model) etc. Idiots couldn't even put on a correct tail hook for the carrier model. And you keep talking about 'top secret technology'. Come on. The US isn't infallible. The Chinese J-10 is just as capable as the Rafale/Eurofighter. So what makes you think the J-20 is a flop? If anything, the Chinese took all the info they wanted from the Americans and improved it.


The Cuda is nonsense, it's merely a drawing board program. Hasn't even been properly defined or engineers, hasn't had a test or anything. Look it up on the internet. Not a single peep from that program since it's 'announcement' in 2012.

who said J-20 is a flop ? , I am saying J-20 won't be as advanced as F-35
for F-35 also depends on a lot of other systems to make it work and dominate the enemy

nope Rafale and Eurofighter are ahead of Chinese J-10 , not just because of its effectiveness but also due to the amount of
weapons available to them and pods.

I just said its a classified project for USAF with barely any details released
 
Well 'Boyd's version' of F-16 was smaller and did not have a radar, that is correct. Whether it would have remained so, if Boyd and Sprey had their way, is any body's guess. As electronics shrank in size, it would certainly have been possible to fit radar even in Boyd's version.
There is a relationship between radar beam and antenna size -- inverse.

In radar detection, the smaller the beam the better the target resolutions, and those resolutions are:

- Altitude
- Speed
- Heading
- Aspect angle

In that inverse relationship, the larger the antenna, the smaller the beam it can produce, and just in case you think I make this shit up...

RADAR BEAM CHARACTERISTICS - 14271_60
Beamwidth varies directly with wavelength and inversely with antenna size. Radar systems that produce relatively small beam widths generally provide greater target resolution.
Large beamwidths are good for volume search and large antenna sizes have this flexibility: That they can perform volume search as well as producing small beamwidths for precision target analysis.

There is another advantage with smaller and smaller beamwidths: resolution cell.

Definition: radar resolution cell
The volume of space that is occupied by a radar pulse and that is determined by the pulse duration and the horizontal and vertical beamwidths of the transmitting radar. Note: The radar cannot distinguish between two separate objects that lie within the same resolution cell.
Against small targets that flies close to each other, the smaller the beamwidth, the better for the radar to separate out each target in that cluster. When the 4 USAF Thunderbirds F-16s flies so close to each other in an airshow, they do appear as one target to most radar systems out there. Your eyes see four jets, the local airport see one.

The current F-16 radome size is just about the smallest it can be and still provide the pilot with reasonably acceptable radar capabilities. Any smaller and it will render the jet worthless as an air combatant.

Are you learning anything ?

But this is beside the point. The point Sprey and others raise is something else. That in aerial combat against an opponent worth its salt (not Saddam's airforce), the combat will eventually end in a dogfight.
A gun-only F-16 will lose against Saddam's pilots.

...its hydraulics use the onboard fuel as working fluid. That is the dumbest thing, I have ever heard in my life. I would not even drive a car that uses fuel for hydraulic fluid let alone flying a plane into combat.
I take it you speak from extensive personal experience in designing high performance combat aircrafts ?

I am going to leave that question open to see if you are capable of exercising critical thinking skills, if you have any in the first place. I want you, and others like you who are so eager to portray yourselves as 'experts' in military aviation, to think what happens when a jet is hit, either by cannon shells or a missile, how systems packaged on an aircraft, and why is it stupid to use fuel as hydraulic fluid.

By the way...Fuel was used by the SR-71 as coolant...

Physics Buzz: Betrayed by Heat: The SR-71 Blackbird
A special fuel that was stable at high temperatures was developed for the Blackbird. According to the SR-71 manual, the fuel was used both as energy for the engine and also as engine hydraulic fluid - fluid used to power certain engine components.

When the airplane was traveling supersonically, the fuel was also used as part of a heat sink. A heat sink is a device that uses a fluid to wick away heat from a solid object. The Blackbird's manual states that without that heat sinking capability, parts of the airplane and its engines would overheat at high Mach speeds.
We Americans are sure a stupid people. Let US know when your Iran produces anything better than the 1950s era technology the SR-71 came from. :lol:
 
Post a link from an official source so I can verify your claim. Blog/forum posts don't count.

LOL , its the whole point of the Cuda , to maintain the same range while having a small size , they manage to achieve this by not using a warhead and other components, instead making it perfectly accurate by using hit to kill technology


The Supersonic Testbed Risk Reduction (SSTRR) represents work on a future weapon in the same size class as the AIM-120 Amraam.

Lockheed Reveals New Air-Launched Missile Concepts | AWIN content from Aviation Week
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom