Register here

Author Topic: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic  (Read 372536 times)

Offline LowObservable

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2082
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1530 on: January 10, 2019, 05:20:54 pm »
I don't know. FW was more keen on better gunsight symbology on the HUD.

I believe I have seen one reference to the implementation of something similar on the JA 37. Combined with the Oerlikon KCA that would be downright nasty.

Offline kcran567

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 655
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1531 on: January 10, 2019, 10:32:28 pm »
But wait a moment, I thought the 'experts' claimed the F-35 couldn't dogfight cause it wasn't a canard style or had no thrust vectoring... ;)

An F-16 will still clean it's clock in a close in dogfight.

I'm getting to the point of "show me." Show me a fully up-to-date "unlocked" F-35 in a knife fight with a front-line USAF F-16C and let's see who gets the best of three fights.

Maybe you can get you're chance by comparing these 2 demo:


See 5:23 and 3:52, have never seen another fighter "skid" it's tail end through a turn like
That and then pick up speed/energy so quickly (I mean a non-TVC aircraft with the horizontal stabilizers flapping away to make a stable "skid" turn. And
4:40 climbs extremely high energy like a bat out of hell.
And those unbelievably tight and graceful vertical loops...

And here is an extremely aggressive F-16 demo from Utah to compare with the F-35...

« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 03:31:28 pm by kcran567 »

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11069
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1532 on: January 11, 2019, 03:58:48 am »
But wait a moment, I thought the 'experts' claimed the F-35 couldn't dogfight cause it wasn't a canard style or had no thrust vectoring... ;)

An F-16 will still clean it's clock in a close in dogfight.

I'm getting to the point of "show me." Show me a fully up-to-date "unlocked" F-35 in a knife fight with a front-line USAF F-16C and let's see who gets the best of three fights.

Maybe you can get you're chance by comparing these 2 demo:


See 5:23 and 3:52, have never seen another fighter "skid" it's tail end through a turn like
That and then pick up speed/energy so quickly.

F-22 at 2:40



(though it doesn't "skid", it actually makes the turn.)


(The F-16 demo isn't really apples-to-apples as it would need a couple fuel tanks, an ECM pod, LANTIRN, etc. to be in a configuration similar to what the F-35 flies around in all the time.)
« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 04:02:15 am by sferrin »
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline totoro

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 238
    • Binkov's Battlegrounds
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1533 on: January 11, 2019, 08:15:49 am »
Would a couple of fuel tanks be needed if they're jettisoned before a plane gets close to danger?
Some F-16s have internal jammers. (granted, of lesser capability) Radar as a jammer can be configured for all platforms.
www.youtube.com/c/binkovsbattlegrounds - military analysis videos

Offline kitnut617

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 181
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1534 on: January 11, 2019, 09:50:43 am »
Would a couple of fuel tanks be needed if they're jettisoned before a plane gets close to danger?
Some F-16s have internal jammers. (granted, of lesser capability) Radar as a jammer can be configured for all platforms.

Not what sferrin is saying is it, for a fair apples-to-apples comparison, that's what an F-16 would have to have externally, whereas the F-35 carries it internally all of the time and now the F-35 is getting clearance to operate far more capably, it's just about on par with a clean F-16
If I'm not building models, I'm riding my dirtbike

Offline Sundog

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2501
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1535 on: January 11, 2019, 10:24:13 am »
First, when the F-16 and the F-35 performed ACM against each other, it was a two seat F-16 with external drop tanks and the F-35 was never able to get the advantage. Second, why would an F-16 driver keep the drop tanks in the fight? The purpose of drop tanks is so they can be dropped. So that would give the F-16 an even greater advantage. This has always been known, it's called physics. The F-35 has higher wing loading and much greater drag across the envelope since it was designed to have large internal stores and an even larger fuel fraction. That's why it has such a large engine (Discounting the STOVL reasons).

The F-35 was always going to be superior to other aircraft simply based on it's combination of stealth and situational awareness. The fact is, regardless of the F-16's maneuverability, the F-35 will be far more survivable in future battlefields.

Offline Sundog

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2501
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1536 on: January 11, 2019, 10:26:08 am »
Would a couple of fuel tanks be needed if they're jettisoned before a plane gets close to danger?
Some F-16s have internal jammers. (granted, of lesser capability) Radar as a jammer can be configured for all platforms.
 

The F-16 was designed to get to the battle with drop tanks, then drop them and fight on full internal fuel.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11069
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1537 on: January 11, 2019, 10:32:26 am »
First, when the F-16 and the F-35 performed ACM against each other, it was a two seat F-16 with external drop tanks and the F-35 was never able to get the advantage.

That specific incident was debunked ages ago.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline malipa

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 181
  • TU Delft AE student
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1538 on: January 11, 2019, 11:05:52 am »
Also the F-16 if it drops it's droptanks, it used to destroy part of the fins at the bottom of the aircraft decreasing it's stability. The Dutch Royal Air Force redesigned them to solve the issue. The droptanks have a right hand pattern when being ejected. It was too expensive to have two different directions.

Offline LowObservable

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2082
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1539 on: January 11, 2019, 03:12:39 pm »
First, when the F-16 and the F-35 performed ACM against each other, it was a two seat F-16 with external drop tanks and the F-35 was never able to get the advantage.

That specific incident was debunked ages ago.

Meaning what? It never happened? The writer of the report was lying? Or merely that there were some overblown interpretations that were published (shockeroo in the days of the Internet) or that different people interpreted the report in different ways?

Online SpudmanWP

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 932
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1540 on: January 11, 2019, 04:14:20 pm »
There is an old saying that "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts".

You can read the report and have the opinion that it sheds a bad light on the F-35.

However, that does not take away from the fact that it was just a CLAWS test with a G & Speed limited early F-35.  It was never intended to be a test of ACM capability.  It's only purpose was to test the flight controls of the F-35 to determine if they responded in the same way that was predicted in software.

Another fact is that the CLAWS, G, and speed limitations have been opened up significantly since that test was conducted.  There a several quotes from F-35 pilots that talk about Block 3F jets being "eye watering" compared to early LRIP jets.
WE4-45-1-08     OMHIWDMB
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

Offline LowObservable

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2082
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1541 on: January 11, 2019, 04:31:21 pm »
So how does that "debunk" the report itself?

Online SpudmanWP

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 932
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1542 on: January 11, 2019, 06:24:29 pm »
It was not the "report" that was debunked but the krappy articles & their "interpretations" of the report, ie the "incident".
« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 06:54:05 pm by SpudmanWP »
WE4-45-1-08     OMHIWDMB
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

Offline LowObservable

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2082
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1543 on: January 11, 2019, 07:07:37 pm »
That was what I asked in #1539. Next time, try answering the actual question. Saves a lot of time.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8032
  • The path not taken.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.